10 improvements that should make everyone happy

[Panzer39]

First I would like to say that yes this is my first post to this forum but I have been following it for over a month now. I have also spent plenty of time playing SC, playing through every Campaign that came with the game and giving the allies a trashing on Expert +2 in the full campaign several times. Now than, on to the improvements to this almost perfect game. Lets start with the editor because I think that with a few improvements most gamers problems with SC could be solved if they had more options to work with

1. The player should be able to activate a country for the purpose of giving it additional units and than deactivate it so that it can come into the war as normal in the full campaign. Example: The player wants to have a harder time beating USSR so he activates them, adds 3 armies around Moscow and bumps up their experience. The player can than deactivate USSR so that they are not at war when the game begins.

2. Placing or deleting resource hexes in Editor. This would make those who feel that USA does not make enough MPP happy. All a player would have to do is add two or three mines to the US mainland to up their MPP production. This way a player who wants more US MPP production gets his way without upsetting those who like it the way it is.

3. A map editor. Similar to above, this would allow the placing of cities and fortifications to the map. Those who want a port in Ireland could add one, those who want a Suez city could do the same and those like me who would like to make the USA harder to take could add fortifications there. Everyone is happy and Hubert does not have to worry about responding to every little gripe.

Now game play.

1. Better diplomacy. This has been mentioned a lot so I will not go into great detail. It would be very nice to "persuade" smaller countries to join you or at least know if they will or will not. Show a percentage of the likelihood of the larger minors joining and the option to get them to join by bribes or threats.

2. Peace talks. Give the option of ending the war with one country before the entire war is over. For example, Germany takes Moscow and soviets move capitol a dialog box comes up and the player gets to select if he wants to talk peace with the Russians. If yes the Soviets surrender, Germany plunders MPP but than all troops leave USSR, similar to when Poland is conquered. USSR is than neutral for rest of the war. Same could be applied to all major countries.

3. Axis Navy. The axis surface ships should also disrupt allied shipping like submarines. This was their main mission after all. However, I am not sure if the current unit setup could be moded to reflect this since their are no national unit differences. Therefore, perhaps a new commerce raider unit could be added the game. Or maybe every surface unit could detract MPPS if close enough to an enemy port. In a way this makes sense because every counties navy impeded enemy shipping in some way.

4. Submarines. Again this has been discussed in another post so I will not go into great depth. Right now they are to strong against enemy fleets and to easy to detect. My solution. Make initial sub value 5 and upgradeable to 10 with research while reducing sub deception and sub cost. This will allow for more realistic, cheaper, weaker, sub fleets to be produced. The Royal navy will have a harder time hunting them down and the Axis player will find it easier to buy them and use them like they were used in the war. Good for attacking shipping but to weak to go up against capital ship fleets. Each sub would still disrupt about 10 MPP per turn. Once found though they would easily be destroyed.

5. Larger map. Everyone seems to agree with this one. A little more to the North, South, East, and West would benefit all. North would allow easier break out for the Kriegsmarine, South would open up North Africa, East would open up the Middle East, and West would widen the North Atlantic and maybe give a few more hexes to America making it harder to run over.

AI issues.

1. Allied AI is to eager to launch an early D-day. Maybe a check could be programmed into the system to make the AI have a minimum amount of air coverage, HQ's and land forces balanced against what they know the Axis has before launching its attack. It would also be nice if they randomly went after North Africa or Spain (if conquered) first regardless if it felt it could perform an early d-day. The US went after Africa first to give their troops some experience, it would be nice if the AI did the same sometimes to. Maybe a dice roll could randomly determine where the AI initially attacks. This would at least keep the player guessing.

Minor fixes.

1. This is just personal but I would like to see a different message if the AXIS knocks out the US. I mean would we really surrender if they took Maine, please.... Maybe a message that states US sues for Peace would be more appropriate.

2. The Axis player should not lose if he holds out to the end of the game. In my last game Expert +1 I was holding the Ukraine, France, and Everything in between when the game ended in an Allied victory -180. I even had a few more unit kills than the AI.

3. Combining like units. Someone else mentioned this and I think it would be a great idea. Instead of having to pay the cost of refitting units and losing their experience you could combine two like units into one.

4. A overall population limit. What I mean is an overall max amount of armies/tanks/reinforcements a country can produce before it runs out of people to man them. For example the War goes into 1946, Germany has lost a boat load of armies. The program lets you know that your population no longer can supply reinforcements or new units. It's over

5. War weariness. A percentage similar to the one that tells you when USSR will enter but instead this one counts from 100% backwards. It will go down when you lose a lot of armies, a major allies falls, a HQ is destroyed, or the enemy crosses into your boarder. Example. USA starts with 100 percent but after UK falls it goes down to 80% Than when Patton, 4 armies, and a Battleship are destroyed in one year it falls down to 70% If it falls below 50% the US citizens get tired of fighting the European War and protest that the Japanese are the real enemy thus making the US end its war with Germany. Example 2. 1945 rolls around and the Allies have landed in France, taken out Italy, and the Russians have taken over Konigsburg. Germany's War Weariness level is at 60%. However, they launch a Operation that takes back their city and pushes the allies back to the sea. Their war weariness jumps back up to 75% and you can stop thinking about which General will assassinate you. To play balance, some triggers would effect war weariness more than others and the Percent value where a country would succumb to the will of its people would be different for all. Example, Higher for the USA but lower for USSR

6. Has anyone tired not invading Russia when they declare war? I had line of 8 Armies along the Konigsburg-Warsaw line and did not move them because I was engaged in Sealion at the time. The Russians attacked for a few turns and than backed off. A year passed, they attacked half heartily while I took UK and US. The built a large army/corps force but deployed them all in the northern area by the Baltic states and to the south by Romania (I did not own Romania) For the next two years they just sat their occasionally hitting me with rockets. All the time I only had a single line of armies there, no air cover or armor, just two HQ's. They did flood Turkey when the Italians invaded, but not action on the German front. Very odd.

Well that's my 2 cents worth on what I think would make SC better without turning it into something else or SC 2. Agree or Disagree?

[General Kesslinger]

Yes,I totaly agree with you,Panzer!

I also posted similar suggestions like yours in Tech Support section of this forum on so I fully agree with all of this!!!:-P

Check my thoughts on

http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=22;t=000051

[Panzer39]

One more thing I forgot to mention. I think Vichy France should be an option either in the game itself or on the option screen like USSR partisans. If I am the Axis player I find it silly to take all of France, have it turn Vichy, than have to invade Vichy. This is especially true if I have taken over all the French Cities before it falls. I understand it is Historical but if the player is rewriting history than he should have the option of taking France entirely. I would like it to be an option within the game so that one can make a strategic choice than (do I want the extra MPP or now or the smaller front to protect when the allies invade). However if that is not possible it would be nice to see it on the option menu. Also how about some random MPP sabotage in France by the French resistance?

[Wolfe]

Originally posted by Panzer39:

1. The player should be able to activate a country for the purpose of giving it additional units and than deactivate it so that it can come into the war as normal in the full campaign.

Yes, I'd love to see some more options to tweak in the editor along these lines. Would be nice to be able to make some different campaigns.

2. Placing or deleting resource hexes in Editor. ...

3. A map editor. Similar to above, this would allow the placing of cities and fortifications to the map.

No thanks. The game is balanced around the existing resources/cities. Being able to change them would make for a large number of very unbalanced scenarios, IMO. Flexibility is one thing, but being able to fundamentally change the game? Nah.

1. Better diplomacy.

Diplomacy is an extremely complex set of love/hate relationships between different countries/peoples. I'd rather not see any active diplomacy in SC (this version or any other). It makes a game much too complicated, IMO. Besides, retrofitting it onto SC would only be very superficial, usually boiling down to who can bribe who to join them. Let the game engine take care of it. I think it works very well as is.

2. Peace talks. Give the option of ending the war with one country before the entire war is over.

Now that's interesting. I'd like to be able to surrender a major if the situation seems hopeless and get something out of it. I'd also like to be able to surrender the whole war. Some fights are over by a certain point and you just want to see the final score.

3. Axis Navy. The axis surface ships should also disrupt allied shipping like submarines.

Would be nice.

4. Submarines.

I agree that subs could be looked at, but the only thing I'm afraid of is some of the changes to how they play would change the game so much that their values would need to be re-adjusted and the game re-balanced. Which could be too much work. It may have to wait for a newer version of SC.

5. Larger map.

As Hubert has explained before, this isn't possible with the current engine. It's already at its maximum (due to some memory limit). The map is as big as it's going to get.

1. This is just personal but I would like to see a different message if the AXIS knocks out the US. I mean would we really surrender if they took Maine, please.... Maybe a message that states US sues for Peace would be more appropriate.

Sounds good.

3. Combining like units. Someone else mentioned this and I think it would be a great idea. Instead of having to pay the cost of refitting units and losing their experience you could combine two like units into one.

But how often would this really have happened? Would semi-intact divisions really change their corps command structure and join together?

4. A overall population limit.

Yeah, but didn't Germany draw men from just about anywhere they could? And by the time it became truly critical, the war was essentially lost anyway, so I don't know it would be all that useful to show in the game.

5. War weariness.

Now that's a very interesting idea, but probably best reserved for a new version of SC.

My $0.02.

- Chris

[demoss]

But how often would this really have happened? Would semi-intact divisions really change their corps command structure and join together?

The Germans, in particular, did this sort of thing a lot.

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by Wolfe:

[QB] </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Panzer39:

Would be nice. </font>

Would be bolocks!!

The submarine counters represent large groups of submarines scattered over a wide area (and they do it badly) lightly interdicting/attritioning many convoys, individual merchantmen, etc.

the surface unit counters represent relatively small numbers of major surface whips that cannot hide and operate only in a small area.

If they catch a convoy the convoy scatters, they kill a couple of merchants or escorts, then they have to go back to port to refuel or rearm.

IMO they are fine for mercantile warfare as is - if yuo can catch a Canadian or US troop ship then you pulverise it, otherwise you cruise around doing sweet FA while the RN and USN hunt you down.

Ie they are essentially useless.

[Bruce70]

You need to be careful about changes to the editor escpecially map changes. I suspect a lot of the AI is hard-coded so if you add a mine, for example, it will probably be invisible to the AI.

I like the idea of being able to merge units (2 or 3 corps to make an army for example). I don't think any human player would accept a peace offer unless there was something in it for them. Don't like the idea of war-weariness. Most of the other suggestions have been discussed before with significantly less than universal appeal.

[Panzer39]

I can see your point about a map editor if the AI is in fact hardcoded to the extent that it would not recognize new objects added to the map. Does anyone know if this is in fact the case? I find it odd that some would vote against the ability to edit the map. I always opt for more freedom when available. Yes, some very unbalanced scenarios could spring up, but who would have to play them besides the creator? I think the pros would out weigh the cons. Each player would have the option to adjust the map to his tastes and challenges without having to ask for it to be changed for everyone. It would eliminate a lot of requests to Hubert because we could do it ourselves. As for multiply, the standard map would be the only one allowed. Thoughts?

[Canuck_para]

I would like to combine my airforces, particulary when you don't have the points to reinforce them. Even naval units would benefit from this ability to re-org.

[coe]

be able to build fortifications or not lose them if you move and another one of your units moves in. One could do this lets say if there is no enemy within one hex. Or lets say you could do something like if the unit that built fortifications was less powerful than the unit moving in, then only a fraction of the unit moving in gets strengthened - for a while...or something like that.

C