Common defaults for Head to Head

[Gavrok]

What are the common list of options that need to be switched on/off for a pvp...ie

soft builds on I now believe is one ,

and I know re disabling 'undo move'.

Are there any other options?

What are the current moves/ tactics that are suggested as 'banned'to make the scenario fairer ie

using americans and italians naval whilst neutral to spot

Anything re sealion?

no amphib landing on major on declaration of war?

Any others out there?

Want to ensure if I host a game that I use all the options as expected

G

[Jollyguy]

I think soft build limits should be default on in patch 1.01, to allow more varation. And I don't know why undo moves is default on, as I set up games not even knowing this was on, it should be default off.

Bob

[Sombra]

1. Allied DoW at USA forbidden. Rom Gambit forbidden (i.e. the allied attack on Rome during the first turn of DoW)

2. Italy, USA and Russia are not allowed to move ships or transports away from their coast before they are at war. Exception: Italy is allowed to move ships/transports from port to port to be able to reach its african colonies.

3. Axis has to take Cairo as soon as possible after the defenders are defeated.

4. Axis DoW at Turkey forbidden.

5. Axis landings in USA or Canada forbidden before England has been conquered.

6. Sealion forbidden before Russia is in the war.

[Gavrok]

Number 6 seems a bit too dramatic wiping out one whole axis strategy! Also allows UK to leave UK totally ungarrisoned to aid the middle east

Would have prefered instead it to be:

a) before Egypt or Gibralter captured.....freeing up Italian naval resources therefore to assist...

or

no sealion before jan 41

G

[Jollyguy]

I also don't agree with no Sealion. Plus, the pending first patch is probably going to modify many things.

1) Agree on both, but Allied/US will probably be patched.

2) Transports, yes, not sure about US navy, as they were aggressively friendly Allied non-combatants, and started escorting convoys etc. The Kearney and especially Reuben James suffered casualites. IMO the US navy units, which appear relatively late, should be able to assist the RN in spotting subs. Here's a link. http://www.ww2pacific.com/bellacts.html

3) Agree. Gamey not too.

4) Patch may fix this. We'll find out.

5) Absolutely agree. We'll see what patch does.

6) Don't agree.

[Blashy]

A LOT of what Sombra and Jollyguy state has been fixed for the first patch, I suggest you wait.

No DoW on Turkey I don't get why.

NOTE: Softbuild limits I've discovered are not favorable and somewhat unrealistic.

1- You can build more units via paying more, but spending more money won't produce more Manpower.

2- It gives the Axis an advantage that was actually a weakness in WW2, MANPOWER, you can buy alot of extra corps for cheap once you have PT at 3.

So somehow spending extra money is CREATING soldiers, must be some cloning tech I have not heard about, hehe.

[Colin I]

Why is turn one attack on Rome after DOW forbidden? Now Italy can redeploy units before it is at war it should be able to protect Rome adequately.

In SC1 it strikes me as more gamey as Italien deployment was predictable.

[Edwin P.]

I too don't understand why no DOW on Turkey.

[Fireball]

I dont think that not taking Cairo is gamey. If Germany knows that the public or leadership in USA/Russia is concerned about a conquered Egypt than it sounds logical to delay such a conquest as part of the strategy.

Fireball

[hellraiser]

Explanation for no DOW on Turkey: when Barbarossa starts, russia is simply unable to defend everywhere. A defence of Caucasus is possible only if the Axis track supply to a lvl 5 city; if Axis capture Turkey. they get lvl 8 cities (+ mid east goes up to 8 via the turkish land link) and they can easily cross the Caucasus and steal all the goodies there. With Caucasus lost, it is game over for the Allies.

Because, to put it simply, Russia is piss poor at the start of Barbarossa and can barely defend her european part. Losing those resources that early shifts the MPP balance way out of whack in Axis' favour.

This rule is a result of some MP games in which Axis took the Caucasus option - really it cannot be done anything about it left aside for emptying the whole european part of USSR and reinforcing Caucasus.

I think Yoda, Condor, Sombra and some others can confirm my post.

[Eikelhoofd]

Yeah, but when German forces would be all around Cairo, the Americans would know so and would laso boost their readiness IMO...it's just too gamey to wait around Cairo, like that would help in real life....

[SeaMonkey]

Only house rule I like is no amphibs larger than corps size.

Got to go with Blashy, I like hard build limits.

[hellraiser]

Regarding the 'no neutral transports allowed to block tiles or spot' - it is not about what historically USA did to help UK while being still neutral it is about finding a balance for a MP game. Using neutral transports to block tiles means Axis/allies cannot reach certain spots on the map, otherwise legit spots, and spotting subs is gamey as well because there is no price to pay for these actions - germany cannot just DOW USA in 40 for the sake of sinking 2 US corps transports spotters ...

Sealion forbidden before Russia is in: yes it bears the risk of UK flooding Egypt with troops and leaving the home isle empty. But it is a bad solution for a worse scenario: because it is so easy for Axis to capture UK home isle and because victory conditions are not OK right now (axis just need to hold berlin, rome, paris, london and moscow for a victory) and because there is no way for Russia to defend Moscow if 3/4 of the Axis' army targets it in 1941 - this means game ends in 41 in a major victory for Axis.

In a older thread (one containing Rambo vs Jollyguy AAR) Terif and myself explained in more details these facts - a result of a game we played where this scenario actually took place (Axis wiped out UK completely and concentrated in front of Moscow all their effort).

[Sombra]

Full agreement here with Hellraiser.

Regarding Cairo: Again the build up for sealion taking cairo in the last moment besides the US / rusian readiness

Turkey:

Its impossible to defend Turkey against a half skilled axis player. Long front indefensible position, nearly no increase in war readiness of US, supply for the African colonies goes up. All these are reasons why the turkey option is "good "for the axis

[Fartknock3r]

In my game vs normal dude, (which i won in mid 42 ) i had enough to defend the european part of russia and the caucasus, but what sucked was that i kept my forces there even though he didnt attack from the south. And i agree that not taking cairo is gamey, luckily, normale dude took it. I evacuated like 4 corps, 2 armies, the AF, and the HQ. I attcked France with only the UK (cuz i was stupid to attack ireland ) and then he surrendered. I think tanks are a huge deciding factor in russia.

[Blashy]

DoW Turkey is not an issue AFTER you've fixed it so Siberian troops get transfered if you enter this resource rich area.

[Sombra]

Originally posted by Blashy:

DoW Turkey is not an issue AFTER you've fixed it so Siberian troops get transfered if you enter this resource rich area.

Thats a nice idea

[bloodstar]

Best solution to a DOW by the axis on Turkey would be the following trigger script:

1) Russian Activation goes to 99 percent (if not already at war).

2) Russian transfers siberian reinforcements the next turn.

3) good chance (50% likely) Greece, Yugoslavia, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary should all take a fairly massive swing towards the Allies.

3a) Small chance (10%) that Bulgaria, Hungry, Romania, Greece and/or Yugoslavia will go neutral if formerly an axis partner.

4) Fair chance (33%) that Bulgaria, Hungry, Romania, Greece and/or Yugoslavia will DOW on Axis if not still an axis minor ally. (and to prevent gamey issues, the readiness of the US should still go up). so yes, it's theoreticly possible for a country like Romania if an axis minor partner to go neutral and then DOW on the Germans.

5) Turkey should be DAMN hard to take, it's horrible terrain for the attacker and supply should be absolutely wretched. Any attacks coming from Greece Bulgaria should have a horrible time crossing into the mainland.

6) Turkey should get more forces. at least another Army. or another pair of corps on the start.

Sure you can invade Turkey, but it should be risky and hard to do.

If you think all of these together are too much, you can always pick and choose which ones make sense to you.

[Gavrok]

hope soft buils ignore any pt development in the patch as i agree with blashy re manpower limits.

PT negates this effect so if you want these units you should really pay for 'em

still dont get the sealion restrictions......but make amphib assaults harder...the germans could not do them in 1940 period.....look how long dieppe took to plan and cock up....never mind d-day

G

[John DiFool the 2nd]

Keeping supply at a maximum of 5, as it is when

Russia is invaded, would be one step in the right

direction...

[Guest Mike]

Originally posted by Colin I:

Why is turn one attack on Rome after DOW forbidden? Now Italy can redeploy units before it is at war it should be able to protect Rome adequately.

In SC1 it strikes me as more gamey as Italien deployment was predictable.

But practicably they can't - and you an invade as early as T2 if you're really keen using Gib & Malta Corps.

[Sombra]

Originally posted by Gavrok:

still dont get the sealion restrictionsG

There is simply no way to defend against a sealion. After the turkey option wasn´t avaible a typical multiplayer games looked like this.

Mai 1940 France conquered (or earlier) , August -September 1940 Egypt conquered , meanwhile launch of sealion , end of 1940 Gb conquered. Even if you don´t defend Egypt and put all your efforts into defending GB you don´t have much of a chance aginst a full scale sealion.

Even that your only chance for GB is to bring all the troops home asap does´t leave much room for the allied player to do anything. Therefore the prohibition.

[Fartknock3r]

Originally posted by Sombra:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Gavrok:

still dont get the sealion restrictionsG

There is simply no way to defend against a sealion. After the turkey option wasn´t avaible a typical multiplayer games looked like this.

Mai 1940 France conquered (or earlier) , August -September 1940 Egypt conquered , meanwhile launch of sealion , end of 1940 Gb conquered. Even if you don´t defend Egypt and put all your efforts into defending GB you don´t have much of a chance aginst a full scale sealion.

Even that your only chance for GB is to bring all the troops home asap does´t leave much room for the allied player to do anything. Therefore the prohibition. </font>

[Sombra]

@ Fastknockr Yes , I remember our old discussion. Regarding supply : Drop HQs in the fist wave. I was sometimes the victim of a sealion and I tried it sometimes IMHO its nearly impossible to do something agaisnt it. Hey, but perhaps different style of play.

I think the first patch ( this mystical promise of slavation) will bring some changes if it is still an issue afterwards I would be glad to meet you on the battlefield. Better yet is to let Terif show you the light

[hellraiser]

@bloodstar -> bumping ussr readiness to 99% after an axis attack on Turkey is of no use because Axis will attack Turkey after the hit on USSR or during the same turn Barbarossa starts

Blashy's ideea of triggering the sibs after a dow on Turkey, although a historical nonsense , makes a lot of sense for the purpose of game balancing. Siberians are more than able to keep caucasus free unless axis' techs are way better than red ones.

OTOH, I would very much like to see the turkish option as a legit strategy because in almost every game Axis go for mid east so a turkish invasion and a caucasus strike is a logical consequence (and IMO a path that should have been followed by Adolf in '41). If only we can find a balance for this