Page 1 of 1

Decline and Fall scenario

Posted: Sun May 17, 2015 8:49 pm
by alexvand
I've just started playing the Decline and Fall scenario, which is pretty neat, but the Allies have some terrible builds in the pipeline. No replacement lift capacity and no more Offensive Chits.

Talk about brutal!

If the axis is able to sink enough transports or amphib the Allies are toast!

Still, it's a lot of fun to play and has a much lower counter density than do the typical end game experiences I've had when playing Global War.

RE: Decline and Fall scenario

Posted: Mon May 18, 2015 4:29 pm
by bo
ORIGINAL: alex_van_d

I've just started playing the Decline and Fall scenario, which is pretty neat, but the Allies have some terrible builds in the pipeline. No replacement lift capacity and no more Offensive Chits.

Talk about brutal!

If the axis is able to sink enough transports or amphib the Allies are toast!

Still, it's a lot of fun to play and has a much lower counter density than do the typical end game experiences I've had when playing Global War.


Never tested it or played it alex. Just created a new game as I see there is no fast start. Seems pretty crowded to me [:(]

Bo

RE: Decline and Fall scenario

Posted: Mon May 18, 2015 4:52 pm
by alexvand
It's the air unit density that I find quite different. I'm used to seeing double the number of air units or even more on the map at this point in the game. (This could just be a symptom of my play style though!)

Although the land units seem pretty thin on the ground too. I usually see the Axis with more of their force pool on the map. (But I don't play with oil so that may be part of the problem.)

I'm also used to the allies having way more lift capacity for D-Day. There's barely enough to invade two coastal hexes in Europe while also providing some invasion capacity in the pacific.

Most of the units in the USA aren't going to get into the action for months.


RE: Decline and Fall scenario

Posted: Mon May 18, 2015 5:04 pm
by Centuur
Well, that lack of naval transport was a real problem for the Allies, historically. So that's perfectly all right.

The US and the CW didn't find out until late 1943 that they needed an awful lot more of shipping to make sure they could get all manpower to the frontlines...

RE: Decline and Fall scenario

Posted: Mon May 18, 2015 6:50 pm
by AlbertN
I could be wrong there, but I think also the forces laid down on the map are matching (scenario wise) the default units the game has, and not the PiF amount of airplanes.
Again I could be wrong - but that would probably justify the shortage in airplanes.

RE: Decline and Fall scenario

Posted: Tue May 19, 2015 5:47 pm
by alexvand
I don't mind it though as it leads to a very different game, which is a lot of fun. But I do find the shortage of allied shipping crippling, especially because there is none on the construction spiral, in the construction pool, or in the repair pool. With such a short game you can't even build much to help.

RE: Decline and Fall scenario

Posted: Tue May 19, 2015 8:52 pm
by michaelbaldur
If the axis is able to sink enough transports or amphib the Allies are toast!

that is also true in other sceneries, in the late game you start "removing" units from the force pool.

first of all 6 turn battleships and 5 turn cruisers ..you don“t start new ships after spring 1943.

when you reach spring 1944 there is no point in starting new transporters or subs..