Yet Another SC2 Request Thread

[Edwin P.]

Wolfe,

Excellent posts on the affect of different terrain types.

[Wolfe]

Originally posted by Edwin P.:

Wolfe,

Excellent posts on the affect of different terrain types.

Thanks, Edwin! I hope it gives Hubert some interesting ideas to play with for SC2.

- Chris

[Shaka of Carthage]

The forum is kinda slow, so in the interest of "knowledge" expansion, here are my comments.

Currently the scale in SC is 50 miles a hex. This will not see any major change, otherwise, you would be dealing with a new system.

To expand just to cover the North Atlantic at its proper scale, would require a map slightly larger than the existing map we have. So we would have to double the size of the map to get the proper scale of the North Atlantic.

If you wanted a Global SC, you would have to have over 60,000 hexes. That would be about twenty-five (25) SC maps to have a Global SC.

Without getting into the other difficulties, I wouldn't look for a Global SC anytime soon.

MPP may or may not include manpower. But even if it does, its not the only thing that is in MPP. You would need a "manpower" value to keep track of. Not impossible, but not something you can get using MPP.

Having terrain influence the combat result would be an interesting feature.

You've lost sight of the scale with the different terrain type definitions and effects. 2,125 square miles is a larger area. The definitions and effects you are asking for are more appropriate at an Operational or Tactical level.

The accuracy of movement determing multiple combat actions is a whole nother discussion in itself.

Defending is inherently stronger than Attacking. Thanks. You can send me my $5 teaching fee.

Having Spain at zero MPPs is a bit harsh don't you think? While maybe not all of the civilian economy would have been shifted to wartime production, having none of it is extreme.

[Wolfe]

Originally posted by Shaka of Carthage:

Currently the scale in SC is 50 miles a hex. This will not see any major change, otherwise, you would be dealing with a new system.

Well, I don't know if Hubert is interested in using the existing map (I hope the map will change). If not, I suspect it'll change somewhat significantly. Personally I'd like to see a Pacific SC before anything else. I don't really want to see a do-over of the European theater myself. And I think it would be helpful to do another theater before trying to tackle a global war (if that's what Hubert has in mind - I don't know). This would force him to concentrate on naval affairs, particularly.

But at 50-60km (31-37mi) per hex you would get a European map that looks something like (warning 840KB):

Europe 50km Hexes

This has the benefit of adding some more space to the Eastern front in particular without becoming an Operational level game. IMO the current hex scale doesn't really show the vastness of the Russian Steppes. If land units were Corps only, not Armies, the German invasion of Russia would look a lot more like the enormous undertaking that Barbarossa really was. Axis would have about 55 units total, and that's for the largest theater (in terms of numbers of units) of the war. Other theaters would have fewer units.

To expand just to cover the North Atlantic at its proper scale, would require a map slightly larger than the existing map we have. So we would have to double the size of the map to get the proper scale of the North Atlantic.

Actually more than double. Shift the above map West so that Ireland is on the extreme eastern edge of the map. This new map would only go from the eastern edge of Newfoundland to the western shores of Ireland, just skirting the tip of Greenland. The only other land mass on the map would be the Azores; the US isn't even included. The Earth is a rather large place.

But I'd still love to see the entire planet represented despite its size. Sea lanes where trade and Lend-Lease routes exist would help to keep the majority of ships from wandering too far into the emptiness of the oceans (as would the lack of supplies).

MPP may or may not include manpower. But even if it does, its not the only thing that is in MPP. You would need a "manpower" value to keep track of. Not impossible, but not something you can get using MPP.

To me MPPs are production capability and manpower to produce goods as well as manpower within the armed forces. If the number of owned hexes cannot fully support both the military and MPP production, you lose workers as well as output in the form of lower MPPs. It's simplistic, but it's an incentive to keep unit builds under control. As well as for land-starved countries, especially Japan, to expand. I'm sure there are other ways to do it, though.

You've lost sight of the scale with the different terrain type definitions and effects. 2,125 square miles is a larger area. The definitions and effects you are asking for are more appropriate at an Operational or Tactical level.

Well, I think the ones I've mentioned are varied enough affect some level of strategic movement or supply without getting down to what type of tree is in that particular hex . Especially if the hex scale changes. If the Pacific is the focus of the next game we'll need some form of jungle. And Australia and Africa has some rather unique and very prominent features like escarpments and such. Wadis and plateaus may seem a bit small for this scale, but representing a number of them in a hex seems reasonable to me. The differences between a desert and mountain tile are rather large; I was looking for something in-between.

Having Spain at zero MPPs is a bit harsh don't you think? While maybe not all of the civilian economy would have been shifted to wartime production, having none of it is extreme.

Well, in exchange for joining the Axis didn't Franco demand that Germany resupply all his military with new equipment and rebuild the railroads? I thought Spanish cities starting out at zero and then climbing back to normal levels could help simulate this and the lasting effects of the civil war on the economy and the infrastructure.

- Chris

[ June 05, 2003, 07:21 PM: Message edited by: Wolfe ]

[KDG]

Nice map. It might be too many hexes though for what this game is. Maybe 40 miles per hex instead of 50, but no more(your map was at 30 miles). I'd take the same theatre of war, but at 40 miles per hex, and expanded on all sides by about 120 miles(3 hexes). This would be great for me.

The question is do we have 40 square miles in Russia or Europe where a tank can't pass through(besides water)?

After being conquered I think I'd like all cities & resources to start at 0 and climb each turn thereafter(by 1 or 2) to simulate the changeover of possession.

Adding defense improvements might be a nice addition (at a decent cost with req. length of time).

Oh yeah, give me a full fledged editor that I can change unit stats, as well as change research.

[ June 05, 2003, 07:37 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]

[John DiFool]

Originally posted by KDG:

Nice map. It might be too many hexes though for what this game is. Maybe 40 miles per hex instead of 50, but no more(your map was at 30 miles). I'd take the same theatre of war, but at 40 miles per hex, and expanded on all sides by about 120 miles(3 hexes). This would be great for me.

I like the scale in the sample map because it

would make certain things work better (such as

the Battle of Britian, or the B. of the Atlantic,

with more places for subs to hide) with the

smaller scale.

But you don't want to turn the Eastern Front into

micromanagement heck, either.

John DiFool