lhughes41 Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 I have only played non Gold so far and I'm curious about those who have played Gold's opinions about the air recon missions in Gold. Are they potentially too powerful... or maybe remove a bit of fun? What I've always enjoyed in SC was the wonderful amount of surprise players could spring on each other. But now, for example, wouldn't recon missions make the Italians pretty safe from surprise when sending troops to africa? They just scout first with bombers? So I've no doubt recon is powerful, but is it maybe too powerful or reducing a wonderful aspect of SC? Probably missing something since I've not played Gold, but that's why I'm asking :-) Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strategiclayabout Posted February 25, 2012 Share Posted February 25, 2012 Hello lhugues41 ^^ , I havn't used recon much but oceans are big so I don't find it that powerfull. Still, it's nice to be able to recon key positions without risking units nearby. I'll have to play with that more . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 It can make the passage of troops to Africa safer, but from my experience the urge to attack enemy units sometimes means that most or all air assets are used for combat, so attempting to ambush enemy transports is still possible. Or you can use a naval unit to set a trap. I rarely find that I have enough units to both recon the sea lanes and attack enemy units, so something has to give. In an early beta game of Gold I lost my Runstedt HQ because I was so keen on using the Luftwaffe to help me capture Tunisia that I naively assumed that he could sail safely from Italy to Tripoli. It was a very painful mistake to make. If I had launched a recon mission to check his sea route was clear, then I wouldn't have captured Tunisia that turn. So tough decisions remain! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lhughes41 Posted February 27, 2012 Author Share Posted February 27, 2012 Thanks Bill. Good post. Only part I didn't understand was 'or you can use a naval unit to set a trap.' Wouldn't a recon mission reveal such a naval unit? Not sure what you mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strategiclayabout Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 - I think Bill means setting a trap by putting an tempting target (like a transport) where it has good chances to be spotted by enemy aerial recon. Then, you can move powerfull units nearby for a counter (subs or carriers). - More elaborated and more random: you can put a unit with low tech levels to be spotted and make your enemy think your troops are underequiped or understrengh while you have elite units with modern equipment waiting to strike. - You can also do the opposite if you're weak: try to delay an enemy offensive by making your opponent think you have units and techs that are not actually there. Send a carrier near Australia or Dutch Harbor (Alaska) as the japanese to lure US Navy away from Midway and strike it with your mighty combined fleet . - I think Catacol Highlander did something like that with the Russians in the official AAR (he used the russian word "maskirovka" = masquerade / bluffing / deception if I'm right). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lhughes41 Posted February 27, 2012 Author Share Posted February 27, 2012 Ah very nice. I have much to learn being a grasshopper :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 - I think Bill means setting a trap by putting an tempting target (like a transport) where it has good chances to be spotted by enemy aerial recon. Then, you can move powerfull units nearby for a counter (subs or carriers). Exactly, because it's extremely hard to not attack such a tempting target. You can then launch your counterattack the following turn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lhughes41 Posted February 29, 2012 Author Share Posted February 29, 2012 Am I right in noticing that spotting range of bombers has been reduced? Therefore this counterbalances recon missions? I.e. you spot less in general... compensated for by doing recon? If so that is clever and a nice balance :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted February 29, 2012 Share Posted February 29, 2012 This is correct Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcaryf1 Posted March 5, 2012 Share Posted March 5, 2012 I have seen quite a few positive comments about the new recce feature but I have to express some doubts about it as currently implemented. I realise it is a nice "game" feature but in my view it moves SC a bit further away from historical reality. Each aircraft unit in SC notionally represents several hundred planes of whatever type and each player turn in the standard (sequential turn) game absorbs a time period of 28 days. The idea that a force containing several hundred planes might only achieve one recce mission along one specific axis in a period of 28 days seems rather strange to me. The original implementation where an aircraft unit might have an all round spotting ability not much less than its action point range seems to me to be a closer approximation to reality. It is of course entirely possible for scenario designers to restore the original spotting range if they wish. Another possibility would be to give all air units two strikes with house rules for human players that one strike should only be used for recce whilst the AI could choose what to do with its extra strikes. As a matter of interest has the AI been programmed to perform spotting missions? I suppose it has less need to do so as it gets a spotting bonus based on the difficulty setting. Regards Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts