Jump to content

Gronq

Members
  • Content Count

    78
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Gronq

  • Rank
    Member

Converted

  • Location
    Leeds, UK
  1. Is there an argument to carry this on with the new Gold edition when it's released (building on the matches already played obviously)? Would everyone upgrade?
  2. $25 for those upgrades? Bargain! Also, supporting continued development for a company that listens to the users. As a user you don't have to buy every single release either and that's your individual choice.
  3. Making the Fog of War a bit more, well, foggier... Having played most versions of SC now for a number of years I'd like to see some changes to the fog of war to make battles, quite frankly, a bit riskier. Therefore, some suggestions that I'd be grateful if you all could consider: 1. Units spotted should not be guaranteed to be what they seem. 2. Units in immediate contact with other units should not necessarily show their true tech level (unless battles have been fought previously). The likely battle outcomes displayed should reflect this. 3. Terrain should have an effect on concea
  4. Allow minor units to be controlled by the power it leans towards prior to activation. Tech upgrades takes place at a risk (in case the minor changes allegiance). This will make for better defensive positions of units if attacked.
  5. Try some simple things first: 1. Reduce the power of TacAir over certain terrain. 2. Close the German Para loophole. 3. Make the US land defences at Pearl Harbour stronger. 4. Give the Russians their engineer sooner, maybe even allow for another in the build queue. These should be very simple to implement. Any others?
  6. Having played quite a few H2H games now I'm of the firm opinion that if the Axis player plays aggressively without taking too many risks he will win 99% of the time under the current victory conditions. The only chance the Allies have at present is to go 'all in' for the Italy gambit and actually take Italy out early 1940. This is a massive gamble because if France falls before Italy surrenders the Allies are really knackered (to use a technical term). Jollyguy's suggestions are all good. Certainly some minors should have more risks attached to them if you attack them. Also, as a number
  7. Agreed. The game is currently very weighted in favour of the Axis.
  8. Bored waiting for an Ikea delivery so I thought I'd throw some thoughts into the mix. Features that I'd like to see in updates/redesigns (some of which have already been suggested by others):- Research: 1. Separate research for each major power. However, add a research chit option for Research Collaboration which would increase the likelihood of a hit in areas where your allies are more advanced. 2. Allow research for Intelligence (spying) to achieve hits in areas where your opponents are more advanced. 3. Allow research for Counter Intelligence to stop opponents achieve hits i
  9. More decision events in general is a good thing as it tends to spice things up. Maybe even allow certain research to make certain decision events more likely is another option. I second Sharkmans suggestion re operational movement cost. Also, (and I think someone has suggested this in the past) perhaps limit the distance allowed per turn.
  10. Hi John, Probably due to sea conditions. If you're on a rough sea tile you won't be able to launch. All the best!
  11. Not sure that leaderboard is right. I've got 1 win, 1 draw and 1 loss (Clausewitz has got a win and a draw against me). All the best!
  12. At the moment paratroopers get to drop for 'free' i.e. there is no defence against them until after they've dropped. Would it be more realistic to enable fighters to attack them prior to the drop? They would, therefore, have to have a fighter escort to minimise casualties prior to the drop itself.
  13. Maybe introduce a Mers El Kebir event where a certain amount of MPPs are spent for the Allies to receive some of the French navy.
×
×
  • Create New...