Les the Sarge 9-1 Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Since I have been involved with SC (involved ie aware of its existence), I have seen a good many arguments of this that and the other thing that "need fixing". But this is a dangerous prospect (as far as I know software doesn't take kindly to fiddling). Ok we all know Air dominates the game. We all know the Germans get to dominate first (beating up poles makes for easy training in the early game it appears). Problem is this, to much tweaking is not automatically a receipe for success. A lot of the "fixes" I have seen through the editor, are really in a lot of cases without categorical basis in solid game mechanic rationale. Given the right "chances" any nation in the game can "get out of hand". But you can't meddle in every nation. It has to stop somewhere. Me, I don't like a few glaring errors of design, because they are just plain ill advised or in some cases just plain non logical. My pet favourite is the permanent residence in Ireland. Those that go in, never come out. That is not even remotely connected to simulating anything. Clearly a design glitch. Most of the "fixes" being requested of the game, are really the province of what may some day become SC2. As such, I am really not overly concerned to fret till it actually shows up. Rambo made some good comments on Air just recent. All very logical sounding for the most part. But currently, SC is just SC. I am happy to leave an Air unit an Air unit. I am happy with equality for all. If it costs one nation X to purchase X effect, then fine, it is ok with me. If the effect of X is unrealistic in the light of day, then building a notional enhancement into SC2 might be a good notion. Right now though, I think some of the fiddling might merely fall victim to the effects of endless fiddling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin P. Posted January 2, 2004 Share Posted January 2, 2004 Excellent Point. In general I think that the game system is great as is and that some requests for "tweaking" are either not realistic or will have unintended consequences. For example - Air Defense for individual units. In my opinion individual combat units did not have effective air defense. They might have an AA gun or two but the only true air defense available was friendly air units. Some might not like it but air power was and is king. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
well-dressed gentleman Posted January 4, 2004 Share Posted January 4, 2004 Everyone assumes their house rules will improve the game. Usually they don't. If you want realism, why not an atom bomb house rule where the allies win automatically in 1945? [ January 04, 2004, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: well-dressed gentleman ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts