A little gift to wet your appetite.

[Blashy]

That's what I meant about sneaking, they had alot of their troops hidden close to the enemy lines, even with planes the German could not judge the size. Now in SC2's model you can't sneak troops close to the line, so the small gaps offer a simulation since you can't see what tech non adjacent units have, so 1 tile behind those units could have motorization and punch through that small opening. Basically it was not a "front line" anything like WW1 and that was the intent for my post.

I used diplomacy (costly) to keep Russia's preparedness low, it was a gamble and it paid off.

[ February 24, 2006, 06:10 AM: Message edited by: Blashy ]

[Slapaho]

Question for Blashy/testers;

Do you think diplomacy can be a game winner almost on its own?

[Lars]

Sheesh you guys, continuous front…

Improvisations During the Russian Campaign - Chapters 2-4

From the very first days of the campaign, the vastness of European Russia

and the peculiarities of Russian warfare led to the repeated isolation of

individual units and combat teams. All­around defenses and security

measures were the only possible remedy. Far from being stressed, these

defense tactics were frequently not even mentioned in the field service

regulations. The field forces improvised them and designated them very

appropriately as "hedgehog defenses." As time went on these tactics were

applied more and more frequently and adopted by larger units. Their use

was not confined to defense. During offensive actions advance detachments

had to build hedgehog defenses as protection against enemy surprise

attacks by night. For instance, during their advance through a swampy

forest region in Lithuania where strong, dispersed enemy forces were

reassembling, combat teams of 6th Panzer Division formed the first

hedgehog positions during the initial week of the Russian campaign.

Several hay barns in a major clearing were selected as the location for

the divisional command post. Covered by thick underbrush, the tanks were

placed in a wide circle around the barns with their guns ready to fire at

the edge of the woods. In front of the tanks was an outer ring of infantry

in foxholes and ditches and behind embankments which enabled the tanks to

fire over their heads. Security patrols and outposts formed an outer

cordon. The Russians recognized the strength of these protective measures

and did not dare carry out the surprise attack they had planned. They

resigned themselves to harassing the hedgehog area with tank and machine

gun fire and a few rounds of artillery shells.

Hell, even the Russians couldn't hold a continuous front in some places.

I'm becoming convinced about half of you have never read a book.

[Kuniworth]

Dear L-ars

Of course there was not soliders even spreaded all over all the time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! No one ever claimed it!!!!!! That would be moronic. Fronts fell apart or did'nt have to be guarded that heavily or could'nt be guarded that heavily as after Kharkov 1942.

However.

What I(we) reacted to was that

A. THe use of army-size units that occupy a tile but consisted of many corps makes it hard to hold a front eg instead of spreading out 2-3 corps you have on strong army occupying 1 tile. This is of course an old problem we inherited from sc1, this is not a divisional or corps sized game nor is stacking allowed so this is an side-effect.

B. We reacted to Blashy's idea that russians "sneaked in" units at Stalingrad and that this was something natural.

Let me be absolutely clear. Putting 4 million german soldiers on a line from Leningrad to Rostov wont make many soliders per hundred meters for sure. But this is not about how thin or thick that posture per kilometer was. It's about the fact that units held a responsibility for different parts of a front. Problem we highlighted here that this is not possible with 4 russian units as in the screenshot.

[ February 24, 2006, 02:45 PM: Message edited by: Kuniworth ]

[jon_j_rambo]

I don't get what's going on? If Blashy doesn't have time to do an AAR, why is he a tester?

"Nice guy, I don't give a crap" --- Alec Balwin, in Glengary Glenross.

Somebody, help Hubert out.

[Lars]

Originally posted by Kuniworth:

I want a continious front as in sc1 but with retreat rules. Seems kinda weird in the first picture with massive holes in the front between units.

Well, this is your first post Kuni.

Why do you want a continous front if there never was one?

[Slapaho]

FFS another thread being dismantled by the same two people. Blashy is the tester so get over it already, take a look around - SC2 is not going to be SC1 version update - it is a different game - adapt or leave (and after reading your utter ****e for the last year please be the latter).

[Desert Dave]

rambo junior:

I don't get what's going on? If Blashy doesn't have time to do an AAR, why is he a tester?

Suggestion.

Get some of yer rich buddies

And create yer OWN WW-2 GS game.

Then you can make ALL the decisions.

Until then,

TRY yer utmost to make constructive,

Consequential remarks,

And perhaps,

You will then have a few clues... about

What is going on?

Kuniworth:

Someone is... STUPID?

High IQ you?

Are so awful... SMART?

Did I miss

How that has translated?

You like?

To belittle people, that it?

You know,

That's a sure sign that you wish

To somehow make YOURSELF... larger.

Due to lack of self esteem,

Due to lack of self worth,

Due to feeling inadequate

In some way.

It is a literal SCREAM!

"I NEED... to make MYSELF seem to be

a big boy!"

We know what yer obsessions are,

And so... you are intending

To enlarge - yer soul?

Yer mind.

Portions of the body?

Well, I am ignorant about very many things,

But, concerning one thing I am convinced:

Blashy is a truly cool SC Cat. :cool:

You'd like to be, it seems, but, it's

Hard to EARN 'at distinction, ain't it?

_______________________________________

OK, about the "continuous front:"

1) Each unit has a ZOC (... zone of control) and any enemy unit that passes through a ZOC tile, suffers a movement penalty.

IF some of you do NOT like the default AP penalty, why, just go into the Editor and boost it by one. Or 2. Or whatever you like, yes?

Then, you will have PRECISELY the "stagnation" that you prefer.

An Army, or Corps on one tile is presumed to have "extended influence" into nearby tiles,

That much is clear.

IF you see a hole in the line, is it really?

An actual... hole in the line?

Not so clear.

2) Having been on this board for almost 4 years, I easily recall ALL the tremendous number of complaints about...

AW! How come this SC-1 game often comes to resemble... a WW-1 trench-line kind of encounter! How come! AW! AW! DO something, somebody?

You now have the re-creation

Of historical "mobile warfare."

How's that?

________________________________

Now, to answer those questions posed

In a constructive, consequential manner:

JDF2:

Builds corps only as a solution?

It might be one way to go.

I've tried it.

It works... sometimes, depending on

What the opponent does.

And,

As SHOULD be expected as part

Of ANY game, or war-game EVER MADE,

Some "luck" is involved.

Slapaho:

Do you think diplomacy can be a game winner almost on its own?

Not usually.

As Blashy has said more than once,

It depends on whether the Wily Foe

Is paying attention.

For example,

You might TRY to delay USSR entry,

But as Axis it will cost you 50 % more

In terms of expended MPP's,

To do so.

IOW, UK can "counter" the Diplo effort

For less cost,

Since Russia leans toward the Allies.

Nice thing is, IF you want to play

A more "diplomatic game"

Then, you can.

If you want to play the "research game"

So to have hi-tech (... and, very

expensive) units, you can.

If you want to TRY to "strangle" the UK

With an all-out Wolf-pack war,

You can.

If you want to have a CONTINUOUS FRONT

Why,

Shore enough,

You can.

You can... do... as close to almost ANYTHING!

As is possible,

As any war-game has EVER gotten.

I don't care... who.

Avalon Hill? Nope.

SSI? Nope.

SPI? Nope.

NSA? Nope.

Tiller? Nope.

Prados? Nope.

2by3 or

3by5? Nope.

Matrix? Nope.

Steel Panthers?

Panzer Corporal? Nope.

Iron Maidens? Nope.

Ad infinitum.

[Blashy]

Originally posted by Slapaho:

Question for Blashy/testers;

Do you think diplomacy can be a game winner almost on its own?

Yes it can, as Dave stated IF your opponent is not paying attention. All you have to do is use counter diplomacy.

But if you're the Allies and keep seeing USA and USSR lower their join % and do nothing about it, well you can expect to have problems.

Or if you start to see 2-3 neutrals increase towards your enemies side and do nothing, that is your choice.

Finally, it is not automatic, the people investing are still playing a high stakes game. While you can try a gamble free strategy (no tech/ no diplomacy) and just pump out as many units as possible.

Again as Dave stated, you can pretty much do anything.

[jon_j_rambo]

Obviously the testers have temper issues. One comment (the Truth), sets them off. Challenging the status quo is healthy competition, the cornerstone of invention.

[Desert Dave]

One comment (the Truth), sets them off.

Pray tell, jjr,

What "truth" have you

Thus far, established?

Amazing how

Some people, apparently, can glance

At... a couple random screen-shots

And... deduce?

How the WHOLE game works?

Without ever playing it!

LOLOLOLOL!

C'mon, let's hear all about "the truth."

About game features, or, help us out,

Go for it - Idaho Legend!

About... anything at'all!

I am VERY curious to hear.

But,

Mixed in with some "temperate smack,"

Perhaps?

A few facts?

[Slapaho]

But as Axis it will cost you 50 % more

In terms of expended MPP's

That is expensive but given Blashy's answer I think it sounds balanced, with a high risk.

I think what everyone is looking for is the ingredient of skill required to win is far higher than luck however a little luck is usually required.

One last thing - any information on how this game actually turned out (briefly)

[jon_j_rambo]

"You want the Truth? You can't handle the Truth" --- Jack, as Col. Jessup.

@Desert Dave --- First, I love you & the Lord loves you. Now that's over with, lets get down to business. What gives me the right or ability to identify the truth about Strategic Command? Well, lets check the history books. The initial time I played SC, I figured out how to "win ever time as the Germans". I was laughed at, mocked, scorned, etc...by the staff that tested SC. I proceeded to headcrack everybody, well, until Terif stepped on the scene. HOW DID THE TESTERS MISS THAT? I don't get it!!!

So what? What does this mean? It means I know what I'm talking about. If you have weak players testing, how do you expect superior results?

When I see testers making "not so smart comments", that's a warningt to me, a red flag against intelligence. I'm not questioning good intentions, but intent does not trump brains. If getting bothered by critics is the norm, well, somebody is in the wrong role & is serving the wrong master.

Remember, while the testers are doing their job, I'm just doing mine. Think! It's better to "know your role", rather than be something your not.

"Call the man" --- Andy Griffith to Aunt Bee, when they needed the freezer fixed.

Too much Legend, too little time,

Too much History, too few books to record,

He who hath an ear, let him hear.

[Desert Dave]

Slapaho:

I think what everyone is looking for is the ingredient of skill required to win is far higher than luck...

It is indeed.

For instance, in the example I cited above,

There is only (... depending on

Which Nation, IE, some

Folks have MORE "influence" than others)

Approximately a one in twenty chance that you'll even

Get - that "Diplo hit."

(... this disparity among Nations, and

in fact, all possible "diplo variables" can

easily be edited :cool: )

Yep, there are the occasional bouts

Of bad "dice-rolling" luck,

And there are unpredictable

(... made more so by intel)

Time-tables for research gains

Or special event arrivals,

But,

In the main instance,

The game depends MOSTLY upon your skill

And willingness to try out

Many different kinds of S&T,

(... as Blashy loves to do,

as you've seen)

And yet... the game is so very nuanced

And so subtly complex,

That it will take a good long while

Before anyone even remotely

Becomes truly the "constant adept."

Factor in the ability to create yer own

AI scripting,

So that yer "game of choice"

Is actually great

And tremendously re-playable FUN

Well, what say?

Are you getting ready

For a... fantastic sparkling-spinning

Globe, for the ultimate

Strobe light show? :cool:

[Desert Dave]

@Desert Dave

I have already mentioned

That I will NOT respond

To this "@Somebody" stuff.

Now, this can be penultimate, eh?

IOW, you want to lay down some righteous

Smack on... me?

(... you and I KNOW what "righteous" REALLY

means, don't we, jjr ?)

Simply use that "@" and I just won't

Smack back!

Pretty Cool Petunias, eh? :cool:

[Blashy]

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

"You want the Truth? You can't handle the Truth" --- Jack, as Col. Jessup.

@Desert Dave --- First, I love you & the Lord loves you. Now that's over with, lets get down to business. What gives me the right or ability to identify the truth about Strategic Command? Well, lets check the history books. The initial time I played SC, I figured out how to "win ever time as the Germans". I was laughed at, mocked, scorned, etc...by the staff that tested SC. I proceeded to headcrack everybody, well, until Terif stepped on the scene. HOW DID THE TESTERS MISS THAT? I don't get it!!!

So what? What does this mean? It means I know what I'm talking about. If you have weak players testing, how do you expect superior results?

You really don't understand the job of testers and I'll say it again, we are a crew of 3-4 testing, are we going to miss strategy X that tips the game one way after oh say 1000 people have played it say 5 times each? Of course we will, this happens in ALL games. But I've tested over 7 games and I've come to be used to hearing from those who bought the game and say "How could they miss that?".

Oh and FYI this is SC2, not SC, VERY different games (that's a good thing).

[Blashy]

I simply ignore JJR's post, too much redneck in there, hehe.

[jon_j_rambo]

I'd rather have one smart person, than...well. Far as measuring the performance of the team, check your walls, it may read this:

MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN

Beyond Legend,

Rambo

[Desert Dave]

As origially posted by vveedd:

When units are without supply they should be automatically destroyed. This is, actually, rule from Third Reich game and it works absolutely great.

If a unit has been blitzed,

Surrounded,

Left abandoned,

O, some sort of "Motherless Child,"

Then,

When destroyed - at low or no supply,

It is removed from the force pool.

Permanently, I mean.

You don't want this to happen!

If it is IN supply, then the surviving Cadre

Will allow you to rebuild THAT

Particular unit,

At lower cost.

Now, sure, this is UNLIKE Third Reich,

Where you just pick up the lost

And wandering souls.

(... a few things in SC-2 are kinda like Reich

games, but, mostly not... more eclectic selection

and innovative design, I'd surmise)

And pitch 'em in that plastic tray,

AKA: the remainder container.

Here, hmmmm, I suppose we could TRY

Blowing them out like so many

Flee-flickering birthday candles?

Vaporize 'em?

Bring in the steam-shovels,

Watch 'em crushed before our very eyes?

LOL.

No, you gotta rack 'em, physically

Whack 'em on down.

But,

Given their low supply, readiness

AND morale state, won't be hard

To accomplish.

Just a little strut-huff

By a no-tech,

Rambling wreck of a slouching-out garrison

Should get the job done.

[SeaMonkey]

Blashy, DD, thanks for your feedback and please don't allow our other SC brethren to intimidate y'all into subservience postings.

Many of us enjoy the insight into SC2 that y'all have allowed us and we are appreciative.

It never fails to amaze me how us humans are easily aroused to mistaken judgements, it is not necessarily a bad thing, actually can be quite productive in some cases. For the calculating ones, it makes for easy manipulation.

Grant our fellow SC posters forgiveness for they are just anxious for "The Game", as I am. I'm just a little more patient, but I can identify with their strife.

As a great entity once spoke:

"And this too shall pass."

[Blashy]

Originally posted by Slapaho:

Last turn of August 1944.

Game is not over yet, why? Winter is coming and the Russians think that will help them, already the very streched Axis forces are out of supply from newly conquered cities (Stalingrad, Voronezh, the north of Stalingrad and another north of Voronezh).

The Allies looked bad in France, the Axis moved more troops back East, bad idea, Allies upgraded to level 4 LR and it helped them immensly. They used that one plane on Brest to spot enemy ships and just sneaked transports passed them and used their remaining navy to attack, knowing the sub fleet was out of range because they have been inflicting heavy losses in MPPs by raiding, the Allies could not risk loosing anymore ships trying to find subs because they needed them to escort transports, but those subs have inflect well over 300mpps in losses, that's 3 uboats, 2 are level 3 one is the Italian sub. That Axis have 3-4 other ships left while the Allies have 2BBs and 3CAs.

With air superiority they've managed to liberate france except for the Vichy area, they've cut off Spain, the Axis have formed a line on their pre-build fortifications on the German French border and still handily hold Benelux area.

The Russians have Leningrad, Moscow, Vologda and Archangel plus 2 cities in the urals with 4 mines behind those cities.

The German's supply issues are hurting them, no units can be reinforced higher than 5-7 the last few turns and fall is approaching.

I still think the Germans have the upper hand but they'll need a successfull strong defense in the West in the next assault, if they succeed, I think it will be game over.

I thought this game was over a long time ago, but mother nature plays a big role in SC2 and she's on no one's side.

[Lars]

Is there a diplomatic option for bringing Vichy back into the fold after an invasion of France?

[Retributar]

Very insightful description from you Blashy ...it's very much appreciated!.

Look's like this game_SC2 has the hallmark's of being a 'Real-Winner'!.

[Kuniworth]

Originally posted by Desert Dave:

Someone is... STUPID?

High IQ you?

Are so awful... SMART?

Did I miss

How that has translated?

I did not say Blashy was stupid. I said his postings were. You on the other hand now call my personality stupid.

Originally posted by Desert Dave:

You like?

To belittle people, that it?

You know,

That's a sure sign that you wish

To somehow make YOURSELF... larger.

Due to lack of self esteem,

Due to lack of self worth,

Due to feeling inadequate

In some way.

It is a literal SCREAM!

"I NEED... to make MYSELF seem to be

a big boy!"

We know what yer obsessions are,

And so... you are intending

To enlarge - yer soul?

Yer mind.

Portions of the body?

What you're accusing me of is exactly what you are doing.

Originally posted by Desert Dave:

Blashy is a truly cool SC Cat. :cool:

I could not care less if he is cool or not. I'm sure you have nice summer parties together. But What the sweet Jesus does it got to do with the topic we were discussing?

Originally posted by Desert Dave:

AW! How come this SC-1 game often comes to resemble... a WW-1 trench-line kind of encounter! How come! AW! AW! DO something, somebody?

Well it might got something to do with retreat rules for example. You have to hammer the enemy army and corps formations to oblivion before getting a breakthrough. I think this is more of the case for the ww1 trench-fronts than blaming the hexes and smaller map of sc1.

Anyway I agree it's pointless continuing discussion. But as everybody now seems to spit in my face for speaking the truth just let me say this;

I myself is getting pretty tired of bashing my head against the wall about historical aspects of the war. I think one major factor for this is some of the comments and answers one get from you playtesters. If someone says it's realistic to sneak armies around the board because that is how the 6th army was encircled of course people will react!

And I'm also ****ing tired of the playtesters únwillingness to even consider one's valid points. For example I argued like hell about Rokossovsky only to be faced with complete ignorance and the feeling I only steered up unnecessary trouble. Finally Hubert stepped in and said he would considered it proving that the leaderfile was not 100% final. Why the hell can't you guys agree a little instead of putting up a defensive stance all the time?

Finally; the delayed release date has caused a lot of trouble both for BF and the community. Don't blame it on us blame it on yourself. The game is delayed for what a year?

Of course pressure will mount,

questions will be asked

and people easily get diasppointed with the game.

I thought it was common knowledge of all game developers that fixed dates can cause pressure but obviousl not. FInally however Madmatt said that the game would be realeased when done. Fine, but the damage was already done. Now deal with it.

A good way is stop putting up a defense for everything concerning the game. We are grown people here FFS, we don't need another halleluah meeting, peting our backs and telling ourself how great we are. Stop that nonsense and lets get down to business.

For example why do you actually want us to hang around here year after year? Tell us what you want and we help. But as you don't do it then don't go tell people to piss of for complaining about game features.

[ February 24, 2006, 02:15 PM: Message edited by: Kuniworth ]

[jon_j_rambo]

Wow, what Kuni said! This guy has a serious side, now deal with the issues.