I like playing the UK but would like to see someone playing China and will do it myself if no-one else wants the job.
Andrew
-
We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Andrew
My personal preference list is:
1) Germany or Sovjet Union (I just love huge tank battles in the open space)
2) Japan
3) National China
4) Italy
5) US
6) UK
7) France (changing to Spain later on
)
But shouldn't we finish addeg 2 first?
1) Germany or Sovjet Union (I just love huge tank battles in the open space)
2) Japan
3) National China
4) Italy
5) US
6) UK
7) France (changing to Spain later on
)But shouldn't we finish addeg 2 first?
Yup, see the first post. This thread was created because some players was very eager to choose countries so they could plan strategy.
Btw- what's your prefered scenario?
I prefer '39. I think it is the most balanced one, with action right from the start. '36 has the serious drawback that you have a long build-up time and then the game is basically decided, depending on your research and build strategies. Especially not-so-experienced players can screw up '36 badly. But strangely enough those players tend to insist on '36.
EDIT: Of course I don't mean any of those players here that voted for '36.
After the experience of addeg 2 I think the 36 scenario might not be so bad, so I'll null vote this time.
Andrew, it's up to you.
Andrew, it's up to you.
We've not had a scenario preference from Phadishar yet have we?
Myself, I suppose my second preference after 41 is 39.
Andrew
Myself, I suppose my second preference after 41 is 39.
Andrew
Last edited:
I could play Japan, it all depends on which days you guys plan to play on?
And if I am in I vote for 36.
mvh
//Dag
Ok, tonigth at 19:00 is ok, but tuesdays I usually play with the DEG group. Mondays and every other weekend are the only other days I have left.
mvh
//Dag
Last edited:
Actually, me thinks that Japan is not really important. They do keep UK and SU a bit busy, but those countries are already weak enough. Japan can conquer 50% of the world, and it still doesn't make a big difference to the outcome of the game.
I think Japan is very important. They are the only Axis nation that can compete with the Allies' navy. Taking India also weakens UK some. They are not the most important, but still I think they're pretty essential.
Dag: We play almost all Mondays, and sometimes also Tuesdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays. I think it should be OK.
Dag: We play almost all Mondays, and sometimes also Tuesdays, Fridays, Saturdays and Sundays. I think it should be OK.
Here are the pros and cons I can come up with regarding the scenarios:
36
Pros: You can shape your country the way you want it
Cons: Possibilities for highly unrealistic expansions, like Italy taking the balkans and South America and so on. USA will be superior to Germany ca. 1941. Long waiting time for USA and SU.
39
Pros: Instant action. Less unrealistic expansions (Italy is also less inferior to the rest in the 39 scenario opposed to sept 39 in the 36 scenario). USA will be more realistically powerfull. Starts out pretty weak, takes some years before she can take on Germany.
Cons: Army is already built, less time to shape your country.
I consider the lower tech levels in 39 (as opposed to where you would have gotten in 3 years with the 39 scenario) a pro, as it makes the war last longer. There are also less distinctive differences betwee the countries, like Italy does not have über subs and the likes.
36
Pros: You can shape your country the way you want it
Cons: Possibilities for highly unrealistic expansions, like Italy taking the balkans and South America and so on. USA will be superior to Germany ca. 1941. Long waiting time for USA and SU.
39
Pros: Instant action. Less unrealistic expansions (Italy is also less inferior to the rest in the 39 scenario opposed to sept 39 in the 36 scenario). USA will be more realistically powerfull. Starts out pretty weak, takes some years before she can take on Germany.
Cons: Army is already built, less time to shape your country.
I consider the lower tech levels in 39 (as opposed to where you would have gotten in 3 years with the 39 scenario) a pro, as it makes the war last longer. There are also less distinctive differences betwee the countries, like Italy does not have über subs and the likes.
I think '36 is the only way to play HOI, it may be unhistorical, sure, but half the fun is guessing at what the other guy has in his pool. '39 leaves no room for any research and construction at all. All IMHO of course.
mvh
//Dag
Originally posted by DagL
I think '36 is the only way to play HOI, it may be unhistorical, sure, but half the fun is guessing at what the other guy has in his pool. '39 leaves no room for any research and construction at all. All IMHO of course.
mvh
//Dag
IMHO the '39 scenario is the only way to play the HoI.
I want to play a war-game, not a research game. '36 emphasises too much on early build-up, and not so much on the actual fighting. Any research choices done back in '36 already cement your defeat in '44. And you get those stupid singular research, like Panthers in '40 and a uber-sub only US navy in '42.
On the other side - '39 puts the emphasis on your warfare abilities. You have balanced armies, and the best commander wins.
BTW - since I requested to play at 19:00 - I could already play at 18:00.
edit - I can play 18:15.
Tomar said he'll be here 18:00, but do we have any word from Andrew? I think we initially agreed upon starting 19:00.
Tomar said he'll be here 18:00, but do we have any word from Andrew? I think we initially agreed upon starting 19:00.
Last edited:
Thanks Vissarion for helping to contribute game statistics for the enjoyment of all.
We had another try at the 39 scenario and again had trouble with the Soviet ministers going AWOL in December 39. Afterwards, I tried playing a solo game as USSR using the 39 scenario but didn't experience the same problem. Maybe the cause depends upon the choices made for an event like the Winter War or Moltov-Ribbentrop Pact?
Anyway, maybe one could play a solo game to Jan 40 and then cut/paste the ministers from a save of that into the relevant place in the save of the 39 game?
More generally I didn't like the pace of the game - it seemed to be going far too quickly and there was no way I could keep up with events in France while still making preparations in India and elsewhere. What speed was that session run at?
The UK has so much to do that it's not sensible for it to try and run France and the CW too. I really think that there ought to be a French player in these games so that Germany gets some serious opposition in the opening campaign. I find it very irritating that we have players just fooling around as the USA and USSR while major powers like France and China are raped by the Axis because they are left to the AI. Given that USA and USSR are very powerful if optimised by power gamers then it would balance the game for them to be left to the AI in the early stages. Or we should try to get 8 players - the number that the game was designed for.
Andrew
Anyway, maybe one could play a solo game to Jan 40 and then cut/paste the ministers from a save of that into the relevant place in the save of the 39 game?
More generally I didn't like the pace of the game - it seemed to be going far too quickly and there was no way I could keep up with events in France while still making preparations in India and elsewhere. What speed was that session run at?
The UK has so much to do that it's not sensible for it to try and run France and the CW too. I really think that there ought to be a French player in these games so that Germany gets some serious opposition in the opening campaign. I find it very irritating that we have players just fooling around as the USA and USSR while major powers like France and China are raped by the Axis because they are left to the AI. Given that USA and USSR are very powerful if optimised by power gamers then it would balance the game for them to be left to the AI in the early stages. Or we should try to get 8 players - the number that the game was designed for.
Andrew