Scook

You only have 5 supply in Gibralter, so an army doesn't last much longer than a corp. Now with getting half entrenchment immediatly, rotating fresh corps in works better, if the Axis don't bomb the port. As for the other issues, you can hold Britain, and unless the Axis gets really lucky, you keep Spain out of the War. 1) With the current patch,bring the whole Royal Navy up to Britain. Except playing against a German who will lose quickly once USSR enters the game, you should be able to stop Sea Lion from happening, even with buying no units. Save the money for diplo in part 2. 2) Germany has a maximum of 25% in diplo, and Italy has a maximum of 9% (3 chits, 3% per chit). This will cost 400 MPP total. Britain has 25% diplo, and the cost for Spain will be 375 MPP, which will take 5-6 turns to get, so you can have 5 chits by January 1940. This will give the Axis a net of 9% per turn to get a Spain hit. That works out to be approximatly 1 hit every 11 turns (I am not going to use the formula to figure it out, just eyeballing it). If they get lucky, so be it. The upside to doing this is if Germany doesn't want Spain, any British hit drop Spain below the magic 40% marker, making Hungary, Romania, and Bulgaria wait until war with The Soviet Union to start. The biggest downside is giving up on the Med for 1940-41. Holding Gibralter open keeps the idea open to taking back Africa once everyone is on the war. Hope this helps a bit more than the short answer. ps. I think if you save Italian MPP and buy the airborne ASAP and Germany does the same, this can bypass naval superiority, but save that discussion for more esoteric strategies on taking Britain.

The weather seems to be more mild since the 1.03 patch arrived. The trend in games is to try and conquer France before 1940 rolls around. In 1941 and beyond, the USSR weather zone often has a total of one (1) snow turn a year. This is great for the Allies later in the game, but early westher does not slow Axis. Is this a good or bad thing in anyone else's opinion? I have mixed feelings on this, as the game is more fluid and every turn can be action packed and tense. This is a game, not a reinactment of WWII, and we all get to abide by the weather.

Yep, cheaper to try and woo USA and let Spain go Axis. I like the extra Navy the US gets when Spain comes in also.

AH and the Nationalist Socialist Party gives us good discussions like this and a basis for a game we seem to really like.

I copied an email save from my 1.03 directory to my 1.04 to test the conversion and got this error: [09/06/2006 3:47:06; 5.1.2600; 1024x768x32(1); v1.04] FAILED(saved_game_dialog: saved_game_verified_for_load): Segmentation violation Will test some more, but this is repeatable. Update: Solo play version are all working fine, and 4 out of 5 multi-play working fine. It seems to be indeginous only to one save game. [ September 06, 2006, 04:04 PM: Message edited by: Scook ]

Your views of Britain falling mirror mine, with the caveat if you can take Britian back with USA, you are much more powerful if you hold Africa. I do like the idea of Spain going the way of Italy also. Most boardgames I have played put Duce and Franco in the same bed.

Mirror match, already sent you my 1st Axis turn. Oh, I am registered on Panzerliga also, so we can be official, and stuff.

Ok, enough time off. Mirror match coming your way, V1.03, same house rules we played last time (which is none). Think I will send mirror to Liam also.

Actually, I would like to see the AI drop the hammer, use 3-4 aircraft, 6-7 units, and take Leningrad in short order.

I was paying $39.99 20 years ago. Most games I see now are at least $49.99. 10 years in the future will be around $70, or even more. Development costs will not be dropping.

I think we are looking at the wrong scale in this game. One general has to be a 10, with all his faults, as he is better than any other general within. Then scale everyone else from that general.

Sorry, my bad. I just went and looked and the last tile spot and you have to look at the different rows and columns for each max value, and I forgot it starts at 0,0 not 1,1.

226 X 63

Your unit graphics look outstanding from what I am seeing.

There are limitations to the SC and SC2 engine, and I can live with it. One game cannot be everything, and I like what SC and SC2 do. A branching logic path would be great, I have taken all of French territory before taking Paris, and it would be great to have the option to declare Vichy or not. The coding to add in every branching path would devolve the code into something like, say, 3rd Reich (uggghhh). More later, gotta run NOW!

In SC1, Brtish cities could trace supply to the Russian captial. In SC2, Western Allies cannot trace supply from any Russian supply source, and vice-versa.

It can work that way, but the Americas were never a battleground in WWII. It work best to have the main battle sights towards the center of a map.

Because at the largest map size, you cannot keep the same scale as SC2 has. You would have to shrink Europe sizeably, or play on the map Honch has, which is to scale, and has about 2/3rds the world. As for the second part that wrote in a confusing manner, the only land link that is vital between Europe and Asia is the Trans-Siberian railway in the USSR. Yes, troops could walk from India to the shores of the Mediterranian, but it makes much more sense to jump on transports, as it is faster and more in supply. [ August 22, 2006, 11:13 PM: Message edited by: Scook ]

In the game currently, if you lose Britain, and can retake the island, Britian actually is much more powerful with the capital in Egypt, as all cities you take in Africa can achieve level 8 or 10 status. Moving the capital to Canada would have the same effect on production as USA entering the war, and would be more realistic. In the current game, except for trying to drag Sea Lion out so the Axis cannot knock you out of Africa, there is little drawback to losing Britain.

I am thinking of attempting a world map, and I need some ideas. Europe and Pacific will have to be on different scales for multiple reasons: 1) I would like to keep the scale we have currently for SC2, so look at Honch's map and you will see the scale as far as east as it will reach. 2) I would like to keep units consistent for movement and range. Bombers in Rabuul should cover a vastr area, but if they hit the Europe map, they shouldn't be able to cover half the map. 3) The area used in SC2 is 1/8th to 1/6th of the whole world. Shrinking Europe to make the whole world to scale would ruin Europe, in my opinion. So: 1) The 2 edges of the map will be the USA. We can cut out most of the heartland, South America, and Canada and that will help cut down what is needed. 2) The furthest north needed in Europe is already deomstrated, so that is the northern border. The Southern areas will be Africa, and maybe some of South America. Pacific, furthest north will be Aluetian island chain, and the peninsula north of Vladivostok. Southern edeges should include the tip of New Zealand, so as far south east as Somoa should be on the map. 3) The scale should change at about the eastern edge of the current standard map. Much of eastern USSR, India, Afganistan, etc. won't be played on in most games, unless the Allies get sloppy and let the Axis in. So, my question will be, should I keep the land and ocean lines together and put the 2 sides together, or use some limited land line connections, and use lots of naval loops to move back and forth from the maps. The 1st choice will create some disfigurement where the 2 scales meet, but moving from one to the other will be easy. The 2nd choice will have and ugly looking barrier, but for the most part the theatres were separate, so it might be a cleaner way of doing it. Suggestions, thoughts, input? Thanks. Scook

How much experience does the unit have? The bars, flags, stripes, whatever you call them, reminicent of Panzer Generaly, affect how many elite replacements a unit can have. One bar = 11 str max, 5 bars = 15str max. And elite replacements can only be added at 1 strength per turn.

Thanks JJ. I am going to attempt a world map now. I like the idea of Germany/Japan vs. the Big 3.

I like the idea of Canada having the capitol if Britain falls, don't know how the convoy thing works out.

Your scenario is what me and my friend call the Britain taffy pull. The objectives are thus: keep neutrality with Russia and USA as long as possible. Take as much UK territory outside of Britain as possible. Make Britain feel the stetch and eliminate assets and lose money. If Japan can be in the game, set up to take oil from the Pacific, Singapore, and cut off Australia as quickly as possible. If you can get the UK into a position with few units and little money, it's very similar to the scenario you are creating. Barbarossa occurs, maybe a little late with tons of Germans, and Japan follows up soon with an invasion to take Vladivostok (hopefully Siberians go west beforehand). The scenario you describe would be great on a world map, take Italy out of major power status and put Japan in. Italy can either be a minor lapdog to Germany (workable solution) or make Italy part of Germany and add to the German force pool (not so workable, but usable in a few situations). I am not so sure Churchill would be replaced. I can see the fear of being under a jackboot as high or higher than placating the Germans after a French debacle.

Bottom line, I believe the USA is under-represented in MPPs and ground units in SC and SC2. Thank Hubert Cater for the Editor.