Jump to content

Rolend

Members
  • Posts

    333
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Rolend

  1. Did the Hood get sunk? Glad to see you guys picked this game back up, I am looking forward to see what Rambo does in Russia.
  2. SeaMonkey I noticed this in a game I played last night but I wasn't sure I was just not imagining it, but it sure seemed like I was interecepted from a long way away. I will have to keep an eye on it and if I run across it I will post a saved game.
  3. I just don't see SC 2 as a real B & P game, to me the board game Risk is B & P. The old turn based computer game 'The Perfect General' or even older war game called 'Empire' (was like Risk only bigger and a little more involved) were good examples of B & P. Sure SC 2 is not a super paced super intense game but there is enough there to keep you thinking and trying differant things, it certinaly is not like sitting down to play a game of checkers
  4. The more I think about it the more I like Stalins suggestion of Turkish Partisans, not only would they be a pain for supply but if they are around they should disrupt Operate in Turkey. I think this solves the problem nicely, risk an invasion in Turkey and risk losing the very thing you invaded for, the ability to Operate lots of units to the Caucuses. Seems like a nice way to do it, risk vs reward.
  5. Yea the boards move really slow besides a lot of good game topics come up in them that apply to a game actully being played. They make for good examples of what is working and what isn't. I say leave them here.
  6. I would think that US would be more towards production and industria, maybe even with a lean towards heavy bombers. I mean sure the Mustang was a heck of a fighter but it had an English engine and could not keep up with the German jets, the only reason the jets were not a serious problem was 'production' the Germans just could not make enough of them soon enough to have any impact. With that said you are right the AI should have a chance to invest more then one chit but I think random would be better then historical. If you make it historical then you will know ahead of time what the AI will be strong in. I would rather there be some guess work involved in it.
  7. Blashy better tech as in what, that was a fairly general statment. Lets look at tanks for example, both the US and England were well behind tank tech to both the Germans and the Russians. To be honest I think most of the major powers were even in tech over all it is just that the focus was in differant places for each.
  8. Don't count on that snow Lars and it is hard to ski in the mud Last night I played a game as the Axies and to save MP, pump up my chits in Spain I 'drove' my army across westerm Europe after Poland fail. Well I had my usal good luck. The Allies had either clear weather or snow the entire winter and I kid you not, the entire winter all my turns were mud. No matter I had my troops in place as good weather came in the spring and proceded to roll from there.
  9. Thanks Stalin for the info and the link. Historicly I think the bigest issue for either side to invade Turkey would of been the geography and the fierce resistance they would of recieved.
  10. Yep you put at least one unit in each city and start them well entrenched and you make Germany bring a lot to take it. That sounds better to me then saying you can't invade at all. Heck even give them a couple more partisan units if invaded that you won't get if you diplo them. Make it much harder to take Turkey and then if the Axies really want it they have to decide to put a lot more resources into it or diplo it. Refresh my memory please, that is one aspect of the war I don't recall at all. Didn't Turkey stay out of the war altogether? If that is the case what were the politics behind it.
  11. The problem really comes in with the cap. As the Axies you just can't spend enough to ensure you get the vital techs which really leaves out the minor techs. As an example if I played the Axies pre patch I could have as many as 5 chits invested in IW just so that I would up my odds of getting it. Post patch I don't dare put 5 chits into IW as I need those chits for other things such as armor or IT. Now if I get unlucky and catch no IW for some time, which is much more likly since I don't have 5 chits in, and Russia does get lucky and get 2 or 3 IW by the time the war starts then I can be in a world of hurt and that is vs AI, if it is vs an average human player you can kiss the game goodby. I do want some luck in my games but not to the point where it regularly makes or breaks a game. IMO lowering the Axies cap to 750 was by far the worst part of the patch.
  12. See I use the railheads option which means a unit has to be next to a city to Operate and this delays this kind of strategy by 2 turns running you into bad weather. I hate Operate as it stands now, way to EASY to use in the game, it just feels so darn gamey to me. Anyway try a game with railheads on and see what happnes to this type of strategy
  13. I will say it again CW troops should have the exact same tech as the English. As for sharing between US and England well maybe some kind of % as not all techs on both sides were shared. As for the Axies, yea making the minors anything more then cannon fodder would not be very historical, besides it takes a lot more to use a new weapon then just the weapon, it takes training and the Axies minnor troops had very little of that.
  14. I will say it again CW troops should have the exact same tech as the English. As for sharing between US and England well maybe some kind of % as not all techs on both sides were shared. As for the Axies, yea making the minors anything more then cannon fodder would not be very historical, besides it takes a lot more to use a new weapon then just the weapon, it takes training and the Axies minnor troops had very little of that.
  15. I have to agree here that tech is too random and by limiting how many techs you can be researching at one time really forces you into cookie cutter builds and takes options away. If you want to keep the luck in then I say raise the cap, that way luck 'picks' which techs you get not rather you get any techs at all. I also think tech should be tied to other things then just luck, the problem with tieing it to the year is most of my games end by 44 so that means the chances of seeing any of the higher level techs will be slim. If you tie techs into certain years then this will mean most games will have the same techs at near the same time and I don't like that either. Pesrsonally I think doing away with the cap or raising it is the way to go. Also I would make the first chit invested in a tech the cheapist and as you add chits to the same tech the price goes up. As an example if I put one chit into IW it cost 100, if I put a second chit into IW it could cost me 125 and a third 150 etc. This would encourage us to spend those chits in things we might not other wise do.
  16. Ok thanks Major, it really isn't that big a deal to force engine code changes at this point.
  17. On paper it all sounds good but what I think you are asking for is fairly large and maybe something to think about in SC 3. Just as with the Sealion problem and my suggestion to change how the new amphib tech works might be a bit much for the current game engine. Get that HC we are already talking about SC 3 in many areas, how about a release date for SC 3, nothing solid just a ball park date LOL
  18. Worse case they should be transported to the nearest port and 'asked' to leave, there is no way they would just surrender.
  19. Yep I agree with Exel as well except that I would give CW troops the same lavel as English tech as the 'common' in CW says it all.
  20. Yep I agree with Exel as well except that I would give CW troops the same lavel as English tech as the 'common' in CW says it all.
  21. Well what if you agreed Operate was limited in Turkey to say one unit a turn, that way the bulk of your forces would still have to come form Iraq/Iran. Just thinking that is all, has to be some other options besides ruling it out altogether. By the way I do think Operate needs work, it is just way to easy to use. Tell me that in WWII that the Germans had the ability to move an entire army, from say Paris to any Russian city in just one weak. Or that they could freely Operate into or out of an area with enemy close by without risking casualties.
  22. Yea I find it hard to believe that had Germany managed to take southern France before peace was called that Germany would of just given back Vichy France. Sure set the French up in any area they still own but I hate it when Vichy France is formed when you have a Axies unit sitting right in the city.
  23. Jollyguy there has to be a better way to handle it then just say no invasion period. That takes away an option from the Axies and I like more options not less. I would think that had Germany taken Syria, Iraq and Iran and had strong forces facing them on both their western and southern borders that they may have joined the Axies or at least given them free passge. This is where Diplo is weak, you should be able to get treaties that include things like free passage not just joining one side or the other.
  24. For me I think the navy part of the game is my least favorite and least historical. With that said I don't have a lot of trouble with it, yea luck can really mess with things as that sub dives 4 times in a row LOL but luck is part of the game. Also to find a sub hunting a convoy lane can be a real pain in the butt, I really do think that you should get some kind of location report when your convoys take hits. Anyway I try to use my forces in large groups to attack small ones, sink one or two then retreat to port and repair, rinse and repeat until the enemy fleet is gone or hides in port. Always stay within cover of land based air if possible. Also do NOT leave your ships at sea forever, they start to suffer from supply hits, take the fleet back to port from time to time.
  25. But there is a lot more to fuel supplies then just oil. Germany had huge synthetic oil production, so now we have to add a tech? Then there is the issue with strategic bombing of the oil fields Not to mention how the lack of fuel effects unit movement, air resources and navy ops. If you want it in then it has to be done right and that is an entire can of worms that personally I would rather be left the way it is. One last note is that real fuel problems for the Germans really didn't start impeding their war operations tell the last couple years of the war and only severely in the last and by then they were doomed no matter how much fuel they had.
×
×
  • Create New...