jjdenver

Happycat chose the option to send Stillwell and noted that it's an always "yes", but in a game where Chungking is about to fall, I think he shows up near a small city on the border of Burma or IndoChina - near where a Garrison unit starts the game. If Chungking falls then you have a good HQ - Stillwell - stuck in the middle of nowhere China. Is there any strategic significance to the mountain towns that are along the road leading southwest out of Chungking once Chungking falls? Does the allied player want Stillwell stranded there?

One is extended map. I looked in the manuals folder and don't find any description of the campaigns. What is the difference between the two? It appears the map is extended west in the extended map. Are the MPP's any different or is there just more geography to fight over once the Germans are pushed back? Thanks

Why wait until now - so late - to take Nanning in southern China? Was it some tricky move to keep US Entry down? Also do you have to take all ports in Philippines or do they all fall to Japan once Manila is taken and the minor country surrenders? Same question for NEI? How early did you have to launch Amphib forces to get them in place for all of these operations? I'm curious how you decide what ports to take east of NEI to take with Japan? I'm glad that you explained about Wake, but what is the logic with other ports in the south Pacific? Does Japan pay MPP's to launch amphib forces to eventually take them all? Or only those listed as secondary or primary supply? What are the first targets and why? By the way what good is a secondary supply hex on an island that isn't linked by land to any primary supply source? Doesn't it seem that Japan is perhaps too powerful in this iteration of the game? They have a huge income, are able to pursue an almost inevitably successful conquest of all of China east of the large mountain range (not historical), and at the same time build up a huge invasion and naval assault force for the Pacific including taking Hawaii along with clearly heavy research. Japan is quite a super power ya? Thanks for the AAR btw, it's interesting.

If SU doesn't DOW and invade it, what happens? Does southern LL route still get opened? If SU does invade it, does southern LL route still get opened? Thanks

If Cairo is taken will the units of type Egypt(Br.) like the New Zealand corp surrender or will they fight on? Thanks

Ok thanks, I realize counterattack, but one question - and I'm looking for an opinion here, is whether it's worth spending MPP's to bring them up to strength 10?

I've got a few general questions. As Soviets what do you do with your light tanks? Is it worth MPP to repair them to full strength or do you just throw them away as speed bumps or making counterattacks whenever possible and not worry about building them up to 10 strength? Is anti-air investment worth making as SU or just focus on infantry and AT an aerial combat techs? Thanks

Thanks for the reply MonsterClaude. I have 2 questions from your answer. 1) When you say Persia and Finland are must-do's for SU once she is mobilized - do you mean after SU is at war with Germany? 2) I have no idea about the 8 axis units near Warsaw - do you mean German player might put 7 Axis units near Warsaw to prevent an increase in SU war readiness? Thanks

Btw, I'm sure that designers can come up with better ideas than this but a couple of ways to handle it would be the following (for these do not count any hexes over water, only land hexes traced count) 1) by city: If a city is not a home country city then city max level (instead of always 10 or 5) is 10 - distance from capital / 10. So a city 60 hexes from Berlin would be max 4. OR 2) by unit: If a unit is not in home country then unit max organization = 100 - (distance from capital - 25). So a unit 50 hexes from capital would be max organization of 75. I'm sure there are better ideas out there than this.

ah well i'm not sure if any of the scripts are date sensitive or political context-sensitive so i was hoping that one of the playtesters or designers would clue us in. Numydar you're super helpful but it would be nice if someone who actually knows what's going on would reply haha.

Ah well I'm not aware of all the events - I'm asking about what if players just do the DOW's. For example Britain DOW's Portugal on the turn that Germany DOW's SU. SU DOW's Persia and Finland on first clear turn of 40. China DOW's Indo-China etc etc - is there any downside to doing these things in-game?

numydar, thanks for the historical perspective but I'm asking about in-game effects/considerations.

Hi, I've seen in some AAR's DOW's vs various minors. Persia, Finland, Indochina, etc. What do you have to consider when making these DOW's? For example why doesn't SU always DOW Persia on the first clear weather turn of 1940? Why not DOW Finland on that same turn? Why wouldn't Britain DOW Madagascar and take it or any other country on the map that has any production? Are there political effects/ramifications? Thanks

Thanks for the response Big Al. The reason that I brought it up now is that I've noticed it before but was reminded by another recent post by steel32 here http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=110124 In this link he talks about pushing to Stalingrad then pushing behind Moscow to Yaroslavl before finally attacking Moscow from behind. Something like this would be a supply nightmare for Germany and I can hardly imagine that it should be allowed as an effective strategy in the game.....so really this problem does lead to some really silly operations in the game.

Hi, First let me give a disclaimer - I might be missing something here and I'm asking this question based on past versions of SC that I've played, not having played enough of AOC yet to know if these problems are addressed. Anyway I have concerns about how the game models supply. I think it misses two very important factors when modeling supply on the east front. First, and most importantly the length of the supply line that Germany had to maintain across SU was a very important consideration. I could go back to various books that I've read about the war in the east for quotes but I'm a bit too lazy for that. Instead I'll summarize what I've read by saying that as the Germans marched deeper into Russia they had a very difficult time pushing supply across such a vast territory and such great distances. They faced rail conversion problems, rolling stock problems, and organizational problems, and to push a ton of supply across the distance from Berlin to Minsk (700 miles) is a very different animal than pushing that same ton of supply from Berlin to Stalingrad (1600 miles). However in the game, once the Germans take a city and it has a few turns to build up to its max value there is no factoring in of the actual length of the supply line back to Germany, is there? Instead, a city east of Stalingrad is just as good for supply as a city on the Polish border. So shouldn't there be some factoring of the actual length of supply back to the home country - Berlin for example - when determining how useful a city would be for supply. Could the Germans really push supply to the Urals as easily as they could push supply to Minsk? I think no. Second, I am not sure that the game models partisan effects very well in the east. I remember reading various books like "the black march" and "the forgotten soldier" (I hope that I remember those titles correctly) and the Germans despite committing lots of troops to security duties were never able to avoid supply disruptions by partisans in such a vast country as the SU. Since the game doesn't really model manpower directly, it seems that the partisan effects might be less than they should be. Is this something that should be improved? Anyway, I'm hopeful that these factors can be modeled more accurately in this or a future version of SC because I really enjoy the game. Thanks