jon_j_rambo Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 What's with the USA limits on Armies? Gee, can those four,"I'll never be in supply Armies do anything significant"? SC2 screws over the USA. I made the same complaints about SC, never fixed. Is the USA going to be fixed for SC2? Is the USA going to get there due? Obviously, Blashy & the rest of the AntiUSA testers aren't going to promote the USA because of their politics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fartknock3r Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Oh god... is all you do play the game, check the USA out, and then come in here and tell us? It's pretty easy for me to be able to Launch a strong D-Day in late 1943, with THOSE 4 armies, a paratrooper, a HQ, and another HQ with 2 fighters and a bomber in britian, all with good tech. Rambo, maybe you should have the UK coordinate D-Day with the Americans. Do you even do that? [ June 17, 2006, 08:59 AM: Message edited by: Fartknock3r ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted June 17, 2006 Author Share Posted June 17, 2006 CrackKnocker --- Kid, I've played you, you stink. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fartknock3r Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 You've never played me. You only played me once, and that was until Winter 1939. I doubt you can say i suck when you only played me for 3 turns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavka_CCCP Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Rambo is correct, How is it that France, Spain or some of the other minor countries have more armies than USA? Or the USSR having a limit of tanks similar to the Germans? Surely the Germans were not able to build as many tanks as the Soviet Union Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rclawson007 Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 It's not such much how many tanks the Russians built as how many were in action at one time. Plus, there is the matter of game balance. The Russians, in a typical game, will get to rebuild their Tanks units more than the Germans. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fartknock3r Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Thats right, its all about game balance. If the USA was able to produce as much as it did historically, then the game would be broken and unbalanced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dicedtomato Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 The game is right and wrong (in contrast to Rambo, who is almost always wrong). The U.S. fielded a small army relative to its size. There was a deliberate decision to create no more than 90 divisions (the Germans had over 300). The U.S. had six armies in Europe by 1945, so the game isn't off by much. However, SC2 is wrong in that Hubert doesn't understand how the U.S. Army worked. There may not have been a lot of armies, but there a HUGE number of non-divisional assets (tanks, artillery, trucks, etc.) that were kept in a central pool and assigned to the armies as needed. So a U.S. army like Patton's Third should pack a lot more firepower and mobility than a German or Soviet army. One way to reflect this is to have the U.S. start with IW1 or IW2. DT Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Night Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Why don't we allow the U.S. to have overstrength units eariler and cheaper? Maybe if you made each army say 12-13 Str it would more accuratley simulate what dicedtomato is talking about? One thing is for certain, the U.S. had a lot more men the SC2 represents. I even think the bombers are under represented since it is such a task to get just 2 bomber fleets with 1 nation, and without atleast 2 you really can't do much damage to anything. In reality we had so many damn planes germany was bombed day and night in coordination with the British. I simply believe a lot of people in Europe are so ignorant that they would rather the U.S. didn't build an army at all as long as it meant America wouldn't have so much pride in itself. 1 word, eurotrash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Spinello Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 AFAIK the programmer of the game is Canadian ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Here, read on the issues of manpower for USA during WW2, YES! They actually did have manpower issues... http://www.militaryhistoryonline.com/wwii/usarmy/manpower.aspx I have pretty much everything on the board by 1944 as USA, and usually my 3 bombers are ravaging the Axis in France and Germany. All of my gear is teched out quite highly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sombra Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Rambo you can choose. Either the US were cowards and even if they had all these super armies they were not joining out of fear or spite of the English. Or simply they had to build up their troops and this is the reason they started D-DAy in 1944 when everything was already decided anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted June 17, 2006 Author Share Posted June 17, 2006 U.S.Army is complete garbage in SC2. Yippee, 4-Armies. Tech sux. Supply sux. Well, in real life, we know the truth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Total manpower from 1940-1945: UK: 23 million USA: 38 million Germany: 40 million USSR: 49 million Japan: 21 million Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted June 17, 2006 Author Share Posted June 17, 2006 Exactly, so USA only gets 4-Armies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavka_CCCP Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 According to your numbers Blashy the USA should have a pool limit comparable to Germany. Why dont the Germans have a pool limit of 4 armies? This of course would disappoint the Bunta lovers who idolize the Nazis because they like their uniforms Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 How much of those 38 million was on the PTO, or did you forget they were fighting on 2 fronts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavka_CCCP Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Also how about tank strength for the US? If i recall the Shermans had a 5+ to 1 advantage to anything the Buntas had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Originally posted by Stavka_CCCP: Also how about tank strength for the US? If i recall the Shermans had a 5+ to 1 advantage to anything the Buntas had. And this can not happen in SC2? Keep in mind that 75% or more of the German forces were in Russia. If a player in SC2 decides to lower this to 50% and bring that extra 25% to the Estern front, the Allies will be hurting. Remember that with only 25% of its force Germany still managed to hold the Allies in France for a year. Mind you if Germany had pulled out more troops in Russia, they would have most likely been rolled over. [ June 17, 2006, 12:50 PM: Message edited by: Blashy ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 And keep in mind that produced and OPERATIONAL are two different things. Alot of stuff was being produced by USA, TONS of stuff, alot of it was not operational due to a lack of... manpower. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted June 17, 2006 Author Share Posted June 17, 2006 Our squads also had the best equipment. BARs were standard. IT'S A FACT US TROOPS WOULD RALLY QUICKER, this should be reflected in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted June 17, 2006 Author Share Posted June 17, 2006 And keep in mind, Blashy hates the USA, always dissing us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stavka_CCCP Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Its obvious Rambo the USA is hated. Remember that a lot of wargamers have this fantasy of German Myth being supermen. This of course is what sells. Of course these are the same supermen who got their butts kicked by the so called "Inferior race" as they called it. Every has thise false belief that everything German was superior to the allies. I guess they never heard of a T34 tank, P51 Mustang, Ect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted June 17, 2006 Share Posted June 17, 2006 Originally posted by Stavka_CCCP: Its obvious Rambo the USA is hated. Remember that a lot of wargamers have this fantasy of German Myth being supermen. This of course is what sells. Of course these are the same supermen who got their butts kicked by the so called "Inferior race" as they called it. Every has thise false belief that everything German was superior to the allies. I guess they never heard of a T34 tank, P51 Mustang, Ect. Anyone who thinks that is uninformed, just like anyone who thinks the war was won by anyone else but the Russians is uninformed. Give those Ruskies credit, they had the Germans on the Run while we the Allies were landing in Africa. Germany had a lot going for it, but their political doctrine was to be their downfall from the start. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted June 17, 2006 Author Share Posted June 17, 2006 @Stavka_CCCP --- Nice take, rack 'em! Obviously the spirit of truth is upon you. May the force be with you. -Darth Legend Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts