RE: Why build tactical bombers? An in-depth discussion of the problem from all angles.
Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 6:48 pm
Well, I guess that's the best we can hope for at the time being, but thanks for replying anyway. [:)]
What's your Strategy?
https://forums.matrixgames.com:443/
I did not say that tactical bomber land attack should be increased to 8. I said that the world average for tactical bomber land attack should be increased to 8.
1.202 puts back the rules the way they were with regards to airborne (and I think other units moved by heavy bombers). This is not something that could be adjusted in a modded scenario. The 1.202 version should be posted this week.
ORIGINAL: TRL
What I would like for Christmas:
A scenario that starts out pre-invasion of poland. The current scenarios mean you have bascally have to invade France right away.
What if Japan invaded the East Indies instead of attacking Pearl Harbor and the Philippines and thus made it hard for Roosevelt to convince the American people to go to war over a bunch of Dutch islands in the Pacific
In reality, if the Japanese had not attacked America, Roosevelt would have probably tried to provoke them or make an incident by putting U.S. forces into harm's way so that shots would be fired and an act of war committed by the Japanese against America. Pearl Harbor sufficed in real life after Roosevelt ordered the Pacific fleet there from California. This would also give the Western Allies player a vested interest in the Southwest Pacific as well as forcing him to put his military out there where it would be more vulnerable and likely to end up in combat as he tried both to occupy islands before the Japanese did, and corner the Japanese into attacking and giving the U.S. a reason to go to war.
I had a hard time keeping myself from breaking up laughing when I read that.Do away with the arbitrary time requirements. Neither Roosevelt or Stalin awoke one morning at said "January 1st, 1942 (or 3), time to declare war on the Axis!
Great idea. However, it has already come up in a previous thread, where I have posted some of my thoughts on the subject in the past: Click here to view itAdd more territories to Siberia. Does anyone really believe the Japanese could have made it all the way to the Urals, much less maintained any realistic combat capability there? Certainly not anywhere near as easily as it can be done in the game.
4) Allow allies to occupy each others territories. Sometimes the best defense is an isolated enemy territory that prevents the allies of that enemy from getting at you. It makes no sense.
5) Allow transports and ships of allies to occupy the same areas. Why couldn't German and Japanese transports or shipping occupy, or at least pass through the same area?
10) Jeep carriers, small, cheap, fast to build. Tac air was good against submarines, when they could reach them.

ORIGINAL: TRL
What else I would like for christmas:
1) Separation of the United States and Great Britain. The United States did not declare war on Germany after Peal Harbor. Hitler stupidly, though loyally, declared war on America. One of the fun aspects of a game such as WAW is supposed to be the "what if" possibilities. What if you don't make the same mistakes as the actual leaders? What if Germany does not stupidly declare war on America and thus leaves Roosevelt unable to convince the American people to go to war with Germany when they already have an actual enemy in the Pacific? What if Japan invaded the East Indies instead of attacking Pearl Harbor and the Phillipines and thus made it hard for Roosevelt to convince the American people to go to war over a bunch of dutch islands in the Pacific when we did not care that the Nazi's ground their actual country underfoot.