next patch?

[bo]

Two things I would like to see in the next patch if there is one. When I use the slide bar to slow down the AI units when they are on the move, it only lasts one turn and then goes back to the right and they move so fast I cant tell whats going on, I almost have to reset it in every move. The other is when a ship or a fleet of ships are destroyed I would like to be informed either at the moment or in some kind of a reportthat I can look up. as it is now I have to count the ships I have before every battle and recount them after battle, I realize this is an abstract naval game and has very little importance in the game but I would appreciate if Wastelands looked into this for me. If I am doing something wrong or there is such a report please inform me on this.

Bo

[lomyrin]

Just finished a campaign as Germany. Made England into Puppet and conquered Russia in fall of 42.  The game then ended, The USA never entered into the fight. That seems to be wrong.
 
 

[AH4Ever]

I feel there are not enough events that deal with the USA reacting to various nations being invaded / conquered.

[X(]

[Tomokatu]

All I see necessary there is a system of incremental advances in the US's diplomatic alignment towards the Alliance (exact increments for each country invaded to be decided later) with a final BIG allocation for a Pearl Harbour event. By the time of a Pearl Harbour attack, if the US's diplomatic alignment is above [a level yet to be determined] then the US joins the Alliance. [;)]
 
If the USA had already appeased Japan rather than taking the historical adamant diplomatic stance and Pearl Harbour doesn't get attacked, then the US may not join the Alliance[>:], but could still become a co-belligerent in Europe. There are already events which cater for this.
 
Next:
Would an Axis attack on the USSR reduce the USA's inclination to join the Alliance?[&:]
Would a USSR attack on the Axis reduce or increase the chance of USA joining up?

[AH4Ever]

I haven't looked at all the events already in the game but in general it seems to me that neutral nations are not reacting to possible threats as the game progresses. As for your "What If's" isn't that what the game is about? As far as I'm concerned the more the merrier.

[Tomokatu]

Definitely agree. The more events, the greater replayability of the game system.[;)][;)][;)]

[bo]

ORIGINAL: Tomokatu

Definitely agree. The more events, the greater replayability of the game system.[;)][;)][;)]

The more the merrier right Tom I agree for replay value, just a comment not a complaint as I am enjoying the game, and I think a lot of players [mainly me] see the time line of WW2 and sometimes try in this game to adhere to what happened back in the 1940's, and that is good and bad, for example there was no way the Italians could defeat the British in North Africa, but in this game it is very easy to do so even with the 1.60 patch even without German help, I am not a great war computer player, just average, but if I can defeat the British anyone can. The British are terribly outgunned by the Italians in North Africa when the Italians build good armored units, my suggestion to Wastelands in the next patch is to bring in a lot of good Armor for the British AI just to break even, but if the programmers of this game want to keep it that way [an easy Italian victory] then thats fine with me its their game and I think they are doing a very good job of listening to the forum comments. I guess sometimes I get rapped up to much in what really happened in WW2 instead of what can happen in a computer gameand I should not do that.

Bo