Matrix Games Forums

Gentlemen,

This was a wonderful experience, and I am so glad I joined you. I hate that it is over as I really wanted to "get my revenge".

Ironduke, I suspect you could have won a while ago, and I much appreciate your grand sportsmanship. This is a great scenario, kudos to its creators!

I hope to see you when 1938 rolls around (again).

Chuck

I assumed from his deployment that he had selected the french/ Burma victory conditions.

@Jonathan,

Fascinating.

You mention the "open sea", can ships in a harbor be targeted too, as in Pearl Harbor?

Chuck

Well, Gentlemen, you have the honor of being the first people to actually finish a GD 1938 game, with victory conditions kicking in.

I would like for you to, in private if you wish, to tell me what can be improved and such.

Once again, congratulations.

The airstrike that did not suffer any fighter interception (your carrier fighters were one hex away) was made prior to my declaration of war, maybe that's why there was no interception. Yes, you are allowed to do airstrikes against naval targets on the open sea without declaring war.

Yes, I noticed that too.

I wonder if it is by design, or a bug. Usually I find that it is a way for Britain to harry subs, before they declare war with Germany.

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung

@Jonathan,

Fascinating.

You mention the "open sea", can ships in a harbor be targeted too, as in Pearl Harbor?

Chuck

I don't think so. But if you send your airstrike directly on a hex that has carriers, the fighters there will intercept even if not at war. Many turns ago you killed a couple of my bombers when I sent a bomber force on a recon mission over your Brit CV force.

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung
@Jonathan,

Fascinating.

You mention the "open sea", can ships in a harbor be targeted too, as in Pearl Harbor?

Chuck

I don´t think so. But ships moored up have another weakness: They cannot flee, if engaged in a naval attack.
I once took out Pearl Harbor that way. Just parked my carriers next to Pearl, and then attacked. The funny thing was, he lost his carrier air too....

I think the Soviet Union has to much production. Don't know if you changed that with 17 or not. They should not have more then Germany.

ORIGINAL: Twotribes
I think the Soviet Union has to much production. Don't know if you changed that with 17 or not. They should not have more then Germany.

I did not change that with 2.17, but they no longer get from 0.8 combat efficiency to 1.0 with just the loss of 1 city. They now have to spend 750 PP to get from 0.75 to 1.0 and they do it only at a controlled rate of 0.01 a turn, where they need to pay 30 PPs a pop... which means, they can speed up the production as always, but they can´t speed up their fighting ability.... 25 turns it takes them to get to full, that is 2 years of game time. Spending 30 PPs a turn will really slow down your build up of economy.

Also as a direct result of the need to make Germany alittle stronger, in 2.17 Germany gets combat efficiency 1.1 to start with, instead of 1.0.

The end result is that Germany starts off with units that are 1.5 times stronger than the soviet ones.

ORIGINAL: ernieschwitz

Also as a direct result of the need to make Germany alittle stronger, in 2.17 Germany gets combat efficiency 1.1 to start with, instead of 1.0.

Maybe instead of efficiency 1.1, having Germany start out with Staff III (while keeping the other countries limited to Staff II until 1941) would be better. This would mean that the other countries could "catch up" to German efficiency in 1941, whereas with 1.1 the Germans would always be more efficient than the Western Allies, even in 1944-45.

Actually no. Not the way I made it.

The extra 10% is because of a research called Superior Doctrines, that everyone, I think, can research, for 200 PP. Which makes it cheaper than the 30 PP increases you can make each turn (until you reach 1.00). They can however research Militarism, which only non-allied countries, can do. (so no can do for Soviet Union or China). It however costs them the ability to research Coalition, so its either better troops for yourself (+.15) or better troops for your minor nations (+.20).

So the Germans would only be .15 better than the allies, could be. But, that assumes they research something. Call this an SS option, if you will.

EDIT: A German unit, of exactly the same type, as the allied unit, would then be about 1.136 times better than the allied one. Assuming both parties had chosen all the same upgrades in research, and that the Germans had chosen Militarism.

You may want to check that. I started and went through a few nations in 217 seems to my recollection even the allies can either research militarism or coalition and I don't recall seeing superior at all.

Just checked version 2.17 in the editor.

It says Militarism costs 150 PP for Germany, Italy and Japan, Superior Doctrines for Everyone at 200 PP except China. Coalition 150 PP for everyone.

Thanks for the game Chuck and Daniel and Congratulations to Jonathan.

Tom, I look forward to another game with you.

I would play this one over again with relish!

You are a gentleman, and a scholar,

Chuck