Next Patch

[Forwarn45]

I was wondering what is being planned for the next patch and when it is expected?

[Dave Ferguson]

What I would like to see:
1.  improvement to the pbem feedback with a pop up of each battle hex showing units/odds/casualties
2.  some high mountain hexes changed to unplayable, parts of the alps, caucasus etc were impassible to any units
3.  add some persian gulf hexes and a port, plus a transport loop hex.
4.  some changes to carriers v ground units
5.  consider giving egypt a major capital to allow strategic movement
 
Dave

[YohanTM2]

Also, need to address:

1. Ploesti oil bug
2. German manpower and oil

Reason I add point to is that in every game I have played that gets into 1943 Germany runs out of both way to soon. Basically it forces Germany to go for a quick war or they are dead. Not neccessarily ahistorical but certainly no fun.

I'm not sure they play tested many games that go right until the end.

[SMK-at-work]

Spain needs strat movement more than Egypt does!!

[targul]

I have still not had much difficulty with oil but I do find the manpower to drop way to early.  I believe we need at least 100 more manpower for the Germans.    I also think the Italians have too much manpower.

This probably means I build too much infantry and not enough tanks but I really dont build tanks.  I find there shock value to be too low to make them cost effective.

I instead build alot of mech infantry very cheap and fast.  I also build Infantry infantry and then I build some infantry.

[IrishGuards]

And you wonder why you are low on MP ... What a riot .. [:'(]
And good take away the Spanish ability to amph with its Inf corps .. [X(]
IDG

[marklv]

What really needs to be fixed is that we need options to keep the USA and/or the USSR as neutral states throughout.  A diplomacy option is also needed, and I also believe that German forces are too underpowered throughout the game. 

[marklv]

ORIGINAL: targul

I have still not had much difficulty with oil but I do find the manpower to drop way to early.  I believe we need at least 100 more manpower for the Germans.    I also think the Italians have too much manpower.

This probably means I build too much infantry and not enough tanks but I really dont build tanks.  I find there shock value to be too low to make them cost effective.

I instead build alot of mech infantry very cheap and fast.  I also build Infantry infantry and then I build some infantry.

The manpower allocations seem quite accurate to me. They are based in proportion to population, and are pretty close to historical accuracy.

What seems not so accurate is the strength/firepower of German units, which seems too low to me.

[targul]

Markley I also think the German army is underpowered.  They seem to have very little anywhere.  Not sure why.  They have adequate forces but not the correct distribution or it maybe that I am used to games with better overall historic distribution.
 
France without a Atlantic Wall is just not correct.  Maybe they could make something like a beach fort unit so we get the feel of an Atlantic Wall.  Lack of Amph makes this kinda silly though since no way to fight to get on a beach.  Game is sure missing alot of the appeal of WWII.  It is fun but really off target. 
 
Would be kewl to see an Atlantic Wall with units and amph with some sort of shock value to assault with to make game feel more like WWII>
 
 

[Dave Ferguson]

ORIGINAL: marklv

What really needs to be fixed is that we need options to keep the USA and/or the USSR as neutral states throughout.  A diplomacy option is also needed, and I also believe that German forces are too underpowered throughout the game. 

Why keep the USA/USSR neutral? There is no point in playing the game if either applies as the USA is supplying a large part of the western allies war effort and the USSR is the IMPORTANT front in WW2. A total waste of time playing without them!.

We do need a political consequences option so that some of the daft gamey stuff can be eliminated, OK it can be partially achieved by house rules. No need to go into detail or argument here but especially irritating are:

Invading Denmark/Sweden/Holland/Spain etc etc etc
Fixed activation dates for Italy/USA/USSR etc etc

Plus another for my wish list

Some cost for amphib operations, it is depressingly easy to amphib with nations that had NO such capability
Something like this:
A unit attempting to land on enemy/neutral territory tests to see if a friendly fighter or carrier is in air combat range, if not penalties such as chance of loss etc are applied.

Dave

[SMK-at-work]

Why keep the USA/USSR neutral? There is no point in playing the game if either applies as the USA is supplying a large part of the western allies war effort and the USSR is the IMPORTANT front in WW2. A total waste of time playing without them!.

So that German fanboys can get their rocks off by bringing on the new world order....if only in their sad little minds!![:D][:D][:D]

[targul]

German fanboys is that like those guys who run around holding unbrellas over the heads of people.

[Dave Ferguson]

ORIGINAL: targul

German fanboys is that like those guys who run around holding unbrellas over the heads of people.

?????

[Dave Ferguson]

Looking at the general script and wonder what this might be for
 
/*Politics*/
AXIS_DOW_PENALTY 0 /*Country morale decreases by this amount on first DOW*/
AXIS_DOW_PENALTY_INCREASE 0 /*For every next DOW, the penalty gets larger and larger*/

[SMK-at-work]

ORIGINAL: targul

German fanboys is that like those guys who run around holding unbrellas over the heads of people.

[:D][:D] Pretty much as useful!!

But for those who don't know, there are plenty of WW2 gamers who admire everything German from WW2 - they see everythign German as the epitomy of technology and organisation and order.

They are not necessarily Nazi's or "right wing", although some are, however they love Panthers and Tigers and Me-262's and are seriously pissed that history allowed such lovely weapons to be defeated, especially by the chattering masses!

Dave interesting find......looks like something's been planned for.....

[firepowerjohan]

Was an old effectiveness drop rule that is inactive currently.

[marklv]

Why keep the USA/USSR neutral? There is no point in playing the game if either applies as the USA is supplying a large part of the western allies war effort and the USSR is the IMPORTANT front in WW2. A total waste of time playing without them!.

You've missed the point here. I want to explore historical options, like what would have happened if the Germans had chosen a Mediterrenean offensive in 1941 instead of attacking Russia. This makes the game more interesting, so it should be available as an option. Otherwise, if play as the German player, you are almost certain to lose and every game just becomes a variation on the inevitable. That's not what I'm looking for.

[targul]

Marklv I would normally agree with you.  This game is way off historically so testing these options would only result in game difference not what was possible by the Axis. 

[SMK-at-work]

You've missed the point here. I want to explore historical options, like what would have happened if the Germans had chosen a Mediterrenean offensive in 1941 instead of attacking Russia.

 
Those options would be great if they were backed up by realistic considerations - however the game is just simplistic - you can move units anywhere you like, you can invade whoever you like...there are no consequence, there is no limit (essentially) to how much shipping you can use, or how removing shipping from the economy to supply a massive force in Nth Africa affects production, how internal politics pans out for "you" if you let the commie bastards build up for another year, and all that sort of stuff.
 
so by having this kind of "optional" scenario you're not doing a "what if" at all IMO - you're actually getting further and further from any kind of simulation of alternate realities.
 

This makes the game more interesting, so it should be available as an option.

 
more interesting for some, but certainly not all.  There is no reason at all why it "should" be included - "could" is a more reasonable auxiliary verb to use in this context [:)]

[targul]

SMK I am amazed you seem to have much the same idea of wargaming as I.  We both want tons of options but we want them based in some sort historical fact based world.
 
Glad to have someone other then me that feels that way. 
 
I keep hearing this if you make the game historically no reason to play it cus you are just repeating history.  But I do not agree.  I want the game based on history and then to try to use that basis to win within the parimeters of WWII.  That just gives me a greater feel of victory then just winning a game.