Upcoming Patch Release Notes (unofficial)

[pyrhic]

sevastopol?

[Oleg Mastruko]

Sevastopol is not cold. [:'(][:'(]

I guess that's why big three conferred there, in Jalta, in February [8D]

O.

[Oleg Mastruko]

I was wrong!

Sevastopol is cold!

I am stupid. For a moment.

O.

[5cats]

I thought Yalta was in Iraq...
Anyhow, the ratio remains 3:1 because the cold weather just increases the defener's evasion, right? Not the ratio of victory required... (In a fortress I mean, or rough cold)

[Oleg Mastruko]

Yalta is Russian sea resort near Sebastobol. Teheran, if you meant that, is in Iran (not Iraq) - big three had the conference there, but in 43, Yalta was in 45.

O.

[Oleg Mastruko]

Hey but Sebastopol is not rough!

(What a moronic thread - and I do take my share of guilt [>:])

O.

[5cats]

Lol! What's wrong with moronic? Aside from the obvious?
Well they DID meet in Iraq at one point... I'll google it!

[Drax Kramer]

I was wrong!

Sevastopol is cold!

It's good thing that general Batov landed his 51st army at Kerch on December 26th, 1941. If he was only a week late, he would be prevented from the executing a landing by the "fact" that Sevastopol region is cold.


Drax

[MikeB]

general comments...
1/ was surprised at land bmbr using land attk against ships! no one else here...got excited!

2/ 15 extra supply for G on turn 1...might be a bit low. One might add a bonus of 10 ...when the Eastern semi-allies join Germany(Bulgaria/Rumania) ?
3/ Gain an extra supply...by taking back a move. I feel like a novice...but i feel i LOSE a supply when moving forces back.

4/ Noticed that a "land" air unit flying cap/support over a sea area with a transport....is somehow ON the transport. ie. if move the air unit to land...the transport movement is reduced to zero.(considered strategic movement) The transport will NOT move to port with a land air on it.

5/ I need to read the manual again. Combat Adviser....where/how?

6/ Would be nice [;)] to have a report identifying source listing of acquired trade resources. Maybe a separate thread(i know one sort of exists explaining the calculation) but one talking about benefits/disadvantage of G attacking Spain, Norway, Africa, Iran/Persia, etc.
For example, i feel G attack of Spain vs leaving it neutral :
if Spain captured...all 3 resources to G each and every turn.(G has to rebuild! the resources)
if neutral...1 resource to G, 1 resource to Allies.
Great opportunity to take Gibraltrar...making it easier for Italian transport in W med.

7/ The G ratio of manpower growth seems critical...more or less FORCING building of G tanks. A G INF army is out of the question! Not enought MEN!

Mike B