Major Spinello

Yes, that´s true. But as Hubert posted about the patch being imminent about 6 hours ago, I figured it could be here for a Friday evening game even with respect to CEST.

Yes, that´s true. But as Hubert posted about the patch being imminent about 6 hours ago, I figured it could be here for a Friday evening game even with respect to CEST.

Seems I was wrong in assuming that the patch comes Friday.

I feel that the Pacific War would be a "natural" theme for the next game, too. To be sure, there will be scenarios for SC2 covering the Pacific also, but to really get it going the SC2-engine will have to be adapted for this I think.

I second that, this is one great awesome mod!

Where can we get it? The version at cmmods is still the first one.

Guys, look at the mods forum - seems like the patch will be out any time soon!!!

I think it would be realistic, though. However, if there really would ensue a game balance problem with motor tech, then this could be avoided by restricting units to one attack per turn. If we would be allowed to use the remaining action points of a unit (that had already moved or attacked) somewhat later during the same turn, this alone would be much more convenient already.

Hats off - I´m impressed! Indeed scenarios like this one will guarantee that SC2 will have a long and successful future!

*Sigh*, I firmly wanted to be patient, but then again - I really would like to have the patch so I can play SC2 this weekend ...

I second that, LampCord. However, I found that I´m playing less and less Matrix games. Somehow I seem not to be able to find the "right" game there for me. World at War was too basic, while War in the Pacific is a Micromanagement hell (which makes HOI seem as complex as TicTacToe in comparison). I loved "Uncommon Valor" (because the restricted scope made it much more manageable than War in the Pacific), but somehow it never got patched to a really bug-free state. That´s why I eventually abandoned playing it.

Actually, thats how I see things, too. I´m really fine with what I see on the map if FOW is on (as was said, long-range airfleets help alot here), but I would like the reports feature to be more useful. That´s why I think it is a good idea to have them reports deliver "fuzzy" information that gets more and more precise once your intel research goes up.

After having played SC2 a few times, I have to say that I´m extremely grateful this game exists. It stands head and shoulders over SC1 and even beats my old favorites "Clash of Steel" and "Pacific General". Actually, I only found one thing wanting (apart from the AI, which will hopefully be improved), and no it´s NOT the tiles. I was worried about them, but they play ok. My problem is rather the movement rules. Let´s compare things to Clash of Steel and Pacific General for a moment: In both these games you could not only move and then attack, or attack and still move, but you could also (if you wanted) first move all your units into position and THEN attack in sort of a "second phase". Personally, I find this much more intuitive than the movement system chosen for SC2 (which is somewhat in between "Panzer General" and "Pacific General" I would say). Firstly, it is annoying if you somehow accidentally "declick" a unit after movement or attack and then lose the rest of your action point. Secondly, it is much more convenient and ergonomic if you can (if you want) bring your forces into position before attack. Thirdly, it is also more logical: for we are speaking turns and the action that goes on in a turn is supposed to go on simultaneously or no? (I can´t imagine that if we move two tank groups within a turn that this is really to be seen as the second group waiting until the first has finished its movement). Fourthly, and finally, a system where you can position your units and then strike also has the advantage that you can implement another intriguing form of attack: the combined assault (like it is in Clash of Steel). I am fully aware that the rules of movement are as they are, and probably will not change with new patches. However, I would like to know whether the concept I just expounded was considered and why it was not used (SSI for example changed the system while going from Panzer General to Pacific General!) I also would recommend to think about the movement rules again should there be plans for an SC3.

At first I needed some time to get into SC2 and actually thought about sticking with SC1 (and even Clash of Steel!). However, after having read the manual twice at a more leisurely pace and 2 to 3 tries at the 39 scenario, I eventually got the hang of it. I can´t imagine going back to SC1 now.

I do not agree that there is only the alternative between a 100% correct and a totally wrong number of units. The number could be an estimate within a standard deviation range. Then it could make sense to reduce that range through development of intel. Anyway, I do not know who is meant with "some people" who want to have 100% exact info in the reports. No one in this thread suggested that.

Hmm ... is Pzgndr right or Terif? I think Terif is right because I cannot imagine that the US has no troops/navy/airforce right now in 1944 (I beat back Overlord, but they still should have some stuff). I think Sombra is wrong that investing in intel tech would do something to improve the reconnaissance situation, however it would be nice if this were actually implemented!

Thanks for the quick answer - the question came up because I noticed that according to the reports the allies had so few units in 1944 (in all categories, especially the US).

Quick questions: with FOW on, are the reports about military strength and losses correct? Can I get reports about the enemy´s tech other than through encountering units? IF (!) FOW affects reports, then how far are they off? And can I influence this somehow (obviously researching Intel wouldn´t affect things here).

Ah, that´s a good thing to know!

@everybody: Great thread, very helpful posts!

I agree that the discussion should maybe not go much further. I just want to add that I did not want to play down the brutality and the crimes that came with the first crusade especially. I´m sorry if it seemed like that. However, genocide in both the sense and scope of the 20th century was really not at all the aim. The political, strategical and economical motives of the different states, persons and institutions involved are complex, diverse, and furthermore change considerably from the first to the eight crusade. Actually, the whole issue is a very intruiging topic in its own right.

Exactly, what matters is this great game - that´s why I came to this board recently. I gather it´s very tempting to get sucked into all sorts of other discussions, though ... Anyway, come back soon - the only problems I have with your posts is the hideous metre of the verses.

@Timskorn: I didn´t get to watch this one yet, but sure will do. What topics does the movie cover that pertain to the time after Hitler´s death?

I think threads like this one should be closed by default without comment. If I get irritated by racist, abusive etc posts from some other forum member somewhere, I just tell the admin, but do not open threads about the guy. Just my 2 pence.

Now that was a cheap shot ... though somewhat funny, I have to admit.