Accountability in SC2

[Bruce70]

... or possibly even SC1?

Currently if you play as the Allies then after the US and USSR join the war you have free reign to declare war on any neutrals you like with no consequences. For example, if the Axis player hasn't already done so it is very easy for the US to capture Portugal and then possibly Spain almost as soon as they (the US) join the war.

One way of remedying this would be to have the MPP production of every allied city drop by X points after a DoW. The points would build back up to normal levels in the same way they do when cities are bombed.

Another problem is that you can prevent your opponent from getting any plunder by declaring war on, say Portugal again, just before your opponent does. You don't have to have any intention of actually invading the country or even any units nearby, and the one corps the opponent gets as a bonus hardly outways the plunder they would have got. Can't think of good way to prevent this ATM, any ideas?

These may be gamey tactics that any self respecting player wouldn't do but it wouldn't hurt to add a little accountability anyway would it?

[RicKhan]

This game favors the Aggessor. Looting neutral nations is part of the game, and as the Allies any country not already Conquered by the Axis is up for grabs by the Allies. As a military strategem the Iberian Pennisula could be a way of getting an edge on the Axis. So why not go for it. The Axis have free Reign in the beginning and noone complains, cuz their NAZI's. But in a game like this, there is no right or wrong, only the law of rules and compromise of players looking for a honorable duel.

__________________

Courage is fear singing a hymn arranged for four voices.

Fear passes. But leaves a record of its stay.

You want to be brave. You also want to be.

But your greatest danger is from your fellow human beings.

[Bruce70]

I agree that there should be no right or wrong. But IRL there were *consequenses*, I think the game should model those somehow.

[Randell Daigre]

Maybe lower plunder and an MPP cap of "5" instead of the usual "8" for cities and resource hexes would address the "consequences" issue. On the other hand, I've always found Portugal and Spain to be a handy remedy to the anemic US MPP production.

On the third hand (bear with me here), Spain was a fascist "neutral" with strong pro-axis sympathies. Portugal was also a fascist country. In fact, Portugal had the first fascist government in Europe.

I seriously doubt that moral considerations were the deciding factor in the Allies' refusal to invade neutral countries. It probably had more to do with the fact that there just weren't any neutral countries "in the way". It's a lot further from Britain to Spain than it is from Britain to Normandy. It's also a lot further to Berlin (and Paris) from Spain than it is to Berlin (or Paris) from Normandy.

P.S.- Also, since both Spain and Portugal were fascist countries as well as neutral ones, I don't think that the Allied leadership would have had *too* much trouble villifying them for their respective publics.

[ September 25, 2002, 08:35 PM: Message edited by: Randell Daigre ]

[Brian Rock]

There's also a difference in political economy between the Axis and Allies (the western Allies, anyhow).

The Axis invaded to incorporate countries into their empire, while the western Allies didn't. The result is that I'd suggest the Axis should get more of an MMP benefit from conquest than England or America.

[Bruce70]

Originally posted by Randell Daigre:

Maybe lower plunder and an MPP cap of "5" instead of the usual "8" for cities and resource hexes would address the "consequences" issue.

Yes,lower plunder for allies and/or axis may be a better "solution".

I seriously doubt that moral considerations were the deciding factor in the Allies' refusal to invade neutral countries. It probably had more to do with the fact that there just weren't any neutral countries "in the way".

That may be true IRL but in SC the plunder alone makes it worth the diversion. The only downside of invading Potugal is that you must invade Spain to get your troops out.

P.S.- Also, since both Spain and Portugal were fascist countries as well as neutral ones, I don't think that the Allied leadership would have had *too* much trouble villifying them for their respective publics.

Also true but it doesn't just stop with Portugal and Spain, I just used those as examples.

No-one has discussed the "fake DoW" issue to stop your opponent getting plunder. Any thoughts on that? This is really only an issue for the few contries that have a small army and few resources (compared to the amount of plunder) eg Norway, Portugal, Iraq, possibly Switzerland.

I guess the solution to that would be to make the plunder proportional to the economic value of the country or try and estimate an historical value for the plunder that could be expected from those countries.

I guess that would solve the first problem too.

[ September 25, 2002, 10:14 PM: Message edited by: Bruce70 ]

[Hubert Cater]

No-one has discussed the "fake DoW" issue to stop your opponent getting plunder.

This one was actually discussed a bit way back when, and of course it depends on which side is doing it and when. If it's the Allies prior to US entry then it can backfire in two ways, firstly it decreases US entry potential when playing in USA 'Random' mode, and secondly, if the Axis end up getting the country without a fight it's considered a 'Join' and friendly as opposed to an occupied territory, the result of which is usually a couple of 'free' units and the territory resources can max out at '10' if connected to either Axis capital as opposed to the occupied '8'.

Then the issue gets a little muddy under different circumstances but the 'free' units doesn't hurt and can add up to in some cases more than the plunder amount in terms of pure MPP value.

Hubert

[Les the Sarge 9-1b]

I have not experienced this problem, from lack of playings, but I must comment.

As we all know, the US the Brits etc etc the people we call the "Allies" were not into WW2 for gain. The Axis were.

I would find any game, that rewards to the Allies, gain from wanton opportunism, to be particularly irritating.

In A3R if you attack a country they join the other side. Attack Spain, and you get stuck with immediately putting Spain's economy in the hands of the enemy. That and the Spanish army is now a reinforcement to you oppponent.

True some Nuetrals were not that impressive both economically or militarily, but they WILL come on your side the moment they are "liberated".

This means pointless attacks can come back to haunt you. Or at least they should.

A dumb "easter egg hunt" gamey conquest effect would certainly crush my interest in the game.

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Les the Sarge:

This means pointless attacks can come back to haunt you. Or at least they should.

In games, in ancient Greek blood feuds (the Furies applying miasma) and real Life and everywhere -- the Nemesis Factor, eh?

In SC2, I wouldn't mind seeing some loss of prestige for a pointless attack, say -- Allies taking Ireland or Portugal, and this could take the form of MPP penalties.

After all, there were billions of other folks not directly involved in the conflict who could very well effect how much (indirect, circumspect) assistance a Belligerent might receive in the future (... even ol' Papa Hemingway patrolled Cuban waters in his fishing boat looking for stray subs... :cool: ).

Such things as intelligence, sabotage, underground elan and a shipment of wheat or ball bearings might well hinge on the good or bad karma associated with these sorts of "pointless attacks," and it would be appropriate, I think, to impose some certain penalty on those who do so. :eek:

[Doomsday1]

In a couple of PBEM games as the "Allies", I invaded Portugal and subsequently Spain with no success.

I did so to take pressure off the floundering Reds, ...a kind of second front in the West. I knew a "Torch" would not draw enough forces to help the Motherland, so I gambled on the Iberian penisula and lost.

My US forces consisted of the 1st and 3rd US armies with "Patton" HQ, an airfleet, a tank army and 2 US corps with the Brits faking a landing in Southern France and joining the fray the next turn.

What ensued was disaster! The Axis player (unnamed so his head does not swell) operated a sizable force complee with a full complement of 5 airfleets and a couple of HQs. Needless to say, a few turns later, the US forces were routed. The appearance of untersee boats sent the proud 'Alabama' to the bottom to pay Davey Jones a visit before she could reach a friendly port. What was left of Patton made it back via a very SW route to avoid detection for future defense of the homeland.

Losses in Spain could not be recouped. This allowed "The Rock" to fall into the enemies hands trapping elements of the Royal Navy in Mussolini's pond.

In another game, I thought it would be keen to attack the lowlands(low countries)thus butting the french up against the Belguim fortress and depreiving the Axis plunder and experience. What foolishness. First, due to lack of sleep, I thought the Belguim forces would join the forces of good to stem the evil tide, instead, I found I had an enemy on my flank. Next, as HC pointed out, this made the Americans angry, and their readiness dropped to -7. The Axis player was able to put off his Barbarosa till mid 1942, at which his vastly superior numbers, equipment and experince rang out the death knoll for Russia.