Slitherine

Just for consideration...
Scneario 1939, no advantages

1. Brit in North Africa far to weak...even without german tank a steamroll is a no brainer in few turns
...Brit should get at least 1 additional corps, 1 garr and and 1 tank somewhere down the line
2. It is highly annoying that after US is in the war the AI starts a full scale Overlord with all available brit and US units as soon as the weather is good enough in 1942 instead of stockpiling ressources and troops to make an overwhelming attack later on. Maybe its a balancing reason to avoid the player steamrolling the russians but it feels awkward

otherwise very good work ! Congrats

Chris10 wrote:Just for consideration...
Scneario 1939, no advantages

1. Brit in North Africa far to weak...even without german tank a steamroll is a no brainer in few turns
...Brit should get at least 1 additional corps, 1 garr and and 1 tank somewhere down the line
2. It is highly annoying that after US is in the war the AI starts a full scale Overlord with all available brit and US units as soon as the weather is good enough in 1942 instead of stockpiling ressources and troops to make an overwhelming attack later on. Maybe its a balancing reason to avoid the player steamrolling the russians but it feels awkward

otherwise very good work ! Congrats

Is this a typo (2.11),or have I missed something.

Rasputitsa wrote: Is this a typo (2.11),or have I missed something.

oh...ehmmm...typo of course...
corrected

Another thing in order to keep some historical balance is..
where the heck is the russian reinforcements and Operation Uranus after occupying Stalingrad ?
look at the screen...the game is almost won if I push forward cause in the south russian lines are non existent since fall 1942
You guys have to spawn at least 4 tanks, 2 mech corps and 8-12 corps and garrisons for every special/city hex in the south to get this straight...

You can't expect much of the AI. Play a human opponent and you will find the Axis side much more challenging.

when I play AI , I win in Nov 1942 as Axis & counqer all over the world . , but When play with an experienced Allies player , it is hard for a minor victory as Axis .

joerock22 wrote:You can't expect much of the AI.

I know..therefore for SP I would add the named number of soviet units once axis owns Stalingrad hex...this will balance out the thingi a bit more

Hallo CEAW mates... First of all I want to say that the 2.10 expansion is marvelous and really improved in comparison with the previous version. Congrats to anyone who worked to create this perfect piece of art.
The only thing that I would like to ask is why ...cant we attack on Switzerland since in the previous version we could...?
I believe that it should be General's decision if attack there or not..!!
Thanx a lot!

Chris10 wrote:Just for consideration...
Scneario 1939, no advantages

1. Brit in North Africa far to weak...even without german tank a steamroll is a no brainer in few turns
...Brit should get at least 1 additional corps, 1 garr and and 1 tank somewhere down the line
2. It is highly annoying that after US is in the war the AI starts a full scale Overlord with all available brit and US units as soon as the weather is good enough in 1942 instead of stockpiling ressources and troops to make an overwhelming attack later on. Maybe its a balancing reason to avoid the player steamrolling the russians but it feels awkward

otherwise very good work ! Congrats

1. I don't understand why you say the Allies are too weak in Egypt

Here is the UK OOB in the Med at the start of the 1939 scenario.

Egypt / Palestine:
1 armor (X Armored corps)
1 Mech (XIII Mech corps)
3 Infantry corps (6th and 7th Australian, XXX corps)
7 Garrison units (including Malta and Cyprus)

When Italy activates the UK get the following additions in the Med:
2 Fighters (5 step at Malta and Egypt)
1 Destroyer (Malta)
1 Submarine (Cyprus)
1 Carrier (Egypt)
1 Battleship (Egypt)

When Egypt and Iraq activate in August 1940 the UK get the following:
2 Corps (10th Indian, 9th Australian)
3 Garrison units (Iraq)
1 Battleship (Persian Gulf)

That is quite a substantial force. Often the Allied player sends reinforcements from Canada (Mech and Corps and maybe even a fighter).

So if anyone is too weak it's definitely NOT the Allies. The Axis player must send quite a bit of forces to Libya to have a chance to not get overrun there. If the Axis player sends several tactical bombers, armor and fighters then the Allies have a problem, but they can then retreat in a clever way and use the Suez as a defense line. The Allies can rail in Egypt / Iraq so they can even fall back to Iraq and wait for more reinforcements. The Axis will take Iraq if they really go for it, but then they can't attack in force in Russia.

In the real Med war the Axis got pretty far with almost no forces at all. Had Rommel got the forces he wanted I'm sure Egypt would have fallen and maybe even Iraq.

So I believe there is no need to alter the OOB in Egypt.

2. You comments about Overlord is regarding playing against an Allied AI and not a real opponent.

I would then just comment that Grand Strategy has NOT altered the AI code. We have made GS for PBEM or Hotseat play only. Making a good AI for such a game is a huge task and we decided to not spend our time on that. We wanted to optimize the game for human vs human play.

Human players wait with launching Overlord until they know when they have a good chance of succeeding. Don't expect the AI to be clever. I don't know how the AI decision making has been coded. We're using the vanilla game AI.class file. That means there is no code regarding amphs, paratroopers etc. The AI doesn't know such units exist and can't use them as a human would.