Page 1 of 1

Possible convoy owner change. Please vote

Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 7:21 pm
by Peter Stauffenberg
I've been thinking a bit about the later part of the war and realize that the strength of the British compared to the US in GS v2.0 is a bit too high.

It's too dangerous to tamper with the production in USA and Britain because that can disrupt the game balance.

One change we could do without changing the game balance is to let the southern convoy become US controlled after USA joins the Allies. This is similar to the northern convoy becoming Russian. The southern convoy could have a spawning point on the southern map edge in the Atlantic and delivery port could be New York. The PP's USA will receive can simulate PP's received from Latin America and maybe even from the US west coast or Mexican Gulf.

The central convoy is the biggest and the southern convoy is the smallest. So the biggest convoy PP's will still go to UK. By doing this change we will see that USA will get more PP's at the expense of UK and I feel that's good. In the end game it's normal to see more British than US air units in Britain (e. g. strategic bombers) and that doesn't feel right. The US contributed with more than Britain in the last phase of the war.

Please vote yes or no on the proposed change:
* Southern convoy will be US controlled after USA joins the war

Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:00 pm
by rkr1958
Yes -- sounds good to me.

Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:07 pm
by pk867
Yes. I agree also.

Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:37 pm
by PionUrpo
Yes, US should have more punch when compared to UK.

Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 8:40 pm
by gerones
One of the consequences of the american lack of PP´s is that the allied player has to send (this way saving lots of PP´s) his american landing force DIRECTLY to France for D-Day. Historically, the americans previously sent their units to properly train them in England and then, land them in France. American army only sent directly their units to France ONCE the landings succeeded and Paris was liberated.

For this and for other reasons I vote yes to make the southern convoy go to american ports once USA has joined the allies. Even more, I would increase a little the strength of the southern convoy from 50 to 60 or 70, reducing the north or the central convoy strength for compensating it.



    Posted: Thu Aug 04, 2011 10:13 pm
    by richardsd
    yes, a very good idea

    Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:18 am
    by Blathergut
    yes

    Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 12:46 am
    by Peter Stauffenberg
    Good point. I have decreased the northern convoy by 10 and the central by 30 so the southern increases by 40.

    These are the new values:
    NORTH_ATLANTIC_CONVOY_SIZE 90 /*max production worth of a north atlantic convoy*/
    MID_ATLANTIC_CONVOY_SIZE 110
    SOUTH_ATLANTIC_CONVOY_SIZE 90

    Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 1:55 am
    by JimR
    Yes, these changes sound good.

    yes! this is right!

    Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 2:32 pm
    by mamahuhu
    yes! this is right!

    Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 3:29 pm
    by Morris
    it is great ! but it will make Axis die earlier .

    Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 3:46 pm
    by gerones
    Also, we shouldn´t forget about the importance of Panama Canal as a vital and strategic naval transit point during WW2. Increasing the strength of the south convoy would be good for simulating this.



      Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 4:23 pm
      by PionUrpo
      Morris wrote:it is great ! but it will make Axis die earlier .
      This merely leads to Yanks having more PPs than Brits. There's no PPs added for the Allies as a whole so how does it lead to Axis losing faster?

      Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 4:40 pm
      by Morris
      a little, almost no effect . but Axis is already in hopeless situation.

      Posted: Fri Aug 05, 2011 7:44 pm
      by Peter Stauffenberg
      Morris wrote:a little, almost no effect . but Axis is already in hopeless situation.
      What do you mean by hopeless? Are you speaking about the strategic situation by the end of the war or that they can't even last to the end of the war (May 1945)?

      Posted: Sat Aug 06, 2011 3:01 am
      by Morris
      Stauffenberg wrote:
      Morris wrote:a little, almost no effect . but Axis is already in hopeless situation.
      What do you mean by hopeless? Are you speaking about the strategic situation by the end of the war or that they can't even last to the end of the war (May 1945)?
      You are quite right sir !