Once Britain falls...

[Liam]

SC2 at this time is the most detailed Strategic Engine I've seen ever for WW2.. Including some tactical levels that say Axis & Allies or World at War pretty much in the same boat could not provide. There are no serious contenders though and it's lack of market

I.E. It takes about 5-10 hours with a good connection to even inch off the crust of a decent Strategic Command 2 game. Likely another 5-10 hours if two opponents are evenly matched. The feel and flow from '39 to '41 is a feel of a Minor Military Giant Expanding, then being held back by Opposing Economic Giants.. It's not overly detailed, but ENOUGH... an average game turn takes 3 minutes for me... 5-6 if I have to hink... That's comparable with Axis & Allies, we ran a 3 minute timer usually.. If it took you that long you were playing the USA and loading unloading many many transports

I.E. Axis & Allies you could win the game in 3 game turns due to luck(less than 5 minutes). World at War, still has not delivered PBEM after promising it a year ago and never likely will as it's flopped at the Store Shelves.

[SeaMonkey]

Agreed Liam. One of the unique things of SC2 is its ability to dwell on the operational level as well as the strategic, with a pinch of the tactical sphere also.

It can never be perfect, satisfying everyone to an infantismal degree, nor can any other game....ever! But its friendly, easy to grasp, with some genuine depth.

And its getting very close to being balanced....

............IMO, given two opponents of equal ability.

[Canuck_para]

I prefer the idea of Canada being the fall back for the UK when the Island is taken.

[Samichlaus]

To Stalin's Organist: I agree that it stands on its own merits but it was YOU that compared it with Risk, Diplomacy and Axis&Allies...and put it in the same category and that`s what raised my opposition. But since you admitted, that there is no better one, I'm satisfied so far...

[Liam]

Agreed, sounds logical, but it wouldn't benefit The British, the Canadians aren't fully represented!

Now if you put all Canadian resources on the Map, like the Urals Build, during the Kapitulation of of Britian, then it might be different! UK Moves King and Empire to Canada Event... several mines and cities popup to represent the relocation then it would be worth it... She'd need the extra MPPs to resupply the fleets to make it a feesible option.. Not only that I would require a percentage of British Units survived Sea Lion for that to work!

otherwise Canada alone would not die to liberate the United Kingdom, she doesn't have the Manpower without equipment and without ships.. A relocation literally, seeing that the defensible position of the UK as unworkable. The Canadians have more resources than the British, less Industry but far far more resources the Empire would supply the Manpower to defeat the Grey Beast

Originally posted by Canuck_para:

I prefer the idea of Canada being the fall back for the UK when the Island is taken.

[Canuck_para]

Liam, I agree that Canada is not fully represented in the game. Canada and all UK units that escaped Britain would never have been able to take back the Island. I think Canada would have prepared for total war to prevent being invaded and thus increased all aspects of it industry and military. For game purposes I like the idea of the UK govt going to Canada to allow it to support its forces still fighting and to join the US in either the defence of North America or invasion of occupied Britain.

[Yohan]

Originally posted by Stalin's Organist:

Waht you have found are some of the fundamental problems of SC2.

Sadly they spoil the game for amny as a "serious" wargame. It's fun to play occasionally, the same way that Diplomacy, Risk and Axis and Allies are - the board games, not the bastardised computerised vesions!

Nope it is worse because we know Risk is lame.

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by Samichlaus:

To Stalin's Organist: I agree that it stands on its own merits but it was YOU that compared it with Risk, Diplomacy and Axis&Allies...and put it in the same category and that`s what raised my opposition.

I don't think I did compare it to them - I class it as the same as them - a good game but not one I consider as good history.

For example I put chequers and ludo in the same class - but I wouldn't try to compare them.....

A comparison means more than putting it in the same class - it means looking at individual features - clearly none of hte other games have much in common with SC in terms of features, and vice versa.

[hellraiser]

sc1 has provided years of enjoyment, sc2 continues the ideea - a good game, getting better with every patch (remember sc1 needed 7 patches to 'grow up') because we got a game designer that actually cares about what ppl are screaming for in the forums and implements a lot of the community ideeas -> rara avis these days

... and because of this excellent community developed around this game, with mature and smart people.

I guess there are quite some incentive to stick around longer

[BioWizard]

A little update guys... I won!!!

It is possible for Allies to win even if Great Britain falls! I must say this was the game I had the most fun playing yet. Very different from all the other multiplayer games i played so far.

So, a very short AAR to those of you who are interested:

I already described how the Axis took both Egypt and Great Britain along with every other minor except Turkey (Pfeiffer and I had agreed that no one could DOW Turkey and diplo was stalled there with USA having invested 5 chits, completely blocking the axis efforts there, in version 1.02). For doing an early Sea Lion, Pfeiffer left Russia alone and, with the 1000 Mpps research limit from version 1.02, Russia took the lead in tech and kept air superiority over its territory. It managed to take back Finland, Iran and Irak (with its Mpps going to no one). In the mean time, USA had landed in Ireland and posted there 5 high tech planes with Bradley. From there, they kept axis airplanes away and chased the axis HQ posted in England. From 1943 to 1945, they bombed the axis boats coming too close and an army posted in Manchester, gaining experience. USA also launched in 1943, a second D-Day in Algeria, not enough room in Ireland, England too dangerous and Axis supply in Europe too high. In 1944 (it is so rare to play games that long...), techs were so high, that USA had reached maximum levels in all categories except sub, anti-sub and anti-aircraft and had bought all armiers, corps, HQ, aircrafts, bombers and tanks available. From 1943 to 1945, Russia chased Germans away from Stalingrad and recovered slowly all of its territory.

Pfeiffer captured an image of the 2 huge facing armies on the Eastern front not yet daring to face each other on the Battleground. I did too, and with my level 4 long range aircraft, it is quite impressive (more then 70 units!!!). If someone could teach me how to post this image, i would greatly appreciate...

So, since he was loosing one unit per turn of my choosing with my air attacks, he launched a full frontal attack. The counter-attack was deadly and he finally surrendered 2 turns later because he could not fight 3 fronts at once, with England soon becoming a new air platform and italy being threathened from Syria and the former North african italian cities now under US control by Patton (this will make Rambo happy ) and Eisenhower with, 5 armies, 2 tanks and 3 heavy bombers.

p.s. from Terif's Panzerliga's course on SC 2 : "so England now can decide if they either want to keep their island or prefer to emigrate to Africa and hold the positions there. As long as their fleet with air reconnaissance is positioned right, they now should be able to defend at least one of them. The art of war here is logically not to equally spread the defenders out, so Axis can conquer both...that would most certainly mean end of war and game-over with UK surrendered ."

p.p.s. not that "most certainly"...

[Jollyguy]

BioWizard

Wow, thanks for sticking your game out and showing the rest of us that in the long, long run the Allies have a chance, even when by all appearances the Axis have run the table and sent England into exile. If I remember, Pfeifer was higher rated on Panzerliga during SC 1 than Terif, so you've definatly beaten one of the premier players.

If you could, send me an e-mail. At the moment I'm taking a prolonged SC 2 break, but plan on resuming play in a few months, and I still linger on the board. Would love to lock horns with you sometime.

And the next patch looks like it will solve the mpps in limbo problem that you encountered. I'm sure Hubert will read your post, so he's going to have to take your come-from-behind victory into account as he balances the game and redirects those mpps. And, after reading the Terif/Rambo AAR, it clearly seems to me that the Eastern Front is where victory or defeat awaits the Axis, not out West by putting a feather in one's cap for taking England.

Bob

[n0kn0k]

Nice read

You can mail the screenshot to me if you want. I'll host it. I'm curious to see that carnage

[ October 03, 2006, 06:02 AM: Message edited by: n0kn0k ]

[BioWizard]

So, here's the image of the two huge armies.

Have you ever seen that many hightech units at once?

special thanks for n0kn0k for hosting this image

[Scook]

Interesting, in my first game vs. JJR (aka Legend) we had an Eastern Front about the same size, but neither had the tech this high, and it was 1945.

[sabazius]

That Hungarian corps looks a little nervous.

[Iron Ranger]

lol!!

No, normally I dont think you get tech this high because.

1) People stop too soon, normally at the frist major down turn. (everyone is victum of this but Terif)

2) The limits on Tech now mean it unlikely you will see this.

3) There must have been a huge lag in combat (the sealion) to give USSR the time needed for all that tech.

[BioWizard]

The techs reached that level because Russia had 1000 mpps (version 1.02) invested in research all the time for 6 years of play while intelligence and industrial tech were the primary focus since the beginning. As for late Sea Lion, it did not influence research spendings but Barbarossa started only in early 1942... after the siberian transfer if i recall well. LOL!!!