Real WW2 vs SC, a comparison.

[zappsweden]

I have made a list (in order) of the most strategical differences between SC and the real WW2 so that Hubert have that in mind when making SC2.

The list (1 is the most difference)

1. Mediterranean wars are 99% axis dominated i.e not historical nor realistic.

2. Landings play to large role and are missused to surround enemies and inflict big casualties on the enemy.

3. Using air to hunt down HQ's is too easy in SC.

4. Unsupplied units (supply 0) fight too good and should have even less readiness (to prevent unrealistic and frequent diversion landings).

5. Experienced units are too invincible.

6. Catch-up in research is too easy and prevents a fun part of the game, the long-term tech strategy.

[ March 28, 2003, 06:34 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[JerseyJohn]

Zappsweden

Very good list.

I'm sure others will add to it and I'll wait till they've added theirs before filling in any I still think ought to have been listed, such as ships in harbor being stronger than those on the open sea.

[ March 27, 2003, 11:08 AM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[KDG]

Just a couple comments:

First, because only 4 or 5 researches are actually used, you see an equalization of research. If all 8 were worthwhile, you would see vast differences in tech levels as people would invest in many different areas.

Second, you can solve the air problem by only allowing air attacked units to be reduced to 1. It would then be a waste to target HQ's, because they can't be eliminated. Air would then be used in combination with other units to break enemy lines.

Third, I agree that experience gain should be slowed down, maybe by 10-15%.

On the Med, does the limited spaces in the region hurt Axis or Allies more?

Agree on supply. Reduce readiness by additional 15%

[ March 27, 2003, 01:38 PM: Message edited by: KDG ]

[Edwin P.]

I do not think that experienced units are too invincible.

Combat veterans fight better and smarter than green-horn units that have not been exposed to battle.

As for the equalization of techs, often times in war weapon systems are found and then reverse engineered by the enemy.

I do agree that you can now play SC and totally ignore the Med. Ocean.

[ March 27, 2003, 10:32 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Liam]

The Mediterrean is only 99% Axis cause the Brits go for other targets, and historically the Italians did have Naval supremacy awhile they just never did anything with it<especially after frogman damaged vital British Battleships in Port Alexandria>Well, I disagree about experience. Though it maybe should be called quality! Russia should have more units and there should be -minus not exp. but quality. -4 and all minors including Italy should have -Quality units cause in the real War they all looked at the enemy a lot in binoculars..

Army Group North was never destroyed.. though encircled

[Edwin P.]

Liam,

I agree with your points, but do not understand Quality.

Does this mean you would give all units a rating for Experience and Quality?

Does this mean that German units would have a quality of say 10, while Russian units and Italian units would have a quality rating of 6(ie -4) to reflect the superior training of the German infantry and its commanders.

Thus would combat strength be a function of:

Readiness x Experience x Quality X Unit Strength

Readiness - supply status

Experience - Actual combat experience

Quality - Training & Leadership

Strength - Equipment & Manpower

[Ancient One]

I agree with Zappsweden except on 6.

I'd also like to point out the vast difference in the profitability and plunder of the occupied territories in the game compared to reality. Also, the value of some areas compared to others is completely out of whack.

[santabear]

I like ZappSweden's list, particularly the first point. It's very difficult (and unprofitable) to follow the historical approach of the Allies (soft underbelly...). It's better in every respect to land in France.

I also disagree about the effect of experience; I think veteran units in WWII were significantly more effective than new ones, though this can probably be argued for some time.

The one item NOT on the list that has been touched on in other areas is naval warfare in general; I think some of the problems in the Med. (and possibly with amphibious operations in general) are attributable to a naval system that needs some overall fine tuning.

[Kuniworth]

Its to difficult in SC to capture russian cities as the axis. No way Minsk will fall 27th of june as it did historically playin the 1941 scenario....and so on

[Liam]

Edwin I would like to gauge soldiers on their real life abilities. Like you say a Russian unit having a combat ability less than is represented in the game. Likewise the german's had much less troops...Instead of the situation now where they merely make less Russian units to represent their inferior quality. I don't know what to do about the hexes though, and if that didn't change it's a moot point.

The Germans, US, British would be of a higher combat rating. As was historical... While the Russians would start off at a disadvantage, and always need #s to overcome a greater adversary. The Russians did however uprgrade their soldiers as time went on... Perhaps the tech system isn't quite correct here. Rather than Inf Tech being size you can organize in a unit. Increase it's readiness/exp. gained per combat/and fighting values as it done already...

giving the Italians, French, Russians their original disposition, poor...

[Liam]

Santa:

One point I'd like to touch on again about Naval Warefare and German plunder. They did get a motherload of gold and Germany starts off rather poor... Also the annexations had given Germany more manpower, arms, and room to grow... If you want to make an alteration, I'd say give Germany more base units and take away some of the plunder she recieves. In particular from countries that would be unpopular to attack...

The Naval Warefare is a bit too easy. a better coastal defense system would be nice, allowing ground units to volley artillery on ships lurking to close to coastal territory! Hey howa bout a 7% chance with every Bombardment that the Ship recieves 1 hit of damage...increased by anti-aircraft tech<as that effects the quality of precise artillery>

Limiting transports and the readiness of some ships in certian seas would help too! For instance, not allowing a direct pounce the Russian Navy rnd1...or allowing the two N.Sea subs to be hunted down so quickly...

Oh, and lest I forget this much you are playing a very intense strategy game. You should be allowed by certian laws to enter neutrals. Aside from say Sweden/Switzerland/Spain.. Those 3 countries would've attracted a lot of unpopular sentiment worldwide and remeber that this is the War in Europe not including the rest of the World. The wrong moves in the wrong places had bigger consequences. I'm not the economics major to name them but if you start have to seize up the world's supply of rubber, oil, and steele in order to protect your nation that is not a freebie. Nations like Mexico, India and MiddleEast could all be melting pots for revolts... I don't think that the Allies should recieve 1 dime for Plunder or occuppation<they'd have to be as cruel as the German's were to get any gold from these nations> Stalin should also react more accordingly, with fear towards Allied Aggression... As the US should act towards Stalin...