Patch 1.06 is Great! Finally research becomes part of the game strategy!

[zappsweden]

The new research system and fixed interception flaw has extended the strategy depth considerably in the game.

What I must say that still remains unsolved is the fact that transport counts as navy units in the report section. Another problem is that there is NO WAY to counter a good axis player in the mediterran.

1)

PROBLEM: A transport counts as navy unit in the report section. I can assume there is a sea-lion attempt when Axis navy units suddenly sky-rocket to 12 units in 1940! If i had not checked the report section, it could have cost me the game. Such micromanagement should not be necessary.

SOLUTION: all transports should count as ground units (in the report section)

2)

PROBLEM: Good Axis players TOTALLY DOMINATE the mediterranean. In every game i play, if the axis player is experienced there is NO WAY for allies to defend the mediterranean. Italian navy+German air fleets will split the allied navy in half. The allies must either fall back to gibraltar or fall back to Egypt. If they fall back to Gibraltar or split both ways, Egypt will fall quickly. Also there is no way of escaping egypt, so they will be destroyed! If they fall back to Egypt, axis will just put EVERYTHING there and wipe them out. 3-5 Axis Air Fleet and 5 Italian Navy Units will dominate the mediterranean. If the Allies tries to counter this and puts every navy unit in the mediterranean, Axis just pull a sea-lion. A factor that influence the outcome is the fact that Italy has several ports with Supply level 10 so they can resupply their navy units before sailing on to battles. Allies only have one good port, Marseilles, and it is lost when France falls.

SOLUTION:

i) Some ports have to have increased supply level for the allies. Gibraltar, Malta, Alexandria and Suez cannot all have just SUPPLY=5.

I prefer increasing Alexandria and Suez to supply level 7.

ii) The Suez Canal Should be able to transfer navy.

iii) The Suez Canal should have a "return ticket"

i.e one hex with an arrow that can transport units back to "west of Gibraltar".

iv) The Suez Canal should be faster than 4 turns to represent Allied flexibility in the Mediterranean.

v) Since the Axis get to Africa quicker than Allies can afford to buy any defense, the Allied corps that start in Egypt should be an army instead.

[ December 08, 2002, 07:46 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[LongTom]

Interesting discussion. But I'd leave the game as-is because:

1) Historically the British were able to determine that a SeaLion was imminent quite easily by spotting all the German barges piling up in channel ports. Sounds like SC does this exactly right

2) Similarly, I would say that if the Axis committed enough resources to the med in ww2 they could have take it (they BARELY were stopped short of Suez at El Alamein - what if Rommel had a bit more air power). Axis resources committed here can't be used elsewhere at the same time. So it seems reasonable that the Axis *can* take the Med *if* they are willing to commit enough resources.

Jim

[zappsweden]

Yes, but since the Suez Canal is a one-way ticket and the fact that axis controls the mediterranean the Allies are effectively cut in half, which is unhistorical. UK suffer just because the map ends in the middle-east and it does not seem right to me. The mediterranean war is non-existent unless Allies want to get slaughtered.

[ December 08, 2002, 09:22 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by zappsweden:

PROBLEM: Good Axis players TOTALLY DOMINATE the mediterranean. In every game i play, if the axis player is experienced there is NO WAY for allies to defend the mediterranean.

I would also disagree. "NO WAY" is an overstatement, if not an outright challenge.

It surely is a fine line that Britain must walk, but they are quite capable of reinforcing the Med with just enough units to form a potent strike force near Alexandria and then proceed to steadily manuever westward toward Tobruk.

This would necessarily preclude any great assistance to France, but delaying the inevitable in that theatre must be weighed against insuring that the Med remains a British lake.

The transfer around the Cape allows continual and gradual reinforcement as long as care is taken to protect the shipping lane leading south.

The German player can either commit to a bombing campaign against England -- in preparation for a possible Sea Lion or as a simple harrassment tactic...OR place sufficient Air in southern Italy/North Afrika to assist the spoiling black shirts. It costs a LOT -- either in MPPs if you Operate expensive units here & there, or in time, if you merely fly the Air to where it's needed.

Also, they must choose when and if they will construct U-boats -- which might sortie and interdict any British troop movement headed 'round Africa, and Air and Army and Tank units, which could be gaining valuable experience in Norway or Sweden or Yugoslavia or Greece, etc, for the upcoming campaign in Russia.

The thing is, I don't believe they can do all and everything, to include a Med-first strategy, and still contest many other areas.

And, now that research in general and Industrial Tech in specific are slowed, they usually cannot field sufficient forces in these many multiple areas, AND build infrastructure and military units with any eye toward taking on Russia and USA. It will cost more for Axis to do the same thing that they used to do before the latest tweaks to the game.

Perhaps extensive gaming will prove your point to be true to some unknown degree, we'll see. But, for now I am inclined to suggest that the Brits CAN counter any Axis forays into the Med.

As with many other aspects of this game, it is all in the selection of strategy, both on-board and in research. And, in good "dice-rolls." And in timely research gains. And in how your opponent is feeling that day. And in... well, you get the idea.

[Jollyguy]

I disagree with ZappSweden that it is a foregone conclusion that the Axis will dominate the Med. But I also disagree with Emmerwatas that the Allies can hold of ANY Axis Med attack.

The point is that the Med now can become a real battlefield, which can go either way. Both sides need to look at it strategically.

Also don't mind the transports as naval units in reports. Nice piece of intelligence!

[John DiFool]

Keep in mind SC doesn't model logistical

capabilities (if you have a port, it assumes that

any units dependent on said port will be fully

supplied-i.e. all those tankers which the Brits

sunk are now perfectly safe in SC).

I don't know if anything can be added to SC2

which would model logistics without also adding

unnecessary complications. Perhaps both trade

routes and supply routes can be made visible

(toggleable on/off), and the enemy can then

interdict same, and you would have to spend MPPs

to open and maintain said supply line. Right now

the Axis gets a free ride in the Med because of this.

John DiFool

[zappsweden]

Originally posted by John DiFool:

Keep in mind SC doesn't model logistical

capabilities (if you have a port, it assumes that

any units dependent on said port will be fully

supplied-i.e. all those tankers which the Brits

sunk are now perfectly safe in SC).

I don't know if anything can be added to SC2

which would model logistics without also adding

unnecessary complications. Perhaps both trade

routes and supply routes can be made visible

(toggleable on/off), and the enemy can then

interdict same, and you would have to spend MPPs

to open and maintain said supply line. Right now

the Axis gets a free ride in the Med because of this.

John DiFool

A simple increase of Supply level in Alexandria would change the game without complicating the rules. The problem for the allies now, are that they can't afford to defend Egypt since it eventually will fall and there is no way to escape from there.

[ December 08, 2002, 06:12 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Jollyguy:

But I also disagree with Emmerwatas that the Allies can hold of ANY Axis Med attack

Emmerwatas? :eek:

Gee, Jilligus, that ain't even close.

The thing of it is, folks will usually select names that have some... ah, significance to them.

When I quote someone, or refer to something they've said, I'll jot down their name on a nearby note-pad, so that I insure not to disrespect them.

Is this reasonable, do you suppose, given that we have all the time in the world to make sure the post is appropriate, before hitting the "add reply" button?

Now, I ain't sayin' you are deliberately being disprespectful, nor sloppy, nor lazy, but how would you like it if I sort of accidentally posted your handle as... jellygoo?

As to your point, I never did say, o no no nix nein Frankenstein, that the Allies would be able to counter ANY Axis attack in the Med. I am pretty sure that I said that it would be tough, but possible. So here, you have not only screwed up my name, but didn't even get the drift of my post. :confused:

C'mon Jollyguy, you can do it more exactly, yes?

[anoldman]

Immer Etwas ,

I am curious as to what your name stands for or means? I have never heard that before. Also is "Emmerwatas" some sort of slang or slur? I know sometimes I make a mistake although I usual add a (sp?) if unsure.

I guess my point is I find these boards so refreshingly helpful and non-flaming even to newbs like me that I was a little taken aback by the the strength of your reply to Jollyguy.

I don't know the facts, maybe you and Jollyguy go back aways, maybe Emmerwatas is some sort of offensive remark that I am not aware of. I hope not. I hope it was a misunderstanding compounded by the inability of email to show the facial expressions and inflections needed to fully understand some posts.

********************************************

OK MY MED QUESTION HERE:

I am a little confused over this Med debate as I have not had the same expierence in my games (1 real PBEM player, 5-10 or so AI Games of different settings).

I have seen the Allies preposition their forces to make a crippling strike on the two Italian vessals not in port. (btw, BUG in ports? Dang dangerous to attack a ship in port in my expierence. I know they get a +1AD and +2ND but jimmineys! =))

The Allied vessals make their strikes in a way that requires the remaining Italian ships to leave port if they wish to attack in return.

If the Italians come out the British/French destroy them, if they stay in the Allies retreat to near "Little Island X"(urp, =( sorry for my wargaming newbness here, I am refering to the British island base south of Scilily).

Between a English Bomber based out of Algiers, and maybe a French/British Fighter out of Little Island X, I have found the Med to be not nearly so one sided. Every plane the Germans take to send south to Italy is one less for France or some other expansion front.

Anyhoo, interested in replies. Also, if anyone would like to demonstrate this to me by PBEM I would be happy to do that as well. Just send to kshriner@gmu.edu and please call the file: yourlastname-T1-Axis.zip ...this will allow me to keep my games straight. Also, please let me know which version you are playing (I have both 1.5 and 1.6 in seperate directories, I have not played much with new 1.6 although it appears to give Allies a small boost?) =)

Look forward to replies or emails!

--Kevin Shriner (An Old Man)

P.S. If you want to PBEM please know I am not a hardcore wargamer. I am fairly light about winning or losing and enjoy a friendly humorous opponent. You may judge my expierence by my inability to name the little british base south of Scicily and the fact that I have only a basic grasp of main players, units and dates of WWII... so Woot!

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by An Old Man:

I guess my point is I find these boards so refreshingly helpful and non-flaming even to newbs like me that I was a little taken aback by the the strength of your reply to Jollyguy.

All right, An Old Man, I will allow that my reply to Jollyguy was in fact... "defensive," in the Freudian sense of protecting the Ego due to a perceived threat.

Jollyguy usually gets other peoples names correct, as he did with zappsweden in his post. If he gets most of them correct, most of the time, and yours is the one he mangles, then you must begin to wonder. Notice, I have gotten YOUR name correct, as I surely try do with other members that I post to.

I am pretty sure my reply was "normal" in the sense that humans are very protective when it comes to their own "name." Think about it. Was there ever a time in your own life that you resented someone (... almost ...accidentally) mispronouncing your name?

You may mis-spell anything you care to, out of laziness or haste, but someone's name should be more carefully considered. Maybe it is true that I am one of the very few humans that even worries over such matters.

If he has a problem with my post, he can reply on board, or send me an e-mail, as I have included my address since day one. I have indeed gotten several responses in regard to other posts that I have made and have taken the time to answer each of them.

This is may or may not be perceived as a "flame," depending on the level of any one person's sensitivity, but I will hereby take a moment to assert the following:

It was not intended as a personal slight. I do not yet know that it was taken that way, though I am, or TRY to at least be courteous to any person I might meet.

Jollyguy is now, and as far as I am personally aware, always has been a thoughtful and dedicated gamer. His earnest assistance with SC is noted and appreciated. It is very possible that this was simply an "innocent mangling."

I, on the other hand, and quite apparently, will sometimes be... "defensive." Whether it was justified is a complicated issue that can hardly be resolved on a two-dimensional forum.

[JerseyJohn]

"Look, Natashia, dumb Moose calls me Boris Yeltsin!"

"Why can't you get their names straight, Bullwinkle?"

"I'm trying, Rock', honest! Now lest see - - that one back there is Dudley DoRight, and the one next to him is Snidely Whiplash and . . .."

"No, Bullwinkle, the one next to him is a woman!"

"Oh -- my mistake -- so let's see now -- the one near the shack is . . .."

--- * ---

"Look Natashia, is last time dumb moose will ever call me Boris Yeltsin!"

"Good, Boris -- shoot them into space like Sputnik."

"Aw Bullwinkle why'd you have to mess his name up -- you know how sensitive he is!"

"Sorry Rock, it must be these new glasses."

"But you don't wear glasses!"

"Now he tells me."

[ December 10, 2002, 12:26 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[John DiFool]

JJ you are truly a lunatic! Keep it up man!

[boris Yeltsin LOL... ]

[To stay on topic] At this point, it is pretty

much irrelevant to bitch and moan about the

shortcomings of SC1, when Hubert is about to go

to work on SC2. What would YOU do to make the

Med more of an even battle (if it was supposed to

be in the first place). I said my 2 pence upthread,

so let's hear your ideas [silly cartoons aside]...

John DiFool

[Jollyguy]

Immer Etwas:

On the post where you responded to me mangling your name, in a robust Bush'ism type manner I might add, I didn't get a chance to respond. Probably because I was to busy laughing out loud!

I thought your response was quite humerous, and didn't take any offense at it. When I went back and saw how far off I was on your name, I laughed again. I think I was just rushed when I did that post, as I usually do try to make sure I've got names correct.

Your response kinda reminded of that scene in "The Sting" where Paul Newman intentionally mispronounced Robert Shaw's character's name, "Liniment, Lindeman, Lonaman" etc., just to get under Doyle Lonnigan's skin.

Bob

[JerseyJohn]

John DiFool

Thanks for the good word -- these forums breed lunacy !

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by Jollyguy:

Immer Etwas:

On the post where you responded to me mangling your name, in a robust Bush'ism type manner I might add, I didn't get a chance to respond. Probably because I was to busy laughing out loud!

You are a good sport about it, as I suspected you might be. :cool:

Forums are great for expressing opinions, notions, ideas, suggestions, and occasionally, something that can be misunderstood. Always good to hear directly from someone, rather than having hard feelings second-hand, and the like.

[Desert Dave]

As originally posted by JerseyJohn:

"Aw Bullwinkle why'd you have to mess his name up -- you know how sensitive he is!"

LOL!

I hope to God I am not actually unduly or overly sensitive, given where I have been and what I have done, and BTW, I only wear glasses when I am reading. No-one I have ever known has told me that I am any way shape or form an "egghead," but somebody did say once -- or was it twice? that I was... forsooth uncouth, etc, ah gosh -- bless us all each and every one, you know how it goes...

[JerseyJohn]

Immer Etwas

I knew neither you nor Jolly would take offense at a little lampooning. These forums are great settings for them.

With all the incorporating of pop culture in your postings I figured Boris and Natashia would go nicely with Raymond Chandler, James Dean , and the classic cars.

Glasses -- The world becomes a blur through my tinted trifocals, allowing me to continue squinting on my own!

[ December 10, 2002, 07:11 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

[Grotius]

Okay, I guess I'm the resident idiot, because I've never taken Egypt or Malta as the Axis. I'm currently playing as Axis, against Allied AI +1, and by the time I'm done with Denmark, France, the Low Countries, and Yugoslavia, I've got the Soviets breathing down my neck. I just run out of time; I need all the forces I can muster in Russia.

Even if I did have the time, I'm not sure how to go about it. I can't transport a land unit to Malta until I remove that Allied air unit, right? Well, with 2 of my air units and the Italian navy, I still can't dislodge it. Am I missing something?

I gather the next step -- if I had the time and forces -- would be to engage the British fleet in the eastern med, then put an HQ and a few armies and corps in Libya, then march east. Except my Italians have trouble with that British fleet.

So I guess I'm the lone, clueless Axis player who doesn't win in the Med. (I have beaten the Allied AI, though this is my first game under 1.06. And no, I haven't tried PBEM yet.) What am I missing?

[Grotius]

One more dumb question. How exactly has research strategy changed under the new patch? Industrial Tech is worth less, I gather?

I have a related question about Industrial Tech. I still invested in it and made level 2, as well as Tanks/Anti-Tank level 1. My infantry/tank cost is about the same as it was at game start, presumably because the advantage of Industrial Tech is offset by the extra cost of 11 (as opposed to 10) combat factors to build. Right?