Slow boat to Alexandria

[pzgndr]

I'd rather create a Suez city and allow 1 unit to be built there each turn.

I've been pondering this issue some more with my "closed" mind. One skewing of the game toward the Axis side that I see is the ability of Germany to build units in occupied countries (ie, U-boats being built in France and tank groups being built in Smolensk) while Britain is unable to build units in Egypt (which really represents a capability to raise forces from India and South Africa more than transport of units from Britain).

This has two consequences which favor the Axis and penalize the Allies. Germany is not penalized for having to build units in its home country and then pay the extra op move cost to move them to the front, which does not provide Russia any relief as Germany drives deeper into the Motherland. And, Britain cannot reinforce Egypt without sending transports through the Med, which is possible but very risky.

So a modest suggestion is to look at how home cities and occupied cities are coded in the game with regard to building new units. Limit building of new units to home cities only, and make Alexandria a British home city. (Something should also be done about occupied Poland; Warsaw should become an occupied capital and not a German home city.) No builds in occupied cities should be allowed, but reinforcements should continue as is. For German U-boats and fleets, allow them to op move between friendly ports on the Baltic and France, and even make op moves for ALL naval units possible just like for air units now. Yes, it's a little unrealistic since these transfers can't be intercepted, but would be consistent with other stuff already in the game and would also address the issue of German naval units breaking into the Atlantic. (Russian fleets should not be allowed to op move, otherwise they'll sneak off to Britain.) As for limits on British builds in Egypt, I say let MPPs and strategy set the limits and not try to restrict what may happen. If Britain can afford to build lots of units in Egypt, then the Axis player probably has other problems to worry about.

Also, building new units in home cities cut off from the capital should be reconsidered. The current system prevents Russia from building anywhere when Moscow is surrounded. It's bad enough to have production cut, and worse not to be able to "produce" anything when there are no placement hexes that can trace a path to the capital. Just a thought.

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Bill Macon:

This has two consequences which favor the Axis and penalize the Allies. Germany is not penalized for having to build units in its home country and then pay the extra op move cost to move them to the front, which does not provide Russia any relief as Germany drives deeper into the Motherland. And, Britain cannot reinforce Egypt without sending transports through the Med, which is possible but very risky.

Disagree Bill -- Britain should NOT be allowed to build in Alexandria, though I would favor some ANZAC Corps arrivals now and then. As earlier surmised, this could be random and once a yearly, and better if this also includes Suez City so to provide greater rationale for Axis even bothering with the area.

If Britain plans ahead, they can have Montgomery and a tank detachment in Egypt BEFORE Italy even enters and those bristling U-boats are any tentacled menace.

Otherwise, the unrealistically realized Brit units would have the advantage of HQ enhancement. The minor armies naturally would not. In addition, the Axis U-boats would not have a chance to intercept the deployment, which should happen IF around-the-Horn movement is eventually implemented.

However, I do agree with you that German units should not be built in captured, size-5+ cities, but should only be "operated" there. Even if you allow for conscripted/enslaved foreign legions, this current set-up probably allows too much of an inexpensive reinforcement.

[Kiith]

Disagree Bill -- Britain should NOT be allowed to build in Alexandria, though I would favor some ANZAC Corps arrivals now and then.

We'll they'd be a great use wouldn't they? If you don't the the HQ there already they are useless. I think Bill's idea is the most simple and easiest one to implement, but I like him might be close minded

[Hubert Cater]

Also, building new units in home cities cut off from the capital should be reconsidered. The current system prevents Russia from building anywhere when Moscow is surrounded. It's bad enough to have production cut, and worse not to be able to "produce" anything when there are no placement hexes that can trace a path to the capital. Just a thought.

This one will definitly be fixed in a future patch, I want to finish up the TCP/IP first as it is the top priority, but I will fix the purchasing issue for Russia as I agree it can be a game killer and I'll think about something for Alexandria as well based on all the input. Thanks!

Hubert

[John DiFool]

Originally posted by Hubert Cater:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

Also, building new units in home cities cut off from the capital should be reconsidered. The current system prevents Russia from building anywhere when Moscow is surrounded. It's bad enough to have production cut, and worse not to be able to "produce" anything when there are no placement hexes that can trace a path to the capital. Just a thought.

This one will definitly be fixed in a future patch, I want to finish up the TCP/IP first as it is the top priority, but I will fix the purchasing issue for Russia as I agree it can be a game killer and I'll think about something for Alexandria as well based on all the input. Thanks!

Hubert</font>

[pzgndr]

Hubert, could you clarify something for now? General thinking seems to be that if you want more British forces in Egypt, then go ahead and transport them early prior to Germany getting U-boat bases in France and Italy becoming active. Changing Allied garrisons in the Med now prompts earlier entry by Italy, and I assume transporting new units past Sicily would have the same effect. Is this correct? If not, perhaps that's something to consider in the next patch. Also, new builds/arrivals in Egypt should affect Italy's entry also, if and when you decide to add something.

[Blurter]

A little better access to the Suez is needed, but making Alexandria a British Home City might tip the balance too far to the British in the Med.

Why not just have a super-operate option for any land units in Britain, that functions just like a normal operate but delays the arrival of the unit for 2 turns (i.e. will arrive there on the third turn). And naturally allow a max of 1 unit per turn to move this way?

The Brits are at a major disadvantage otherwise in the Med....particularly human vs human.

[Canuck_para]

Originally posted by Hubert Cater:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />

Also, building new units in home cities cut off from the capital should be reconsidered. The current system prevents Russia from building anywhere when Moscow is surrounded. It's bad enough to have production cut, and worse not to be able to "produce" anything when there are no placement hexes that can trace a path to the capital. Just a thought.

This one will definitly be fixed in a future patch, I want to finish up the TCP/IP first as it is the top priority, but I will fix the purchasing issue for Russia as I agree it can be a game killer and I'll think about something for Alexandria as well based on all the input. Thanks!

Hubert</font>

[Hubert Cater]

Thanks!