What we would like to see in Global SC.

[SeaMonkey]

Hope the timing is appropriate to remind our creator of what we need for metamorphosis.

1. The communication layer based upon railroads, main highways, and ports. In essence this will replace the convoy system as it will integrate that feature into an alternating sequence of delivering supplies and resources to and fro.

2. An interdiction feature to interupt the above system by use of air, ground and naval units. This would include the asked for naval surface raiders and may require a zone based naval system, somewhat on the lines of World in Flames with the search calculations.

3. An inherent resource layer that allows assigning generic tiles/hexes with a transferable MPP value. This would create a potential value in all areas that necessitates them a need to be protected/garrisoned.

that's the beginning, I don't want to over extend my welcome.

[scottsmm]

I just want to add a few things to what SM has said and that would be to use something similar to Nupremal's mod's Europe, I personally think his map of Europe is absolutely as close to perfect as possible (Europe), but I'm against all the restricted area's in his map as I think it takes some of the fun away, because you have to play by the history books. Maybe one small change to his Europe map would be to add in more sea tiles in the English Channel to make an invasion easier.

Obviously use PT as the base engine, as I think a lot of us have really enjoyed all the new features that have come up in this expansion .

Make places like Africa smaller (besides northern Africa) as this will enable the creator to make more important areas bigger such as Asia, etc.

Finally this is likely going to happen either way, make it so you can add major countries without having to get rid of another major country. For example don't get rid of France as a major country so that Japan can be a major, etc. That's all for now.

[Colin I]

Global games are tricky - SPI tried a few times with WWII and WWIII and they never seemed as good as the theatre specific games this publisher and others produced. You either have to abstract a lot or assume most of the map is of minor importance.

SC/WaW/PTO do do strategic warfare well in the sense you can attack supply sources and ports and disrupt land transport.

A gobal game would need changes in the diplomacy system and a more sophisticated political model.

Operational movement would need a range limit.

[emf]

Here is something that I would like to see changed for any new game going forward. Currently when a player builds a unit (of any type) he may place it anywhere he want's to provided the game allows it. I find this concept completely unrealistic. It's most noteable with German naval units. The German player may build a naval unit before he conquers France. After France is conquered the German player may place the naval unit in any port he controls (provided there's a land link) including French ports on the Atlantic. It dosen't seen likely to me that a naval unit started in one port would be finished in another port.

So here is my proposal: When a player builds a unit he must specify which tile it appears in after it is built. If the tile has been captured, at any point before the unit appears, then the unit is eliminated.

What do ya'll think?

Eric

[Nupremal]

really? all you need to use is "home builds" as per mine and that is not an issue - can only build in home territory. That is already in the game.

[emf]

I must be ahead of my self, since I wrote this today and I see that I posted it yesterday!?!?

Anyway the "home builds" is not quite what I had in mind. I figure that most building takes place in and around the cities. When you start building a unit, materials are brought to a factory. If the city, with the factory, is captured then the unit being built should be eliminated, instead of just being moved to another city. I just can't see 1/2 of a battleship being moved from one port to another port, especialy if it means a journey through enemy contested waters.

[SeaMonkey]

Some good suggestions here, especially Colin's air op move restriction.

Now what about units? I tend to agree with emf's logic, but it might be a bit picky noting Nupremal's "home build" response.

Now about those units, how about a more battlegroup friendly philosophy? You know, where you pick a basic foundation like armor or infantry and attach the assets, anti-air, anti-tank, artillery, engineers, heavy armor, assault/special weapons, perhaps even a motor pool for that all important mobility feature?

You could do it through the build Q or use your HQs to coordinate the additional asset allocations.

I'll be back.

You've been warned!

[scottsmm]

So you basically build your own special units? If this is the case it definitely will raise quite a few questions.

Personally what I would like to see in global SC is special units such as the Imperial Guard, the SS Leibstandarte, the British SAS and other important special units have a class of their own with the best attack defense values because nations such as Nazi Germany and Japan made sure this units where always equipped and trained with the latest advancements. In other words I want to see super powerful select group of units which will simply brush other normal enemy units aside, and when these units clash whoever wins the clash I think should lead to a morale boast to all units of that respected country, and it should also demoralize the super unit's side which lost, especially in that area in which the unit fell. After all if the strongest unit in a faction such as Nazi Germany fell then other inferior German units wouldn't feel so invincible. Of course the number of these super units will need to be low no more than 2 per major country (not counting Italy, China, or France) these countries can have 1 super unit.

[Colin I]

Do not think you need special elite units. You choose which units to reinforce and upgrade so can give priority to your favourite. You can add elite levels. You can preserve important units (protect with cannon fodder). You can make sure they always have HQ support.

In other words do all the things that really done to make the Pazer Lehr, Russian Guards, US Screaming Eagles or others powerful and special.

Game actually covers this well - maybe with a little tweaking of the experience system.

[scottsmm]

can see where you are coming Colin, but I think it would be nice to have these great units play a bigger role in the game. Of course if you wanted to (expecting they don't change the editor too greatly and its freedoms) you could design these units yourself, it's just then you would have to get rid of another unit (likely SF). Unless they allow you to create your own units from scratch with the editor (I'd love this) ....

[emf]

I think the weather needs a bit of work for the Global War. I just ran through the Fall and Winter turns and noticed that there was snow in the lower part of South America during their summer (which would be the north's winter). I know I'm being picky, but it would be nice to take the different seasons north and south of the Equator into concideration.

[The K Man]

I'd like to see the world map, the same scale as the other games (WAW, PDE, and Pacific.) I tried playing the world map campaign, and didn't like it because the scale of the map was so much smaller than what I was use to in WAW (Fall Weiss.) France was just so small, it seemed like the Germans were marching into Paris as they crossed the border.

[Nupremal]

You are not talking about mine are you? Reason is that I gave different weather areas and accounted for north-south of equator. It is moddable as is so is not game-specific but is scenario-specific

[emf]

To Nupremal: No not yours, the one that came with the 1.09 upgrade.

[SeaMonkey]

Anyone reading this thread that has not at least looked at Vypuero's Nupremal World Campaign is doing themselves a great injustice. This is one of the best....no ....it is the best World campaign to date. It is definitely a showcase of the SC editorial features, very imaginative and captivating to play.

Get it at cmmods...before he shuts down, version 1.03 is out.

[SeaMonkey]

OK time for some controversy. Now I know there is a large crowd of SC players that like historical sets, and I agree with the context, but for a game it is necessary to bring a variation of attainable victory conditions within the grasp of either side.

I know that SC is a wargame, but perhaps it is time to leave a bit of the combat behind and use a more subtle path to victory, like Diplomacy. I for one very rarily tap into the diplomatic variations and so maybe I'm a bit at a disadvantage here presenting this deviation for SC Global. So I'd liked to hear from some of you that have embarked upon a serious diplomatic effort.

What I'm saying is, even though it could end games early, if you just start with no one at war, would we lend too much of an ahistorical edge to SC by allowing more variation through the diplomatic model?

[scottsmm]

Good idea SeaMonkey only problem is the war could be over before it's started, so although it's a good idea there needs to be strict guidelines for it to ever have a chance to be in any SC game imo. Because after all if you win the game by simply inserting 5 diplomatic chits against an AI which inserts 3 then it's not really fun at all, and this is supposed to be a game in which you have fun right?

So basically what I'm saying is have the situation be similar to storm of steel in which 5/6of the major combatants were neutral. Only have it be (since it's a Global game) set to 37’ with the Second Sino Japanese war. This way Europe is neutral, and with good guidelines will give the player the opportunity to prepare his or her troops for battle, but not upset the game balance too greatly.

[SeaMonkey]

Fair enough Scott, but I'm not talking about the present diplomatic model. I'm invisioning something where different countries, dependent upon their historical levels of influence locally and regionally, exercise the manipulation of other countries.

For example, say a country that historically exercises a lot of influence worldwide, Britain, makes an investment in the current medium, chits, but also moves a strong naval contingent into proximity of the targeted country. Let's say they also land some troops nearby on a cooperative allie's shores simulating some training maneuvers.

Such "strong arm" tactics inconjunction with a monetary consideration generates a situation where the targeted country takes a greater percentage leaning to the "program". The factors are all entered into the equation and the outcome calculated per turn. What are some other diplomatic parameters for the equation's variables?

Further, imagine an "incident" occurs when two different theological perspectives are trying to exercise influence on the same country, a naval mishap occurs. Wars don't necessarily need to start from a DoW.

[scottsmm]

Well then I still think it's a good idea, but seriously SeaMonkey it still needs some strict guidelines. I've also come to the conclusion if this is implemented into SC then everyone who is on the SC team definitely has their work cut out for them, with all the countries this could happen to, what's the chance you get the desired effect, or what if GB diplomatic mission backfires when that country get's word of a practiced invasion close to its own shores.

[PowerGmbH]

Well to the Diplo some detail:

If you may set that the activity of a Mayor influences not only on Diplo to any Minor but also via Adjacent Mouvements, Port Blockings or similar:

HOW TO SHOW AN AVERAGE PLAYER WHAT Activities will trigger an event???

here would be the key.

Imagine USA will force Brazil to get active. US PLayer invests some Chits, and so on , but where shall he put his Navy or which places would be an Incentive for positive Brazil response? Could some US Navy around Brazilian waters not naturally also trigger a leaning towards Axis?

So how to make a rule that any average Player naturally understands`?

[Nupremal]

way too complicated an idea - try to stick to tweaks that make more sense within the game system. Some examples for me that would make the game better:

1) Moddable units - so we can create our own

2) A less linear combat system, for example where defense is more like actual "armor" so that higher defense takes lower casualties

3) A less random research system, where there is a random effect but where you slowly gain the technology anyway, so bad luck doesnt accumulate into a loss - can be optional

4) More flexible convoys - so you can have convoys from any nation to any other - for example can start with russian convoys to germans, and when russia reaches enough activation towards allies it is cut off (ie oil/resources deal they had). Also - multiple convoys and routes (example - usa can have LL all over - australia, uk, russia via murmansk, persia, siberia... Would like some that can be adjusted, others cannot be (say a min/max) - this is to show some that can't be adjusted as they represent a weakness = trade that if cut causes economy damage.

of course more than enough Minors and Majors - up to 10 Major and 100 Minor say.

[dhucul]

Good ideas guys. All are being bandied around by us in the beta testing forum.

At the top of the list are changes to the diplomatic system, restrictions on op movement, surface raiding and blockades and some other goodies.

I have read all of the posts and submitted my own priorities in the beta testing forum.

Stay tuned. I think this will be the best release yet.

[scottsmm]

How about this very simple change which will give major countries the capability to switch sides, from Axis to allied, and vice versa. Realistically the US in the pre-war years was an ally of Japan supplying them with oil, and the USSR was an ally of Germany in the pre-war years as well. It would therefore be a good idea to give major countries the ability to switch sides, after all you can do it to minor countries so why not major countries? Then again this could have already been addressed?

[emf]

It might be an interesting idea to have the ability to create convoys during the game. If Germany puts DPs into Venezeula, at some % activation, a convoy would be created to ship oil to Germany. The Axis player should be able to direct the path of that convoy. This could be expanded to allow all players to move the paths of convoys during the game. Of course this would mean that the other side would not be able to see the path.

[emf]

Here is another idea for neutrals. I'm sure such things were discussed before but I can't remember. Where do all the points spent on DPs go? I would suggest they should be spent by the country in a random fashion, reinforcing, upgrading, or building new units, building fortifications, antiair for resources. Perhaps building infrastructure, like roads and railroads. This might go hand in hand with putting limitations on how the points are to be spent. For example if Germany spends points on Spain it might be required that Spain buys a certain type of unit. Maybe you can say here's x$; you get all if you do this, or 1/2 if you don't.

Another idea is to allow influance other than DPs, such as transfering technology or loaning a unit.