Stop Poland-exploit, Hubert I want an explanation

[Kuniworth]

I still don´t understand the surrender-terms for Poland. Most of the time you have to chase down and kill all units but 2, sometimes even more.

why?

France, Portugal, Spain, Italy, Finland, Sweden, Norway, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Romania, Bulgaria, Turkey(?) all surrenders with the loss of capitol. But not Poland why?

It´s not a great power like France and still you have to kill all units, I don´t see the point nor historical accuracy.

Only beside Greece among the minor countries, Poland have this strange winning terms. I suggest that both countries should surrender with the loss of their capitol. Poland in 1939 would never had fought on if Warsaw would have fall, IRL the capitulation of the warsaw garrison ended the fall weiss campaign.

And Greece is even more horrific, why wont a capture of Athens make them surrender?

Want an answer Hubert...

[ July 14, 2003, 10:25 AM: Message edited by: Kuniworth ]

[Konstantin V. Kotelnikov]

Spain is one of those that will fight on after you take it's capital. I believe it's all dependant on how many military units it has left.

I've taken the capital, and it didn't surrender that turn but the next turn without any additional losses.

Unique to say the least. It 'tis an odd beast.

Poland sucks. You should be able to defeat it within a month as it's units were badly equiped and poorly deployed. Difficult to achieve. Have been able to get it a few times, especially in one of the 1939 Mods, but I can't remember which one.

Of course by the Axis' second turn it's already Oct 15, 1939. Time is Germany's greatest enemy.

Something to consider for future editions.

[Terif]

Kuniworth:

You are right with the Poland thing. It is random and depends on your luck how much units have to be destroyed before Poland surrenders. You can only be sure it surrenders if you have killed every single unit. As long as it stays in the game every turn there is a chance that it surrenders (with capital captured). With every killed unit the chances increase.

All other countries use the same system, except France. France was changed with a patch (I think 1.06), so it surrenders after the capital is captured no matter how much units are left. The reason was to prevent the evacuation of France, so that it never surrendered.

So to conquer every other country and make them surrender you have to capture the capital AND kill most of its forces. In case of Norway and Vichy they usually surrender after you conquered the capitals. But after this they lost most of its forces and at least Vichy is not 100% sure that they surrender. Yugoslavia usually survives until you have killed at least 2 of the 3 corps (+capital). Poland uses not a strange system, but the same as every other nation (except France).

[Hueristic]

Funny I get Poland on the first turn alot. I believe if you take warsaw no matter what it will surrender within 4 turns. But the odds are better the more units you kill.

If you want an answer from Hubert you should probally ask in a more polite fashion. If I was him I wouldn't respond to your "Puny" demands.

[Kuniworth]

Thx Terif for the explanation. However what makes Poland unique is that is not a campaign of your chosing. As axis you face´an immediate threat from Poland that needs to be dealt with an which ultimately can cost you the game because it will decide how prepared you are for the war in France. It´s a game-spoiler at worst.

When you attack minor countries you often have a very effective battleplan and order of battle whioch not is the case in Poland. You chose when and how to attack them.

So to be short - Poland needs to be fixed. IRL Fall weiss met heavy polish resistance but had no problem of completing a german victory in little over 2 weeks. In SC that is impossible which is to bad.

[Kuniworth]

Hueristic, if I were Hubert I would bow down on my knees and praise the wisdom of the mighty Kuniworth.

[JerseyJohn]

-

-

"How dare you disturb the Great, Exalted, Magnificent and All Wise Kuniworth with Your Petty Problems !!!"

[ July 14, 2003, 03:25 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Konstantin V. Kotelnikov]

I think a great way to resolve this issue in SC2 and beyond would be allowing people to place their forces initially.

Right now unless you Mod the scenario you at a bit of a disadvantage. I can't remember but aren't 2 of Germanys initial luftflottes out of range of warsaw? Or is it one?

Then there is ground unit placement. If you can start them where you desire that would have max effect on getting Warsaw.

What I see in a lot of AAR's is that most German players operate there main forces west to be able to attack the low countries on turn 2. Keeps france from having a period to build up and prevents the dutch gambit.

Of course this is a gamey thing. In reality Germany would have never sent it forces west during the polish campaign unless there was an immediate invasion of Germany proper. Which as we all know the french/british did not do.

Then compound the polish issue with the Soviet invasion of Eastern Poland. Part of Poland's collapse was from this. Not the combat which was minor and a lot of poles even thought the USSR was advancing to fight Germany, but from the fact that poland eventually realized it was being divided between those two powers and Britian & France could not help stop it.

Perhaps in the future the soviet units can advance into poland and help eliminate polish units. Which of course would hasten Poland's surrender.

That would be cool.

[Curry]

I think its historically acurate that Poland fights to the bitter end. Yes they didnt have much to fight with in comparison to the Germans. Yes the major powers of the day wanted Poland to submit to the Nazi's for the sake of what they thought would bring Peace. But Poland was not going to let the Nazi's take Poland without a fight. They seem to have understood the Nazi's better than the British or Russians and certainly better than the French.

I quote from William Manchester's The Last Lion. "Their government (Polish government) and high command had left Warsaw for Rumania, leaving orders to fight to the bitter end. The Poles did; fuled by patriotic fervor, they barricaded streets with streetcars, stopping Reichenau's tanks, his infantry was forced into the ugliest and most dangerous close combat - house to house, room by room. By that myterious process which telegrahs news throughout a country, even after its communications system has been destroyed, all Poland knew what was happening in Warsaw, and thousands of Poles folloed its example. Guderian plunged deep though the Polish rear to Brest-Litovsk, but when he tried to storm the town's ancient citadel, he found and obsolete Renault tank had been jammed, and welded, into the doorway. Warsaw, starving, lacking water, pounded around the clock by Nazi planes and artillery, finally capitulated ten days after the Russian invasion. Pockets of resistance fought on, though the last major stronghold, 17,000 men in Kock, did not lay down their arms until October 7. Menwhile, 100,000 Polish soldiers and pilots had escaped to Rumania and made their way to England, where they would fight in Free Polish battalions beside the British, French and later, the Americans; Polish destoryers and submarines reached the Orkneys and joined the Royal Navy." end quote.

I would make a counter claim that the maker of the game should not have Poland surrender until all its units are destoryed. Forget just taking Warsaw, but that Poland does not surrender until all units are destroyed. That would seem to be a more historically acuate protrayal. And perhaps a unit can retreat to England via Rumania. Since 100,000 Poles fled to fight another day.

[Leopard]

Poland did indeed fight hard against long odds, as the Finns did in the Winter War with the USSR.

I myself have always wondered if there would have been a WWII in the first place if Czechoslovakia had not been emasculated by Politicians.

Without a recently exposed southwestern flank of Poland, would there have been an invasion of Poland? With the Skoda works producing munitions to fight against the Nazis, not for them? The Czech army and air force, organised and opposing the Nazis, on the flank?

Would Hitler have attacked Czechoslovakia across the mountains? The Fall Weiss attack on Poland had a very short time for success due to limited supplies (6-8 weeks). How long would Czechoslovakia have taken to subdue? And without Skoda, would Germany have had the munitions and especially tanks to conduct Blitzkrieg?

I agree with your excellent post Curry.

[jon_j_rambo]

Bottom Line: The Polish fighting spirit was awesome. Yes, the Poles did get headcracked from lack of weapons, planning, etc...BUT they brought a great anti-German attitude to the table: The Ghetto, freedom-fighters, & played for keeps. The Poles didn't role over like France & become Nazis themselves. Remember, the French didn't give a crap 60 years ago, & they don't give a crap today about fighting scum. God Bless the Poles, Polish-Americans, Polish-Jews, & the Polish-Polish.

When in comes to SC, you CANNOT halt surrender until all Polish units are destroyed, because the Fighter can be operand out. Polish surrender can be a MAJOR problem for the Axis. Turn #5 & later, the Russians get anxious to fight. You can lose the game against an ICON player with a late Poland surrender.

With Honor to the Poles,

Rambo-Hollywood-Vegas

Captain of Team-USA

[ July 14, 2003, 08:09 PM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[Bullwinkle]

You demean the French, and then demean yourself!

I think any Frenchman alive would filet you for declaring that they didn't really oppose the Nazis in 1940. Certainly I don't think that they "rolled over" as you so arrogantly put it. They were led by incompetents, that much is clear. But given responsible leadership and a logistical staff that wasn't mired in WWI, they would have done much better. That is also clear.

As for "fighting scum", I hope you're really proud of this jackass president of yours' for doing just that and now getting his ass whacked in the aftermath. GIs dying every day. You & he have the same mentality - unfortunately.

One last thing: "Captain of Team USA"???? What the hell is that? Who voted for you? Why don't you declare yourself "King of the Universe" and swell your head to galaxy size? I'm sure a peanut could fit inside a galaxy.

[Kuniworth]

Curry;

Nothing you say change what I wrote. Fact is that after the warsaw-garrison surrendered the Polish nation gave up. Sure there were local fighting going on just like after Germany´s surrender.

Lets keep to the facts and not to speculations by individuals. Interesting reply though.

[jon_j_rambo]

Bullwinkle --- Very good! You're an excellent reader! You get a gold star!

What did the French do after Paris fell? Ahhh.......let me think........they formed a new country called the Vichey French & joined the Nazis. The Vichey were Nazis & fought the Americans. Then when they saw they would lose, they switched sides again.

What happened in Warsaw? They fought to the bitter end at the Ghetto. What happened in Paris? Stores, bars, hotels, etc. were serviced by French for the Germans.

What happened in 1980's with Libya? The jackass French wouldn't help Reagan's flyboys bomb Colonel Kadolfee. Oh well, we bombed his ass the long route.

What happened with the killer Saddam? The French don't care.

What happens to the American attitude? The Americans don't care about the French.

Yes, I'm Captain of Team-USA. Why? I'm the top SC-USA player & represent our tournament team.

Yes to Bush, "Four more years!!!". If Gore was President, he would have sent Al-Quida a check & surrendered.

The French demean themselves. Don't blame our Leaders yet seperate the French leaders.

Far as pointing out U.S.A. causalties in Iraq, you're a scum bag too. I'm not even going to explain it to you. Why? You're obviously against us. The real shame was all the U.S. young soldiers who died on June 6, 1944 to help the French.

I'm glad you understand me,

Rambo-Hollwood-Vegas

Captain of Team-USA

[ July 14, 2003, 09:15 PM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[Comrade Trapp]

Bullwinkle

While I disagree with Rambo's French bashing attitude (personally, I like the French) and I'm against Bush as much as you, you have to look past his sometimes arrogant views on things and see the "happier" side to him.

As for him being Captian of Team USA, he earned it from when he was champ back in the day. He was once the "heavy-weight champion of the world", he has since been replaced by Terif.

But that won't last forever......the US will rule again........

Comrade Trapp

[ July 14, 2003, 11:27 PM: Message edited by: Comrade Trapp ]

[xediel]

The real shame was all the U.S. young soldiers who died on June 6, 1944 to help the French

sure if it was not for the U.S war machine europe would be probably overrun but don't go kidding ourselves.. wars aren't conducted out of good will nor charity.. they are a product of politics and that means interest...

we all know germany needed the war but so did america (thousands of new jobs and a boost for the fallen economy)

this is my point:

if it wasn't for the recession in U.S no one would give a rat's ass for what happened in europe

for there was no real danger for america itself.. so please don't go telling about the "helping"

but don't get me wrong it's ok doing something for yourself and eventuate later on as a good guy.. moreover it's a positive thing !

and sure..

The Americans don't care...

they do not care now and did not care then..

it's also true that..

The French don't care.

why would they care.. when it's done it's done and the damage has been already done

anyway who gives a **** what happens somwhere over the mountain.. it's not about the freedom and well being of others as they are makin us believe..

who thinks that is a god damned fool and a naive romanticist.. IT'S ALL ABOUT THE PROFIT !!!

[jon_j_rambo]

xediel --- I agree with 85% of your take. Yes, US-wars have meant profit, but at least we try "to fight for those who can't fight for themselves" --- Harold from the movie Few Good Men. You wouldn't fight for a loss. Nor fight to lose.

But how can you profit, lest you be Capitalists? How can you be a Capitalist, lest you be free from Commies (or other non-free nations). First fight for freedom, then you can fight for profit. "You gotta fight, for your right, to party" --- Beastie Boys.

If there is no afterlife (with judgements & rewards), what is the point of anything?

In search of excellence,

Rambo-Hollywood-Vegas

[Comrade Trapp]

xediel

What happened, Mommy and Daddy let you stay up late? Tell that to someone serving in the military and you would get punched in the mouth.

I guess we were in Korea and Vietnam for profit too, huh?

Go somewhere else with your trolling.

Comrade Trapp

[jon_j_rambo]

ComradeTrapp --- Nice take, rack 'em. Far as beating Terif, it's like playing "Big Blue" computer in chess. Last game I played him, I conquered Russia...BUT...the UK was so dang strong in air power (5-carriers & 7-Jets) combined with USA (nice sized army) that he turned the tide. Zappsweden & I have similiar games. We gamble, try funky stuff, & make hasty moves at times. My record against him is around .500. But Zapp carries the glory of beating Terif, making me #3.

Rambo-Hollywood-Vegas

[ July 14, 2003, 11:44 PM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

[pzgndr]

As axis you face an immediate threat from Poland ... It´s a game-spoiler

Kuniworth, are you still struggling with Turn 1 after all this time??

[Kuniworth]

Actually Bill I´ve only played a few human vs human and often no longer than to 1940. My role in this community seems to be to write crazy stuff and contribute with breaking news.

For instanse, sources tells that the third soldier on the cover really was the real perpetrator against fugitive Kimble´s wife...not the one-armed man.

[pzgndr]

to write crazy stuff

I hear you. Me, I'm just a crazy writer. :eek:

That 90-page Strategy Guide did try to address some of these aggressive strategies that Terif, Rambo, Zappsweden and others are using. They certainly make for a different and challenging style of game, but every strategy has an effective counter-strategy. The trick is to figure it out BEFORE you lose.

[Kuniworth]

Bill, your strategy guide was truly a splendid piece of work. Absolutely superb. However your axis tactics in Poland talks about "sweeping" forward. I lack details there how to do it without 3 air, 1 tank and 1 army in LC.

Furtrhermore it would be nice to get more detail on the axis opening move in Russia. How do you dispose your troops(eg the third unit is a corps/tanks tactic) etc

[pzgndr]

Thanks! Details for specific troop dispositions and tactics were generally avoided because each game situation is so different. At the grand strategy level, it's more important to think about WHAT needs to be accomplished and WHY. Throw in a few comments about the pros and cons of doing something, and then leave it to the generals (ie, you) to figure out the HOW.

We could have discussed some specific maneuvers for Barbarossa given the historical setup in the 1941 scenario. But the first turn invasion does not decide the campaign, and the first turn OOB for any game starting in 1939 or 1940 will likely be different anyway. The Strategy Guide is just that, a guide. Not a how-to manual with perfect solutions provided. Terif will have to write that one.

[xediel]

Comrade Trapp

profit does not exclusively mean money !

look it up in the dictionary !