RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe



Message

Taxman66 -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/15/2019 11:24:20 AM)

I hope that will be enough. It's still easy to peel off entrenchment.

I expect to be posting pictures shortly. It will be over way too soon.



PvtBenjamin -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/15/2019 1:10:12 PM)

I think if all Maginot line max entrech was 6 & they start at 3/4 that would be fine. I don't know what the logic behind Metz entrench max being 4 and starting at 1 is.



Rannug61 -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/15/2019 4:01:36 PM)

I'm in a game against Fafnir(a.k.a. the King Slayer) and he didn't go for the Maginot line but hit hard on Holland instead on turn 3. Paris fell in early June and in early august he landed in UK. He sank close to half the UK navy not loosing a single German ship. I had a good portion of the UK Navy in the Med trying to cripple the Italian navy but only got 2 battleships and he had built a Italian naval bomber so I did loose some ships too.

US and Russian readiness are up but things looks grim for the UK. It's too easy to take out Poland not using air or tanks. Even if Poland holds out until turn 4 it doesn't make a difference with this tactics. I once wrote about the Sugar War Machine but this is the Fafnir War Armageddon[;)]
Fafnirs playing style is more flexible and inventive then the Sugar War Machine.

The King is dead... long live the king! [sm=happy0029.gif]



Taxman66 -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/15/2019 4:23:47 PM)

I don't want to get started on the naval issues again. I've made my opinion clear in the past numerous times.



Taxman66 -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/15/2019 4:33:45 PM)

The early attack on the low lands should be helped a little bit by the next update (see earlier posts above). Will it be enough?

Again, I'm not against the Axis ever using this strategy, but there should be an element of risk (or balance) associated with it.

As an example, in another game, Axis agression against neutrals in 1939 increases US (equivalent in this game) mobilization more than it does in 1940. Oh and attacking through the Maginot is a poor choice at best. (Using typical combat odds, with planes being supplemental and no reduction of fortification levels).



PvtBenjamin -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/15/2019 4:46:41 PM)

I think I've only played Fafnir once and he's definitely at a much higher skill level than me.

Having said that if the Axis attack Poland w/o their airforce & tanks their should be a penalty. There is no way in Hell the Germans were going to attack Neth/Belgium in Ocober '39. That not a what if.

Taxman is correct on the low lands, its ridiculous right now with 0 supply. Thankfully its being corrected.

The Maginot line needs to be improved also.






Rannug61 -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/15/2019 5:04:48 PM)

If Poland hasn't gone down by turn 3 I suggest that Italian readiness should go down 3-5% and Russian readiness go up 2-4%



Taxman66 -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/15/2019 5:54:02 PM)

How do I get these pictures under the 200KB upload limit without making them too tiny to read?

Edit
Apparently some Forums have a 200KB limit (e.g. this one), and others have a 5MB limit.
I'll post the pictures in the AAR thread later and put a link to it here.



Zovs -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/15/2019 6:09:00 PM)

I use Imgur to host my pics and when you click on an image I use the second to lost code and paste that into the message bypassing any pic restriction limit.



Taxman66 -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/16/2019 12:18:56 AM)

You can find the example here



marcdhanna -> RE: Supply Rules and Unintended(?) Consequences (6/16/2019 4:59:52 AM)

I also got 'Fafnir-ed' with a Maginot early strike and although his Sealion failed as a consequence (he said and I'm sure he's right) of the new supply rules, I lost too much naval power and his air forces owned the sky over England, able to bomb at will the living hell out of anything built south of Hadrian's wall.

Meanwhile, a paratrooper marched around unmolested in the British hinterland for 3-4 turns from one naval base to the next taking steps off my aircraft carriers docking to repair; I couldn't figure out how to reduce its supplies -- as would have happened after about exactly one week -- in a more realistic simulation of WW2 strategy.

The naval game is most unsatisfying even if one is aware of the strange ways things work. Apparently these issues have been discussed at length in the past so I won't go into the odd quirks I saw in the two games. I've since resigned both and thanks to both fellows sportsmanlike contests.

Sorry and with all respect due to the designers, I'm done with this game for now but will stop by in a couple of years and see what's improved in making this game more historical / less unreal in strategies and outcomes.

It's an enjoyable game with lots of potential but I find that it's a bit too fantastic and even Advanced Tactics Gold is more satisfying in terms of sensible outcomes in battles.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.640625