Constraints

[John DiFool the 2nd]

By that I mean ways which the game engine and/or

scenario limits what a country can or cannot do.

I wish to raise the issue of whether each country

should more or less have the general sort of

default limitations which they had in the real war,

and have to deal with or work around them.

Take Italy, a prime example. I daresay that in SC1

Italy is capable of reaching heights the Mussolini

probably never contemplated in his wildest dreams.

Invading North America with a huge fleet out of

nowhere?

Of course that is a rather extreme example, but

the only thing holding back Italy in SC1 is her

crappy leaders. But if Germany lets her capture

a lot of capitals...

My point is: is this desireable? Should Italy

have access to resources, technologies, and

organizational capabilities which she never really

had a realistic shot at? How about Russia or

France? Would it be good for gameplay to be

lenient in this regard, or would all the improbable

goings-on lessen the game's impact and verisimili-

tude?

[Retributar]

I have run across from time to time exerpts describing technology sharing between the Axis partners. So for technology...there was not much of a limitation.

For example the Italians and the Japanese were on their way to developing their own jet forces (German Technology)...for which they paid a fee for, also missile and rockets...and so on.

The Japanese for example had nearly something like 2000 jets that were on the verge of going into action...they were waiting for the Americans to invade Japan!. Up till that point, those jets were kept hidden..in underground cavern's in a mountain!.

Better leaders are required as you say (The Italians were very poorly led)...so is national will, availablity of resources, and industrial capacity.

I dont know how all of this will be represented in the game...someone else will need to answer your query moreso than i can.

[pzgndr]

I wish to raise the issue of whether each country should more or less have the general sort of default limitations which they had in the real war, and have to deal with or work around them.

This is what the new force pool limits should provide players. But what exactly are "default limitations" and how might they change if a game goes differently than the real war? That's the thorny issue.

I admit to being somewhat biased toward using the simple force pool limits that have been playtested over the past 30 years with 3R/A3R, WiF, etc. These are reasonable defaults, and can be further edited as desired. In SC2 you will be able to play with "hard limits" meaning you are not able to exceed them, "soft limits" meaning you can exceed the limits but at increased costs, or "no limits" which is basically what SC1 has now.

Also, research tech levels can be capped at certain levels or blocked altogether, and edited for each country. Research costs can be edited for each country, meaning Italy or any country could have some advantage or disadvantage towards particular tech areas.

In summary, SC2 will provide lots of flexibility for imposing specific constraints and limitations by individual country. :cool:

[Liam]

Panzer, Italy was pathetic in WW2. They managed to conquor Greece with German Aide. Then some say that it wasn't the Italian troops it was their leadership, it wasn't that they were bad troops, it was their equipment and Dictator's unpreparedness for real War. On and on and on and on... Mostly Italians defend Italians and few else, the one thing that is said is they helped us in the end, that's about all I see agreed upon. Italy was formidable on the Seas of the Mediterranean, they put a few sneaky mandriven explosives on a Brit Battleship or two in Port and had the upperhand there and never used it fully. They needed German Aircover the whole time. In this SC is fairly accurate, but in using them as Terror Amphibious Marines all over the Glove the game is not at all accurate. I use Italians is Cannonfodder, early on they have a slight bit of firepower all in their navy and amphibious 100% effective Units.. A 4 star HQ and some Italian Units would be effectively used against an SC Rookie only.. An SC Expert uses Italians to enhance tech, garrison major Cities, and that's about it. Maybe their Navy comes up for a complimentary North Atlantic War. Historical for selfish ambitious Italy? No. Often in SC they develop better tech than Germany, that part at least should be phazed back with initial setups.. they had few technological advantages I know of in WW2 start. Making a balanced Fall Weiss is most important

Ultimately the Italians are useless in SC though as they were in History they just have a Large Unit presence in the graphs...

Giving them the capability to do more is for gameplay I suppose. If Hubert is going to include their presence in the game. 6 players? I assume Italy is one of them... HOI does this to some degree, gives Nations like Italy boosts, and you can trade Tech.. They have a massive Navy in that game, and it makes for them being playable at least. The fact is you start in 1936 with HOI giving Italy time to do a lot of tricks, with Tech and Preparing for a Strategy and War, interesting...but their simulator/wargame is no more accurate than SC except in Detail or if people play RPG style.. As far as making them able to conquor Vichy, Spain, Turkey, etc.. I have to say the Germans wouldn't have allowed that heheheh

[Retributar]

Liam i agree with your evaluation of the 'Italians'...but, in addition to those comments...i have to say that the 'Italians' had 'no stake' in this war...they had no reason to fight it...and so were not motivated,...they were forced into war by their Dictator 'Mussolini'...who had an agenda that his people did not!.

[Roosevelt45(the 2nd)]

Mussolini said to hitler that his country wouldn't be ready to join the war until 1942.

Though he said that because he wanted to wait and see how the Germans did first(They joined when they saw France was getting its ass kicked)I think this was pretty much a good evaluation of the Italian army and economy at that point.