SC2: Enhancements On the Way

[Liam]

Originally posted by Moonslayer:

If luck is such a factor then how can you know the outcome of a game over such a short number of turns?

The only way to be certain is if luck plays no major part, surely?

Luck played a role in history. Many of the major Conquests by Hitler were not predictable. France should've never fallen. Noone expected them to. The fact is the French were as in SC2 ill prepared.

Also once the Germans faced an equal foe, the British, in the air or at sea, the war went downhill for them. They nolonger had the iniative and the their stockpiles didn't help any vs the British who could pick and choose where they would fight in the Battle of Britian and at sea, the Germans had nowhere near the size navy as the Brits...

In the East, it was also predictable due to Stalin's great purges and poor deployments. It was a sad state to see the Soviet Armies crushed that way. The Russians were not as well trained and where was good leadership, they also needed experience! Kind of hard in a nation when they appoint Marshall Communist on Merit, rather than Marshall General!

Once the Axis faced True opposition, in 1942, they were crushed like bugs. They never again had any chance to win. What SC2 simulates is the same HUGE gamble by Germany to Grab a bunch of Territory and quick and at the same time to crush their enemies armies and collapse their Governments and that is what this game is about. Once the USA/UK and USSR mobilize and are still tactically in place they can crush the Axis!!! Axis are even a little overpowered. As far as Luck is concerned:

Dunkirk was luck, how the hell did the British evacuate all that?

The First Winter in Russia was very bad! That was luck!

The Fall of France!

The Luck that Rommel had because the British were stupid and overextending themselves all over the Mediterreanan instead of focusing on Egypt and Libya first!

Hitler made Decisions based on Astrologists, psychics, etc... he firmly believed in Luck. Even when the American's invaded Vichy Algeria and Morocco, noone knew how they'd perform, they untried and untested.. Torch was a big gamble along with Normandy D-Day, something like that scale had never been attempted...

So you can say that Gambles were made all over the map and there were failures, successes and inbetweens... The Germans had their series of Successes and blunders as did the Allies and in the end the Allies could concede 10 Xs more before they lost so Chance was not as big a factor. I do admit in SC 2 terms, the Map and the territories do not allow for a full simulation of the longterm logistics of what the Germans would face!!! Even had they taken Moscow in 1941, that wouldn't had been the end! It may have only invigorated the West to mobilize faster!

Whose to say what Luck plays... I think in a Strategic Sense given that combat does not involve much luck. Some of the factors, I.E. Malta effect really shouldn't be based on Dice. Rather on Deployment of Royal Navy and RAF. Also if you invest in Infantry weapons as a Major Industrial Power, there is no Rocket Science to it, you'll get it... There really shouldn't be luck there but the chances are in game you'll usually get what you invest in.. Usually.. I think 80% of the time I usually hit what I am aiming for if I put enough cashflow on it...

[Blashy]

The one thing about this game I love the most is that luck is not a game breaker.

That does not mean the game does not need more variables .

[Blashy]

The one thing about this game I love the most is that luck is not a game breaker.

That does not mean the game does not need more variables .

[arado234]

Tao i agree somewhat with luck factor(spending lots on up grades and not getting them,That should be modified somewhat)But the rest maybe not.When you play the computer you always win i assume no matter how your tech.goes.Thats not luck.Its because the computer will always fall for the same traps where as a human player can see whats up and usually avoid them.Thats not luck either.We all(except maybe terif)make mistakes in this game that cost us big time.Thats also not luck.I bet if you or i played terif he would wipe us out no matter how lucky we got with our tech.Thats skill.Its not possible to make this or any ww2 game absolutly historically accurate.We all know before the game starts as the germans we have to prepare for america and russia.I agree with blashy that the game needs some tweeking.Ive mentioned(under the new expansion package list) what i think should and hope is changed.People this game is about HAVING FUN,which it is.

[arado234]

Tao i agree somewhat with luck factor(spending lots on up grades and not getting them,That should be modified somewhat)But the rest maybe not.When you play the computer you always win i assume no matter how your tech.goes.Thats not luck.Its because the computer will always fall for the same traps where as a human player can see whats up and usually avoid them.Thats not luck either.We all(except maybe terif)make mistakes in this game that cost us big time.Thats also not luck.I bet if you or i played terif he would wipe us out no matter how lucky we got with our tech.Thats skill.Its not possible to make this or any ww2 game absolutly historically accurate.We all know before the game starts as the germans we have to prepare for america and russia.I agree with blashy that the game needs some tweeking.Ive mentioned(under the new expansion package list) what i think should and hope is changed.People this game is about HAVING FUN,which it is.

[Liam]

Definitely agree it is a portion of luck but mostly not... Terif makes mistakes, there just isn't enough players around to capitolize on them! He's very well studied with SC2 mechanics!

The new release may take some luck out by adding so much more detail the better studied you are the more likely it will be you'll win. That or add more variance and fun. All luck is purely boring, all variance doesn't make a game interesting. The Right amount like Salt does The World was unpredictable back in 1939-1945! Just as SC2 is, in that context it is relative

Terif is damned good, so is JollyGuy Rambo, HellRaiser and a bunch of other guys. I have had 10 hour marathons with these guys, 1 player played a game with me for nearly 2 months altogether! Was very enjoyable... If SC2 Enhanced is out it'll only get better!

[Liam]

Definitely agree it is a portion of luck but mostly not... Terif makes mistakes, there just isn't enough players around to capitolize on them! He's very well studied with SC2 mechanics!

The new release may take some luck out by adding so much more detail the better studied you are the more likely it will be you'll win. That or add more variance and fun. All luck is purely boring, all variance doesn't make a game interesting. The Right amount like Salt does The World was unpredictable back in 1939-1945! Just as SC2 is, in that context it is relative

Terif is damned good, so is JollyGuy Rambo, HellRaiser and a bunch of other guys. I have had 10 hour marathons with these guys, 1 player played a game with me for nearly 2 months altogether! Was very enjoyable... If SC2 Enhanced is out it'll only get better!

[ChrisND]

If I wanted a game with no luck I would play chess or with my calculator.

[ChrisND]

If I wanted a game with no luck I would play chess or with my calculator.

[TaoJah]

Yes, in real life luck plays a factor too. And yes, Terif is so much better then us that he always wins.

But with two more-or-less equal players, you know who will win at the end of 1940 due to luck in research and diplo : a hit in those are just too important. And that's just not fun. Well, at least for me it isn't, so...

[TaoJah]

Yes, in real life luck plays a factor too. And yes, Terif is so much better then us that he always wins.

But with two more-or-less equal players, you know who will win at the end of 1940 due to luck in research and diplo : a hit in those are just too important. And that's just not fun. Well, at least for me it isn't, so...

[Liam]

Actually Tao, there are some ways to prevent early disasters. They will ruin a game for two players of the same Skill Level. Need a notebook on, "SC2 Openings." Most of them are old fashioned tactical errors. There are just some things you cannot afford to do, or forfeit the game! For instance many of my games vs Rambo, a player of my level the game is not decided at all due to tech in 1940. Often by 1942 or even as late as '44 tech is still a factor and must be exploited. We have not had a game in the passing 20 games where we did not both get something! I'd say we're about 10 games each in wins in SC2 altogether

Allies have a lot more room to sacrifice but Axis have more time... I learned you gotta exploit the chit system... Generally 9 Xs outta 10 you'll come out "fair"

From now on put 5 chits as Axis in early in what you want.. Do not invest in Diplomacy at all! Just build more units and conquor what your enemy uses against you! You'll likely never notice... As Allies focus like a laserbeam on what you want "way ahead of time" "give yourself plenty of room for error!"

Usually I lose a game to a guy like Rambo, or even my 1st game to you not due to tech, but due to a weakness, a hole in my armor, like a Capitol or a fruitless Battle... Never due to tech....... Axis require a lot attention to detail to get a perfect opener, practice makes perfect

Originally posted by TaoJah:

Yes, in real life luck plays a factor too. And yes, Terif is so much better then us that he always wins.

But with two more-or-less equal players, you know who will win at the end of 1940 due to luck in research and diplo : a hit in those are just too important. And that's just not fun. Well, at least for me it isn't, so...

[Liam]

Actually Tao, there are some ways to prevent early disasters. They will ruin a game for two players of the same Skill Level. Need a notebook on, "SC2 Openings." Most of them are old fashioned tactical errors. There are just some things you cannot afford to do, or forfeit the game! For instance many of my games vs Rambo, a player of my level the game is not decided at all due to tech in 1940. Often by 1942 or even as late as '44 tech is still a factor and must be exploited. We have not had a game in the passing 20 games where we did not both get something! I'd say we're about 10 games each in wins in SC2 altogether

Allies have a lot more room to sacrifice but Axis have more time... I learned you gotta exploit the chit system... Generally 9 Xs outta 10 you'll come out "fair"

From now on put 5 chits as Axis in early in what you want.. Do not invest in Diplomacy at all! Just build more units and conquor what your enemy uses against you! You'll likely never notice... As Allies focus like a laserbeam on what you want "way ahead of time" "give yourself plenty of room for error!"

Usually I lose a game to a guy like Rambo, or even my 1st game to you not due to tech, but due to a weakness, a hole in my armor, like a Capitol or a fruitless Battle... Never due to tech....... Axis require a lot attention to detail to get a perfect opener, practice makes perfect

Originally posted by TaoJah:

Yes, in real life luck plays a factor too. And yes, Terif is so much better then us that he always wins.

But with two more-or-less equal players, you know who will win at the end of 1940 due to luck in research and diplo : a hit in those are just too important. And that's just not fun. Well, at least for me it isn't, so...

[arado234]

As far as germany winning ww2 they would have had to have the allies make some big blunders(letting it get started in the first place was the biggest)which they did and have germany(which they didnt) exploit them to the fullest.That to me sounds like skill and LUCK which is what this game is.Some things are hard wired in(some that i think should be arenot)and the rest we decide.One thing i hope we NEVER touch is the effect experience has on this game.There were lots of times during ww2 that experience was the deciding factor in major battles.

[arado234]

As far as germany winning ww2 they would have had to have the allies make some big blunders(letting it get started in the first place was the biggest)which they did and have germany(which they didnt) exploit them to the fullest.That to me sounds like skill and LUCK which is what this game is.Some things are hard wired in(some that i think should be arenot)and the rest we decide.One thing i hope we NEVER touch is the effect experience has on this game.There were lots of times during ww2 that experience was the deciding factor in major battles.

[Blashy]

And keep in mind arado the default scenario is made to be 50-50 in terms of one side "defeating" the other.

Which was an impossibility in WW2, the best Germany could have done is hold on with strong forces until fall 1945 and seek an armistice which would end the bloodshed. The Allies might have gone for it, depending on the terms.

Most players feel the game is 50-50 right now, I think it favors the Axis, like I said before another player equal in skill as Terif, whichever of the two chooses Axis would win 9 times out of 10.

[Blashy]

And keep in mind arado the default scenario is made to be 50-50 in terms of one side "defeating" the other.

Which was an impossibility in WW2, the best Germany could have done is hold on with strong forces until fall 1945 and seek an armistice which would end the bloodshed. The Allies might have gone for it, depending on the terms.

Most players feel the game is 50-50 right now, I think it favors the Axis, like I said before another player equal in skill as Terif, whichever of the two chooses Axis would win 9 times out of 10.

[The K Man]

I agree that you do need some "luck" in this game to make it different than the previous one you just played. But I also agree with Taojah, that some of these extremes in "luck" can also kill a good game.

I seem to have alot of "bad luck" with Russian techs, even though I have maxed out the research to 750. (Don't have the same bad luck with Germany, even though the max is also 750.) Can't figure it out. :confused:

One of my previous games (as allies) I was battling #5 tech subs, fighters, & tanks against Germany. For Russia, all I could get was 1 on tanks, and took forever to get up to 3 on fighters. For US, even though I had 5 chits in Anti-sub, the best I could do is 2. So it gets frustrating when you can not attack and barely defend.

A tweak I'd like to see (or an option) in this game regarding techs, is a limit to how far an opposing player can distance himself from the other player. (Maybe a difference of 2 tech levels the most.) So if one player is at level 2 on tanks, the most the opposing player can go is 4. (And can't go up further until the other player does.) Or another option: if a player moves up more than 2 levels, the opposing player moves up a level automaticly. In the real war, the enemy was always taking, using, & studing the opposition's technology, and upgrading its own. So as one country upgraded, the other was usually following suit. So if the axis was at level 5 tanks, you can bet that Russia would have gotten a hold of some Panthers and not be stuck on level 1 tanks. (Even if they had scientists that were not very "lucky" with their research.)

[The K Man]

I agree that you do need some "luck" in this game to make it different than the previous one you just played. But I also agree with Taojah, that some of these extremes in "luck" can also kill a good game.

I seem to have alot of "bad luck" with Russian techs, even though I have maxed out the research to 750. (Don't have the same bad luck with Germany, even though the max is also 750.) Can't figure it out. :confused:

One of my previous games (as allies) I was battling #5 tech subs, fighters, & tanks against Germany. For Russia, all I could get was 1 on tanks, and took forever to get up to 3 on fighters. For US, even though I had 5 chits in Anti-sub, the best I could do is 2. So it gets frustrating when you can not attack and barely defend.

A tweak I'd like to see (or an option) in this game regarding techs, is a limit to how far an opposing player can distance himself from the other player. (Maybe a difference of 2 tech levels the most.) So if one player is at level 2 on tanks, the most the opposing player can go is 4. (And can't go up further until the other player does.) Or another option: if a player moves up more than 2 levels, the opposing player moves up a level automaticly. In the real war, the enemy was always taking, using, & studing the opposition's technology, and upgrading its own. So as one country upgraded, the other was usually following suit. So if the axis was at level 5 tanks, you can bet that Russia would have gotten a hold of some Panthers and not be stuck on level 1 tanks. (Even if they had scientists that were not very "lucky" with their research.)

[Liam]

The K Man,

it would be nice to have an option like this in the new Update to SC2. If you destroy an enemy level3 tank on your soil and say that you've only acquired Level1 Tanks you get a 35% increase by studying the destroyed armor laying about on your soil

Likewise for some of the other techs, depending...Just an idea to balance out the luck factor to tech?

[Liam]

The K Man,

it would be nice to have an option like this in the new Update to SC2. If you destroy an enemy level3 tank on your soil and say that you've only acquired Level1 Tanks you get a 35% increase by studying the destroyed armor laying about on your soil

Likewise for some of the other techs, depending...Just an idea to balance out the luck factor to tech?

[The K Man]

Liam,

Yes, I like that idea. Even if you just damaged a level 3 tank, you should probably get a % increase for research if your still at 1. (I figure if your damaging a unit, some tanks will be left there for retrieval & study.) That would definitly balance out the luck factor on techs.

[The K Man]

Liam,

Yes, I like that idea. Even if you just damaged a level 3 tank, you should probably get a % increase for research if your still at 1. (I figure if your damaging a unit, some tanks will be left there for retrieval & study.) That would definitly balance out the luck factor on techs.

[targul]

Just finished a game as Axis didnt recieve an up in rockets for entire game even though I had 2 chits in it from the start.

I find that to be correct, however. When you begin research you never know if or when anything will develop.

What I do is develop my military based on what impoves the quickest. That means one game I have planes, next subs, then tanks etc.

[targul]

Just finished a game as Axis didnt recieve an up in rockets for entire game even though I had 2 chits in it from the start.

I find that to be correct, however. When you begin research you never know if or when anything will develop.

What I do is develop my military based on what impoves the quickest. That means one game I have planes, next subs, then tanks etc.