The eye and hand of god

[Sombra]

"will find and crush you whereever you hide"

One of the "game breakers" of SC is for me, when the enemy besides JT superiority, reaches LR tech lvl 3-5 . Suddenly he sees all and and can strike anything anywhere on the map. You cannot hide you cannot run....

I know that there are new rules regarding FOW in SC2 . Perhaps the effectiveness of airfleets could although be disminished with strikerange (as rockets in SC1). Simply getting to their attack target burns up most of the fuel and limits the effective fighting time at the destiny . Right now in SC1 planes can fly 3000 miles and strike as effectiffly as they do near at home. One of the reasons Germany lost the "Battle of Britain" was that their planes could only fight a few minutes above London before they had to return home to refuel.

[ March 14, 2005, 04:03 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

[SeaMonkey]

Yes, and Sombra think how much extra fuel they burn flying all that extra distance......see about the supply factor(especially oil).

[jon_j_rambo]

Al Turning's radar was quite helpful to fight off Goering's Luftwaffe.

[Retributar]

I Agree with 'Sombra'!... that's why i grew tired of SC rather quickly.

American Fighters and Bombers were pounding German submarines on the other side of the Atlantic...as well as other disagreeable unrealistic occurrences in the game made it unappealing to play anymore!.

[Sombra]

Originally posted by Retributar:

I American Fighters and Bombers were pounding German submarines on the other side of the Atlantic...as well as other disagreeable unrealistic occurrences in the game made it unappealing to play anymore!.

Spotting of subs with planes. Well another small thing which could be improved in SC2.

[Edwin P.]

Quick Note, it appears that;

In SC2 the Spotting Range and Strike Range of air Units will be reduced.

In Sc2 the LR tech will increase the attack range of a bomber by +2 for each level and that of a fighter by just +1.

In Sc2 subs will have the ability to run silent and remain hidden from sight.

In Sc2 air units will have a naval attack rating. If you do not research this then your aircraft will not be very effective against naval units.

[ March 15, 2005, 07:53 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[Augustus]

A super idea...makes great sense...how could something so simple be so over-looked in SC I? A pragmatic rule such as this would have increased game-play satisfaction immeasurably.

Cheers

Augustus

[santabear]

Well, it's hard to know what "level 5" jets represent, but if one imagines anything like the current US air force working in WWII, the game isn't that far off. The problem is how quickly and cheaply these "death machines" can be created. Any one of the numerous rules/devices to address this makes SC a very good game.

And if you ever want to work out your aggressions and conquer the world, just play against the AI and research jets and LR...

[Retributar]

http://www.wargamer.com/articles/roadtowar_1/page3.asp

Author: Scott Udell

Article Type: Buying Guide

Publication Date: 3/15/2005

Related Categories: Business and Industry, Buyer's Guide

Last but not least in Battlefront’s stable of upcoming games is Strategic Command 2: Blitzkrieg. While many gamers would’ve been happy if the follow-up to the loads-of-fun, simple-to-play Strategic Command had just covered the Pacific Theatre of WW II, or covered the whole world, designer/developer Hubert Cater of Fury Software instead has done a complete re-design of the game. In a lot of ways, it sounds like a much meatier version of Strategic Command, with more to do; this should please the grognards who were turned off by the simplicity - or the simplifications - of the original, but hopefully it’ll still keep the flavor and the fun and addictive play. There’s been a fair amount of news on this since its announcement last April, including a FAQ in November and a set of designer’s diaries. You can also chat about the game at Battlefront’s dedicated forum. The game is in late alpha now, and I expect a release by this summer.

[Exel]

The Americans bombed the Romanian oilfields from Britain and even had fighter escort for their bombers. So it's not unrealistic. What makes it a problem, however, is that aircraft are way too deadly against ground forces.

Early war planes didn't have much of a range, and it should take some considerable efforts to develop such long-range aircraft, but it should be possible. Air units do need tweaking from SC1, but range is really not the biggest issue there.

[Panzeh]

Planes historically were much better able to interdict the logistical tail of a unit than do much about the unit's combat capability itself. Remember that logistical assets must generally remain on roads, rails, and near cities. Combat units don't.

I think air strikes should sap supply instead of strength.

[Exel]

Air strikes should cause more damage to the target's combat effectiveness (readiness in SC1 terms) and only a limited amount to its strenght. The strenght loss should be capped so that air units couldn't destroy a ground unit completely, only weaken it. That would generate a lot more realistic air and ground warfare and air units would no longer be the overpowered superunits they are in SC1.

[hellraiser]

you have a point mate ... but think that without a fair amount of planes, axis cannot even break the French defence, after the conquest of LC. LC itself might be a problem, because if AFs reduce only readiness and not strength, axis can have problems capturing brussels due to too few attack hexes (2+1 on river). You would need some tweaking to ground units attack/defence parameters in this case IMHO.

[Exel]

First off, you are speaking purely from SC1 perspective. Please remember that SC2 is a new game, I doubt the combat system would have been copied from SC1 as such.

Second, I don't really see a problem. Axis can take LC in one turn with the air power it has in the start, and even with just protective air cover it wont take too long to reach Brussels. The air power is also insignificant when breaking through the French lines, since both the Axis and Allied air forces are quite evenly matched there - Luftwaffe wont achieve such a dominant superiority in the air by then. The aircraft in SC1 only get overpowered when their tech level and quantity on the battlefield increase.

[jon_j_rambo]

SomeGerman is right, the Long Range is a joke when it comes to spotting. At least only allow the fighter one mission per turn, either Offensive Air-To-Air, Offensive Air-To-Ground, Defensive, or Spotting. At least make the fighters fly a mission to spot & use their turn doing that.

[Liam]

this has been extensively discussed and aircraft cannot see everything, what about cloudcover? Deception, camouflage? On and on and on and on

in fact, a recon unit sees an army might mistaken it for something else, perhaps should out of realism be reflected as something else? This is a complex category

[Exel]

The spotting issue is easily dealt with by making the spotting non-foolproof. Ie. there should be a random chance of the air unit detecting each unit within its spotting range. This could be increased with tech.

In fact, if I'm not totally mistaken Hubert had something like that in his plans already.

[Sombra]

Excel I hope you are right

[Liam]

20% damage with a majority of average AFs on land units in current SC with average HQ support is Uber. 10% more with chance, add tech-exp and LR makes them deadly weapons. Recon-Seahitting power cause they are cheaper and easier to repair than most sea units. Land units should recieve 20% average damage for a fighter air strike.

10% is a bit closer, and a cap no matter experience or tech as 40s era aircraft Minus Nukes were not that strong<even nukes had a bit of trouble with accuracy early on. Remeber the testings in the Pacific that were miles off and the ships targeted were taken up again by their crews temporarily?>