From Russia.....With Hate

[The Great Santini]

What with Germany converting the map from Narvik in the north to Cairo in the south into an Axis money factory their attack into Russia in late l941 is often an ahistorical and tepid effort. Surely, with two years of preparation behind them the Russians can do more than just waiting around Moscow to be overwhelmed. Maybe something like 5 level 3 tank armies under Zhukov poised to go into Romania. I dunno, isn't there something more aggressive they can do?

[Liam]

USSR can if the Axis are weak launch a frontal assault, but it's usually hard because she doesn't start with as much as Germany and by 1941 Summer, it's unlikely she will have upgraded everything with the research done. Originally there weren't the caps on the limits of research but now there is and the Russians have to think smart. Her best bet is to be dug in with lots of cheaper units and assualt soft targets in 1941. MiddleEast, Finland, but Germany-Romania is not a soft target!!! It's quite hard to attack the Germans unless they're weak and all the Luftwaffe experience on top of it makes it triply hard to win...

My suggestion is if you want a frontal assualt, research Level3 tanks, I have in 1941 I think once or twice... Send 3 or 4 of them but you'll likely lose them to AT3 Corps-Armies along with 5 airstrikes! Better spent killing Finns or elsewhere! Regardless it is not impossible to attack Germany and if a Very Valiant D-Day is performed who knows...against a good player you'll likely lose with this bold move. Utilize your Engineer on the frontlines if he takes too long, that is the best bet a frontal assualt, that way you can strike and retreat...If Barbarossa isn't performed early it is possible by Summer of '42 that the Germans are in full retreat!

[Blashy]

The gobbling up of the whole map without consequences by either Allies or Axis is an issue that needs to be rectified.

Every minor country is just sitting there waiting to be invaded when you see the over aggressive nature of the Axis their should be consequences.

Ex: Attacking Spain should have Portugal prepare its defenses, increasing to a full corps entrenched in its city.

If Axis go for Vichy France right after France, Spain would be weary and gear up their defenses and so would the other two Vichy countries (Algeria, Syria).

Or Allies invading Norway, Sweden would at least entrench its troops. Or Axis invading Sweden, Norway would increase to full complements of Corps on their cities and entrench.

And so on.

[Iron Ranger]

If your brave, and you see that the attack on Russia will be late and weak you can set up a 'forward' defence/attack. As Liam said use your Engr. unit to establish some forts, I suggest behind the river in the north. You can attack any unit on the border and sit behind some exellent defence at the same time. While Germany is dealing with this 'road block' you can take down Finland... Sweden (?). While I wouldnt say you can be more 'agressive' due to a weak attack on Russia, you can put up a much better forward defence and if you prepare for that you should prepare for a early D-Day.. game over in 1942!

[Jollyguy]

Now that I'm close to matriculation from the Terif School of SC 2, I believe I can say that I see how the calculus of SC 2 works. This is something Terif figured out a long time ago but which few others have. And Terif has mentioned countless times in prior posts that he believes SC 2 to be close to perfectly balanced, which I now wholeheartedly agree with.

IMO the secret to making the Allies work is like so many other things in life, it’s a steep learning curve while you’re doing it, but seemingly common sense in hindsight. The only way to have a fighting chance is to throw the Axis time table off, and then to be opportunistic and keep the Axis off balance by destroying units and/or causing him to incur operating/transporting costs by spreading him out over the map.

The calculus is very simple. The Axis start with more units and then out produce the Russians by two and maybe even three-to-one leading into Barbarossa, when you include the Italians. And Russia is always where the main German effort must occur. This means if the Germans are allowed to conquer minors and build-up unhindered, they will almost certainly prevail in Russia by 1943. IMO that’s why my fancy strategies like take Finland with the help of the British and have the Brits DOW Sweden failed, because while I was conserving my mpps to research and buy units for my flashy attack, the Germans were allowed to marshal a massive Barbarossa force.

What the Allied player needs to do early in the war is utilize his advantage of being able to harass the Axis in areas of his choosing. The Brits have to be quick and opportunistic, more like a boxer dancing around a much larger opponent, not expecting to knock his adversary out, but to land blows that will wind him and eventually sap his energy.

Here’s the math. Let’s say the Axis player gets diplomacy hits on his minors and signals he’s going to attack Spain. Every turn the Germans are delayed in taking Spain means st 5 mpps per resource hex he gets 35 mpps less, but even more when they go to 8. And, after the DOW, if the Brits get lucky and can delay the Axis advance, which can happen if Spain is invaded late and bad weather sets in, then that’s a 70 mpps shift, 35 less for the Axis, 35 more for the Allies. That’s why Terif when he plays the Allies holds Brest even at the cost of a corp. And that’s why Terif transports in a British corp to the Northern Spanish city. And that’s why Terif will DOW Algeria if the Axis is late in doing so. And that’s why Terif will place the RN around Brest and Gibralter. It’s like a set of dominoes that adds up to likely over a thousand mpps that the Allies either get and/or the Axis doesn’t. If the Allies can also take out an Axis army or corp or two or three, your talking a significantly smaller force for the Russians to deal with, and more opportunities for the Western Allies to cause trouble sooner.

In summary, and I believe Terif has said this too, any one British action might prove minor, involving a small number of mpps going either way. But in total, when this occurs turn after turn, it adds up.

So for those who pick one game element in isolation and say it needs fixing, I suggest you first play Terif’s Allies and see how he plays it. He never misses an opportunity as the Allies to be a thorn in the Axis side, generally by causing trouble in the Med. And he’ll gladly incur British losses (but not recklessly), because he knows doing so keeps the Axis off balance, and pays major dividends down the road once Russia and the US are in the fight.

In closing, I would say little needs fixing in SC 2. Enhancements, yes, but fixing, not much. And if something is “fixed” or enhanced then the other side needs something in return, because as it is most actions by the Axis come with a cost that benefits the Allies and which they can capitalize on, and vice-versa.

Bob

[Blashy]

This is not about the math Jollyguy.

It is about having some historical perspective.

Noway Germany could have gone on a rampage AND especially vs. countries that were considered "friends" without anyone doing anything about it or noticing.

Russia certainly would put two and two together when friendly German countries get invaded and increased their mobilization, after all Stalin knew a confrontation with Germany was going to occur, he just did not expect so soon and expected to have it happen on his terms. But seeing Germany go all over the map would have sounded alarm bells.

This is not a question of balance, this is a question of having some historical perspective.

You can still keep balance, but gobbling up the whole of Europe would never had been as easy as it is now.

Making a game balanced is the easiest thing to do, making a game balanced within historical perspective is always challenging but if you are making a historical game, you have to try and do so.

[jon_j_rambo]

@T-Blashy --- Dude, you don't have a clue about the game or history. The game is simple, MMPs over the long haul is a trump card.

Far as history. Who is going to stop anybody from trashing the little guys? It's ALWAYS the United States Get us mad enough, and Uncle Sam will make a housecall.

Now get back to work & sign up for some political science courses at a credible school...not that bleeding heart liberal professor socialist stuff in Canada.

Setting the record straight,

-Legend

[Liam]

What I see here is two very valid points, Terif's indorsed Perfect Axis Minor Takedown and even mutually the Allied perfect Minor Takedown vs Blashy's Actual Historical Truth... There is no way without consequence that Hitler would've taken all the Minors that we do in WW2 without the World having gone Bananas. Also, to change certian things may make the game imbalanced!!!

The two key factors here are Major Readiness, as Minor Readiness is of no consequence. In Version 1.01 or 2? Was it, you never invaded Minors as Axis to not upset the Majors! In SC2 1.06 you invade everything in the end because of Plain income.

The Bottomline is this Switzerland Gave Germany more resources than she would've been worth conquoring and plundering, she was a valuable ally to the Axis, so there should be a bonus to keep her Neutral, not only but no Morale gain to conquor her. Sweden also!!! The Convoys Germany use to recieve historically would've taken awhile, the Nationalistic Swedes likely would've likely sabotaged their own Mines! So we do not represent any of the deeper implications of attacking Highly Neutral minors. As for Spain she was also a Axis Conspirator, she should not be invaded under any cirumstances without HUGE penalty, these 3 nations have no penalties now, nor dies Ireland, Portugal or North Africa for the Allies... I am not saying that the UK may not have seized North Africa but she would have never invaded Ireland, The USA would left the War after such an action! Portugal perhaps as a way to attack Spain...

To Summize what Terif has created is a perfect Neutral TimeTable for both UK and Germany to advance themselves just the right way and just the right path to make a balanced tough '42 '43 battle for the game! Some are decided in '41 if you do not know what you're doing. Once you start changing things, upsetting the applecart, the whole thing will get spoilt and you'll have to start from Point A again and change all your fixed strategies. JollyGuy you're wrong about one thing it is quite possible to tweak the game to balance the game even after such Historical alterations are added in, it is just going to go to those who are more likely to study and research then to those who just like to hack the game!

Tough game to master, but once you do, it's all the same......... A few other ahistorical things need altering, say for instance Luftwaffe Fighter Experience, it's way too much! No way it could be that good... So there are a lot of things that could be "minor improvements" I would say however Switzerland, Ireland and Sweden be completely tweaked so they're not just "targets" They bare consequences... And Spain, Well, I do not know how to handle that Jewel. It is likely the British could've defended it! They don't really possess an Army to do that in this game. Up to the Designers and BetaTesters I suppose. Be careful though wrong tweaking may destroy your game balance!

[jon_j_rambo]

What Blashy doesn't understand, is Europe was already pro-Bunta, so why would anybody want to "beat them", when they could "join them". Kind of like the One World Order coming to your planet Earth in the book of Revelations, Vatican+. Anti-Christ will do the same thing, you going to join him? Or step into his destiny? Better to go with The Truth.

As Always,

-Legend

[Liam]

I.E. of historical emphasis and game balance!

How about this, Swiss Banks Enrich German MPPs 20 per turn after 1942 if the Germans do not invade for Bank Transactions with Plundered Nations, negative effect, -2 Diplomatic Chits permanently for the German Diplomatic Machine due to the disbanding of the Swiss Influence on European Politics. Make Turkey an easy Target for the Allies in consequence and a possible reprecussion!

many of these are possible MANY

[Jollyguy]

And that's the gist of what I'm saying, if you want to tweak the game for whatever reason, then keep balance in mind. The game may not be perfect historically, but it is balanced. Every veteran player here remembers the bidding system of SC 1. Well, that's history. I'm sure Hubert put a whole lot of time into balancing this thing, and hey, he got it right.

So, if you want a perfect historical recreation, customize a mod. But as far as the standard, 1939 Fall Weiss scenario, don't be trying to fix something that isn't broke.

If you want to reshuffle the deck, fine, I have no problem with that. Just make sure each side gets the same balance that they have now. It should basically be a zero sum game.

Bob

[Blashy]

The goal should always be to keep the balance 50/50 because that is what Hubert wants for his default scenario.

But as Liam also points out, they are serious historical anomalies that can be rectified while staying true to Hubert's vision.

[Blashy]

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

What Blashy doesn't understand, is Europe was already pro-Bunta, so why would anybody want to "beat them", when they could "join them". Kind of like the One World Order coming to your planet Earth in the book of Revelations, Vatican+. Anti-Christ will do the same thing, you going to join him? Or step into his destiny? Better to go with The Truth.

As Always,

-Legend

Sigh, that is my whole point...

If the Axis start invading pro Axis countries the Russians would not just sit around and neither would other minors. They were pro Axis, but notice that only THREE countries joined them actively.

Basically they were pro Axis as long as Axis were winners, they easily changed their tune once Germany started to lose.

[arado234]

The way the game is set now''might is right''(which is fun)is what rules.If we go making the penalties to high for attacking minors(no matter which side the minor country was leaning towards)alot of us(except for maybe terif or jollyguy)wont do it and the game becomes much more predictable.BORING.Even now with game being quite balanced things are allowed that historically were not possible(the allies especially france)can launch major amphib.invasions in 1939 when they had almost no landing craft.It forces germany to act right away even though historically britain and france had no hope of invading in 1939,1940.You can use the french ships on hopless suicide missions when HISTORICALLY there is no hope they would have done it.You can launch major attacks against other countries through neutral airspace with no penalty which should be changed.(attacking finland from norway by flying over neutral sweden).The western allies would NEVER attack finland.The brits were contemplating HELPING finland when russia attacked them.These possibilties make the game FUN(which is what its all about).Terif and im sure now jollyguy seem to win no matter what side they choose.The game is fine the way it is.Both sides have the same atvantages.The only thing that needs to be changed is if you violate neutral airspace there is a penalty.

[Liam]

Arado, even Terif can be beaten and JollyGuy gets beaten quite a bit. They're very advanced players and that's what you'll get a player that generally beats you. best thing to do is Join Panzerliga the German PBEM site and play Terif or one of the upper rated SC2 players and take notes to their moves.. Each Minor and Each Conquest has a special type of approach, sometimes several of them, but you must memorize them to step into the next level of gaming.. I am only brushing up on them myself after a good 10 or 15 games!!! Been away from SC2 for the past 6 months

As to what you say, it's quite impossible to believe that Major Amphibious OPs occurred in WW2 before 1942... The Germans would've probably been as advanced as the Allies at this point at such a thing! French Fleet dying??? Shouldn't every time a Capitol ship gets sunk the Morale of a nation goes down 10%!

That tonnage and the morale signifance alone is a lot to take into account!

Violating airspace may or may not matter, but definitely could hold political consequences. Depending on if it was an Axis friendly or an Allied one, I generally never violate Neutrals and assume if one side can then the other can both have made Diplomatic deals with the Nation in Question and this is a Strategic Game...

[arado234]

Thats my point liam.There are alot of things that arenot included in this game for both sides but was is included keeps the game open to many different options(remember its about fun).As far as terif and jollyguy go they are probably the best at this game.Im assuming they played it alot and studied every and all aspects of the game and use them to their atvantage.We all have the same oppertunity to do this.If we choose to do so or not is up to us.As for morale yes i agree with you.That would atleast make french naval suicide missions a little more costly.British morale could start to drop off if she started loosing to much to commerce raiding.Violating neutral airspace is one thing (it happened during ww2) launching a major attack across a whole country(attack finland from norway)is a different matter.You could easily have it that if a country violates ANY neutral airspace the country being violated joins the other side or atleast gets a big diplo hit against the attacker.As far as amphib. invasions go i know the germans didnt have much in the way of actual invasion craft but neither did the brits or france so the game is balanced in that it gives them ALL an option.Remember their is no ultra included in this game,unlimited allied resources.The chance that in 1941 when germany first went into russia ALOT of the russians(and if germany had done it right)the whole country would have atleast been synpathetic or joined the germans isnt included.The game would be pointless if any of those options were added.Maybe the designers of the game could develop an actual historical option setting for this game.this i know would take alot of research and testing.

[hellraiser]

again this history vs balance stuff...

guys, the game starts from a historical date, having historical OOBs (more or less) but then, it is up to the players to change the history!

And not all of it - for example, no matter what you do as Axis, you will have to face Russia - this could have been avoided back in the 40s IRL, who knows? So some of the actions you do are preset in accordance to some historical facts - some others, you can change...

Personally, I like to play a balanced game especially in H2H - otherwise I get bored in 2 days

[Desert Dave]

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

@T-Blashy --- Dude, you don't have a clue about the game or history. The game is simple, MMPs over the long haul is a trump card.

Far as history. Who is going to stop anybody from trashing the little guys? It's ALWAYS the United States Get us mad enough, and Uncle Sam will make a housecall.

Now get back to work & sign up for some political science courses at a credible school...not that bleeding heart liberal professor socialist stuff in Canada.

Setting the record straight,

-Legend

Where in dickens you been, ramblin' dude?

Inspectin' pipe-lines

Up 'er in Alaska?

Abetting the Governor's attempt

To destroy what little

Pristine wilderness - we got left?

Or was it?

STUCK in Mobile?

With them Memphis Blues - again?

No doubt,

On yer be-bop hip-hop

On along to Beale Street,

(... since, strangely, you ain't a'knowin'

nuthin' much 'bout them there cross-roads

whereat Johnson had his Faustian

joust with the Devil? - HiWay 61?)

You stopped over - at Bayou Teche?

Paid reverent respects

To ol' Jimmy Swag, him?

How IS that groaning old poet?

(... man, WAS he EVER, once; surely

one of the top 2 or 3 - along with

that great Canadian, Leonard Cohen...the last

60 years, at least... IMHO),

Now 'is once-swarming congregation hast

Got up, and - like fire-flies

Then the advent of sun-rise... went?

[Blashy]

It is not history vs. balance it is historical balance and relevance.

If you want to invade the whole of Europe go right ahead, but to just have every country sit by and do nothing is just nonsense.

This can be rectified while still keeping balance.

[Desert Dave]

Originally posted by Blashy:

It is not history vs. balance it is historical balance and relevance.

If you want to invade the whole of Europe go right ahead, but to just have every country sit by and do nothing is just nonsense.

This can be rectified while still keeping balance.

Blash Mon,

Agree, has got it - figured.

And,

Has had, all throughout this thread.

This ain't enny - either/or sorta

Manichean thing.

NOTHING in this whole wide world,

Is.

Man, some changes a'comin' - galore!

What more, SC Scat Cats!

Could you ask for? :cool:

[jon_j_rambo]

@DD --- Yep, you ain't nothing but a hound dog. I visited the king & paid my respects ($30 tour). Far as Beale Street...it's only a small 3 city blocks with small old buildings. Only the remnants of that blue sound is left, the ribs are great. I did swing down to Mississippi to eat lunch on John Daly's pub, those JD burgers are tight. Sun Sessions is still there too, a historical old shack of a structure. I'm sure you were there with Elvis, Johnny, Carl, & Jerry Lee...well at least in spirit.

Far as Jimmy, I didn't have the pleasure to make it to Batontown down, Louisanna, but I'm sure the The Camp there is doing well. Jimmy is still one of my favorites, his son Donny is WEAK. Holy Ghost got ahold of Swaggart waayy, I love that man to this day, got 3 of his music CD's.

Yes, it will be another Johnny's song soon. "North to Alaska" --- Johnny Horton, died too young, car crash I believe. I plan on turning on the oil valves while up there, I'm tired of paying $3.48 X 25 gallons to get my SUV's gased up.

Vote for me, I'll open up Alaska & take the Iraqi oil...we'll all get it for $1.00/gallon while I'm in office.

Blashy --- Dude, if I see the bully beating up the little guys & gaining strength, I'm not that motivated to get punked myself. Well, that's in the Euro attitude. I'm saved & in America, you're smart enough to figure out that game plan.

Legend >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> OUT

[arado234]

Blashy the only way you could change the game to atleast make a major power think twice about attacking certian neutrals would be(im assuming)to have the readiness of the other major powers go up or down depending on who is attacking who.Otherwise i dont see anyother way????????I think what hellraiser says is true in that the game is hardwired to some degree historically and both sides having the oppertunity to change that is what makes the game fun and much more interesting.Terif and jollyguy seem to think the game is balanced and from what ive read terif has probably played this game way more than anyone.