Common defaults for Head to Head

[Dragonheart]

Additionally to the common used houserules in the Panzerliga (already stated by sombra)i played some games with special houserules which are making the game more SC 1 like. Defending is also a bit easier in that way.

-IW Limit 1

-Mot Limit 1

-HT Limit 2

-LR Limit 2

-no dipl. influence on majors

[Sombra]

Hellraiser I am getting worried that we are thinking much alike.

I don´t want to see restrictions for viable strategies in form of : And if any german soldier puts its foot on american soil god will strike him down in form of 20 armies. I think Blashys suggestion regarding Turkey is a little bit cheesey but I think it would work in some way.

Still I would prefer solutions based on the game mechanics: Why didn´t we see many Turkey attacks from the axis in SC1 ?

1. Because you need your units for Barbarossa

2. attacking in SC1 was quite hard.

Some solution for the situation could be: Player is able to move/reinforce and entrench troops from a minor country when its activation is over 60% ( at this point you could consider a nation "friendly" toward one side of the conflict) Benefits would be: Move troops in defend positions (much) harder to cut Turkey of and attacks on minors would be much harder after the first few "Blitzkriege" of the axis. To prevent cheesey gameplay you could forbid to attack nations with activation > 60%

Minor nations should be affected more if their direct neighbor is attacked. Iran should be getting nervous if Iraq is taken over and vice versa.

Problem for me right now we only discuss "penalties" for the axis if they do something which makes sense from the game mechanics without any further restrictions for the allies. for me something is simply wrong with the game if you don´t need your troops in Rusia and you can easily conquer any country even if it has the best defensible terrain in the "world"

[ May 30, 2006, 01:58 AM: Message edited by: Sombra ]

[Dragonheart]

Minors doesnt have the same role like in SC 1 anymore....so one dont need to care about penalties or entrenchment for them.

The only minors i attack are Denmark,Benelux i dont care the others..well sometimes greece and yugslavia....giving a war entry of usa in july 1942.

[hellraiser]

So do I.

But, if I decide to go for a long game instead of going fast for the victory conditions, I will hit Norway and not necessarily for the mpps but to deny allies a closer base to Germany. OFC the turn before USA joins Leaving the Baltic exposed to allied raiding ain't a smart ideea.

If things go ugly in Russia, you can always retreat back to your high supply areas and divert some forces to capture some more minors - if you go for an attrition war (because of previous mistakes or just because you wanna have a fun game), minors collecting is necessary

[Blashy]

I don't see it as historical nonsense, the enemy is at the gate of your most valuable resources. Bring in troops!

Lets see, let Japan have some part of Siberia or let Germany have access to oil rich caucaucus...

Dragonheart, those limits are terrible, talk about limiting gameplay. I've had IW3 for Russia before barbarossa and you should see the cost for the Axis to take out those city holding troops and have them entrench and it is terrible for Axis.

I usually always have equal IW and AT weapons or better than Axis with USSR.

[Dragonheart]

@Blashy Why this limits are terrible? They are valid for both sides. In that way you will need not only one unit to kill another unit but maybe up to 3 like in SC 1.

I did not recommand to play with this limits its just a test from my side to make the game a bit more strategically.

Meanwhile i have finished 2 of this low tech games and they proved to be very interesting long-term-games decided in 1945.

IMO the attack values make SC 2 to a slugfest the one bringing more units into the field in one certain spot wins the battle and mostly the game.

Concerning your entrenched IW 3 russians..you can forget them ..i hit them with 3 Air first then with a tank and any minor unit is finishing them off.

With no tech limits the germans will get moskov in latest 1942, Stalingrad in 1943 and Sverdlovsk in 1944 .....the west....well ...the first time they can really involve in the war is mid 1943 with USA entry mid 1942.

[Blashy]

I think you'll love the first patch .

[Dragonheart]

maybe ..but atm i come along with some houserules.

[Blashy]

BTW, you people are obviously not toying with Intelligence too much.

I`m in a game right now where I`ve had 2 chits in IW since 1939 and 5 chits in HT right after that.

It is July 1944 and I still have IW2 and HT3.

Most likely because my opponent invested in Intelligence and I did not until 1944.

[hellraiser]

True, Blashy we don't invest much (at all , in fact) in intel tech as you don't have time for it if you plan to end the game in 42 if not late 41

[Rolend]

Were there no Russian troops in the Caucasus Pre German invasion? Couldn't you just give Russia a few more troops and tie them to the Caucasus? I hate the idea of no Turkey invasion by Germans because I think it would of been a valid aproach for Germany.

Put a bunch of resources into finishng off the Middle East, push up into Iraq, Iran then DOW Turkey in 41 all the while keeping enough forces in Poland to keep the Russians 'honest' Once Germany had the Middle East and Turkey they could DOW on Russia and make the 'big' push through the Caucasus while driving East out of Poland.

Once the Caucasus and Stalingrad fell( if they did) and large portions of Western Russian had fallen, even if Moscow and Leningrad still held the Germans might of been able to force a peace on Russia. Yea I know a long strecth but more doable I think then what they really did.