Multiplayer Questions

[Edwin P.]

1. If a player withdraws from player during a multiplayer game can control of his nation be assigned to another player or to the AI?

2. Can you play as the UK/USA/France player and have the AI control the Russians?

[ July 19, 2004, 04:11 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[ev]

I am all for making SC2 a three player game: UK/USA/France, Russia, Germany/Italy.

In a two player game, I would have the AI play the third party. In a one player game, I would let the AI play two parties, but, the AI should play each side separately.

I would define victory conditions so as to promote expasionist moves by the Russians, in whatever direction. VIctory conditions should encourage the Russian player to consider other alternatives than head on confrontaiton with Germany. The Russian player should try to grab land from Finland, Iran, Iraq, Turkey, etc. A Russian player that takes over Finland, Turkey, Iran, and, Iraq, the Baltic States, half of Poland, Besarabia, and does not loose 17 million men, women and children in a devastating war with Germany, is a winner.

If the Russian achieves all of the above, and Germany takes over half of Poland, Norway, Sweeden, France, Benelux, the Balkans, and North Afrca... then clearly the Western Allies lost.

Victory conditions should be set so that a war of annihilation between Germany and Russia is not a forgone conclussion.

But, likewise, the economic model should be set up so that players are discouraged from triggering "Total War" on any of the other players. What could trigger "Total War"? Some ideas:

- Repeated bombing of homeland cities. Germany should not reach total war if the Allies only bomb French Ports. But, if US bombers bomb German cities several times, then Germany may reach total war.

- Enemy armies occupy 3 homeland cities. Germany occupying Baltic State cities may not qualify as a homeland. But if the Germans take Kiev, Minks, and Sevastopol, then Russia would reach total war.

- For England, the loss of France should trigger total war.

- For US, the bombing of English cities, the invasion of England by German Forces, or Axis forces getting too close to Suez should trigger total war. If England is not threatened, we assume the US gives priority to Japan. (The US reaches total war due to Pearl Harbor; the issue for the US is whether it gives priority to the Pacific or to Europe.)

-For Germany, landings of Allied troops in Italy should trigger total war.

-For Germany, landings of US troops in France should trigger total war.

-For Germany, Russian occupying any German homeland city should trigger total war (exclude Pague and Warsaw.)

-Italy should reach total war only if either the French, British or Russians occupy any homeland Italian city. But Italy should not reach total war if that city is occupied by US troops.

The Victory Conditions and Economic Model should be such as to encourage though out strategic powerplay. SC2 should be a game of grand strategy, not brute military force.

In hind sight, Mussolini may have been right to attack Greece. Why attack Russia, when there are easy pickings to be had? ...Greece, Egypt, Iraq's Oil...

[Edwin P.]

I don't think that the USSR was in much of a position to launch an aggressive strategy of World Conquest perior to WWII. They had just suffered through several years of famine and purged their officer corps. The army was not trusted by the political officers and the Soviet leadership was focused on avoiding any action that would anger Stalin, and lead to their exectution.

Also, with the pre-war red hysteria in the US any Soviet expanision might have lead to a UK/Germany/USA alliance against Russia.