Developer Diary #3 Comments

[Edwin P.]

Interesting, UKs capital moves from London > Manchester > Alexandria. :eek:

Wargamer.com > Developer Diary: Yes, the idea here is from the special situations we had in SC1, secondary capitals (USSR, Vichy France, UK) and secondary supply centres (UK, USSR), but with a few minor differences.

The secondary capitals will be a list (in order) to which a country will move it's capital when the original is captured. Looking at a probable setup for the UK, it's list would be:

1) London

2) Manchester

3) Alexandria

If London is captured then the capital will try and move first to Manchester (if available) and then Alexandria (if available), if not UK surrenders. I imagine that this could also happen in reverse, i.e. the capital moved to Alexandria but subsequently Manchester is liberated and then let's say Alexandria is captured, the capital moves back to Manchester. Still not 100% sure about the last part but might be an interesting option

Cool: :cool:

The one thing that we don't know... are Russia and USA and Italy going to be "active" from 1939, from the beginning of the Grand Campaign?

Exactly Plan is to have them be "active" but not "fully active", with (my current idea) perhaps linking their per turn income to the actual percentage of war readiness as one of the limitations during this phase. So if US normally collects 250 MPP's but is at a war readiness of 50% they only collect 125 MPP and so on.

Can the INACTIVE Major Powers, USA & Russia, have ANY kind of research successes, to include IT and for their forces... BEFORE they become active?

Yes, I would think that this is very likely. Plan is to have all majors active even if not currently at war... but if not fully joined the idea would be to only limit them by a reduced income, yet retain all common capabilities, like troop movement (within your country for land, naval units less restricted), research, purchases etc.

Really Cool :eek:

[ March 06, 2005, 08:33 AM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[pzgndr]

Wow #3 popped up at Wargamer already. I just read through it to see what we said...

This whole deal with alternate capitals, secondary industrial centers, production modifiers, IT research, off-map resources, events that can trigger resources to start production, and more, all work to provide a very flexible production model. There's a lot of useful information in those #3 notes. There have also been a few changes.

[SeaMonkey]

Just finished reading the new diary entry.....awesome!

eech!! eech!! eech!, Yes its time for the "ButMonkey".

Considering the last paragraph instituting provisions for intelligence/counter-E, I would like to see a little added depth. Since this is still up in the air...hopefully, I would like to suggest some scripted events, that would allow various instantaneous glimpses into the opposing sides moves, both strategical and tactical. Some revealing episodes of troop movements/massings/locations; popups as describing an enemy units' passing or leaving a geographical location, as an example. A notion of an enemy level of research in certain categories.

Creating provisions for such a feature/s could prompt a prewar(before 39) diplomatic condition for the players of SC2 to engross themselves in as well as semi-active majors before they enter the fighting.

I can wait a little longer for SC2, perhaps 3 months?

[SeaMonkey]

Expanding on my above post, the instituting of the feature would allow the MPP investment into espionage for accumulation of diplomatic chits also. Edwin has suggested many ideas for prewar political maneuvering. I think there could also be provisions for semi-active majors to steal technological advancements from the enemy as well. All for the purpose of added depth and replayability, not to mention the possibility of creating custom prewar diplomic scenarios.

Come on HC....give it a shot.

[Desert Dave]

I can wait a little longer for SC2, perhaps 3 months?

Very good then SeaMonkey, we shall

Have to make you

The "official deflector" of ALL those

Who wish to have it

In - 3 seconds flat!!

Perhaps, resembling this shield-ready

Old Warrior kind of cat:

________________

Excellent and original ideas as per usual,

Except we mostly haven't gotten that far.

Hubert is yet mulling over

Many of the "intel" features.

No doubt he'll one day arrive

And let that new! intelligence feature

See the light of a sun-stunning day.

(... better get yer LA-made shades

shined to a pur-blinding gloss! :cool: )

[SeaMonkey]

"Hubert is yet mulling over

Many of the "intel" features"

Excellent!

and I most humbly accept the unofficial title, and a very good likeness also....thanks DD.

One thing though, my weapon of choice, I prefer an AR-15 with a bag full of 30 round clips....set to auto mode...and my ammo box full of .223 rounds.

While I'm wishing, a Green-eyed, redheaded serving wench to replinish the used clips would be nice, not to mention a reinforced concrete bunker for my shield.

Now with that endowment... bring on those instantaneous gratification seekers.

Mr.C...take all the time you need

your diligence is defended!

[Edwin P.]

Originally posted by SeaMonkey:

Considering the last paragraph instituting provisions for intelligence/counter-E, I would like to see a little added depth. Since this is still up in the air...hopefully, I would like to suggest some scripted events, that would allow various instantaneous glimpses into the opposing sides moves, both strategical and tactical. Some revealing episodes of troop movements/massings/locations; popups as describing an enemy units' passing or leaving a geographical location, as an example. A notion of an enemy level of research in certain categories.

Creating provisions for such a feature/s could prompt a prewar(before 39) diplomatic condition for the players of SC2 to engross themselves in as well as semi-active majors before they enter the fighting.

Good ideas, SeaMonkey.

To elaborate these ideas just a bit;

Perhaps

1. You see the location of Eisenhower's HQ unit for one turn.

2. Perhaps a popup: "Axis Submarines sighted in Atlantic", but not where in the Atlantic or how many.

3. Perhaps a popup: "Allied transports sighted passing Cape Town."

4. Perhaps a popup: "British Naval Fleets pass through straits of Gibraltar" - but the popup does not tell you in which direction or how many fleets.

I would also like to see each additional level of Intel Research give you various bits of information on the enemy force structure and their economy. If you are cooperative allies you would see this information, on allied countries, automatically.

Example:

Intel 1: Economic Production - ie 254 per turn, Lend Lease 50, War Mobilization 50%, Industrial Tech Level

Intel 2: Research Chits - ie 5

Intel 3: Force Levels - ie 12 Land Units, 6 Naval, 2 Air

[ March 06, 2005, 12:01 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[SeaMonkey]

Exactly Edwin,

Let us not forget that the lack of intelligence or miss-information also plays a valuable part of the overall WW2 espionage scheme. Since neither player will perhaps not be aware of their opponents "Intel" tech level, there should be a chance of popups that will also be untrue or missleading. Maybe, your intellgence information should have a % reliability attached to it, such as , "Info Sketchy, 20%", or "Info from this source realiable before, 50%", or "Info Trustworthy, 80%", etc., etc.

[Edwin P.]

Good idea, SeaMonkey.

I wonder what HC thinks?

[SeaMonkey]

Alright, I have another idea. Remember how I have been a proponent for the need of a random possibility for opposing naval/air forces to overlook each other in sea tiles? How about using the "Submarine Dives from Attack" feature to simulate the "Naval/Air Forces Fail to Discover" provision? OK, well maybe not exactly the same parameters but something similar for the "effect". Come on Hubert, you said it yourself...you like "simple abstractions".

[Edwin P.]

I agree, air units should have a chance not to spot a naval unit, especially at their extreme range.

[Edwin P.]

Plunder - One idea (with this system) is to actually remove the capitals from countries like Ireland, and let's say Portugal to give them even less value and hopefully avoid the gamey moves employed, like simply doing it for the plunder or for target practice

I favor retaining the capitals of countries like Ireland and Portugal but increasing the penalty for attacking them and making the penalty unpredicatable.

For example;

UK Attack on Ireland

30% - "News Flash - Over 500,000 people in Boston, Chicago and New York City march in protest against British attack on Ireland." (USA war readiness drops by 20% to 30%)

30% - "News Flash - US Congress angered by British Attack on Ireland halts all Lend Lease assistance to the United Kingdom." (until the USA enters the war all lend lease assistance to the UK is stopped and US war readiness drops by 10%)

10% - "News Flash - The Government of Spain, horrified by the British Attack on Ireland has joined the Axis Alliance."

30% - "News Flash - Over 100,000 people in New York City march in protest against British attack on Ireland." (USA war readiness drops by 10%)

As for Portugal, if the Axis attacks Portugal Turkey becomes more pro-allied, may join the Allies and may stop all trade with Germany in protest.

50% - "News Flash - The Republic of Turkey in protest against the Axis attack on Portugal has halted all trade with the Axis powers."

[ March 17, 2005, 04:24 PM: Message edited by: Edwin P. ]

[SeaMonkey]

Good ideas Edwin and I'm in agreement about the capitals, in addition I would like to see a port also. However there could be another direction to consider to reduce the incentives for attacking neutrals, like reducing the plunder algorithm.

Possibly another consideration is to represent a reduced trade (MPP transfer) mechanism between adjacent neutrals to major countries. Example: Ireland with a port and a capital has trade with the UK based on a 20% multiplier to the Irish overall MPP worth, say 40 MPPs = 8 MPP per turn to UK coffers. If the UK invades not only is the total MPP worth of Ireland reduced by at least 50% subject to a randomizing factor, but also the trade multiplier(also subject to randomizer) could be reduced to say 5% = 1 MPP per turn to UK. This trade algorithm could be subjected to certain randomizing factors like diplomatic chits invested in Ireland(propaganda campaign)or MPPs to represent an investment to improve the infrastructure that would slowly increase the MPP worth of Ireland to the Allied cause, post or pre-invasion status.