Strategic Command v1.12.02 Beta

[SamSlitherine]

Hello Everyone

We have a new Beta update for Strategic Command WWII War in Europe

It is available for download on both the Members Area and Public area

v1.12.02 Changelog

-Fixed a Submarine diving error that could possibly have the Sub dive off the accessible area of the map.
-Fixed a PBEM++ replay error that would sometimes show the wrong weather during the replay.
-A major power that is not yet at 100% mobilization will no longer have its research levels apply to the catch up bonus if applicable.
-Fighters and Carriers in Fighter mode will now have their escorts reduced by 1 point when performing a recon or any other fighter sweep.

Campaigns
-The Neva River south of Leningrad converted from a River to a Major River to make it easier to defend the city.
-Tactical Bomber Build Limits reduced: USA, USSR and Germany 6 ? 5, Italy 3 ? 2.
-Medium Bomber Build Limited increased: USA, USSR and Germany 3 ? 4, Italy 1 ? 2.
-The USSR now starts with 1 chit invested in Anti-Tank Weapons in the 1939 campaign, and level 1 in the 1940 campaign.
-The cost of Diplomacy against a Major Power has been increased from 150 to 175 MPPs.
-MOBILIZATION_1 scripts amended to severely increase the penalties for an Axis declaration of war against Algeria: Vichy France, Tunisia and Syria will now swing 40-55% towards the Allies (it was previously 10-15% for the first two, and 20-35% for Syria).
-Additionally, a new MOBILIZATION_1 script has been added so that the USA will now swing 8-15% towards the Allies if the Axis declare war on Algeria.
-MOBILIZATION_1 script amended so that an Axis declaration of war against Yugoslavia will now swing Greece 30-45% towards the Allies (it was previously 10-15%).
-Pro-Allied Algerian UNIT script amended for when they join the Allies so that their Corps will deploy at strength 5 rather than 3.
-Spain must now have a pro-Axis leaning of 60% for DE 603 to fire.

Happy Gaming!

[Christolos]

Many thanks! [:)]

Could you remind me why the MOBILIZATION_1 scripts were amended to severely increase the penalties for an Axis declaration of war against Algeria?

I tried searching this and couldn't find anything.

Thanks,

C

[Hubert Cater]

In the Mass Air Groups thread there was some discussion about the Axis DoW on Algeria and if it was too easy with limited consequences and the above changes are simply an attempt to re-balance that accordingly.

tm.asp?m=4464731

[Christolos]

Thanks Hubert.

There was a lot discussed in that thread...and so seem to have I missed that aspect...[8|]

Cheers,

C

[Taxman66]

Honestly, the only one change there that really matters is the US Mobilization hit.

The increase to a strength 5 Corps only helps stop cheap invasions, though that is something in itself I guess.
Non cheap invasions will go through Tunisia, so the increase in their pro-Allied swing is meaningless if they're conquered on the way to Algeria.
Syria doesn't swing enough to make it a worthwhile investment for diplomacy to bring into the Allies (even more so if the Allied player chose to attack the Vichy fleet). I guess it would remove it as even a remote consideration for the Axis to get diplomatically.

[PvtBenjamin]

Spain Diplo for DE603 30%=>60% also a big deal.

So US mobilization goes +8-15% when Algeria is invaded & +8-15% when DE603 is accepted (+16-30%)correct?

AT for USSR also.


Fighter change good


-Fighters and Carriers in Fighter mode will now have their escorts reduced by 1 point when performing a recon or any other fighter sweep

[Taxman66]

Yeah, but he was asking specifically about the mobilization changes for Algeria.

[PvtBenjamin]

ahh Didn't read that far back

[8|]


These are great improvements to the game.

[Christolos]

Regarding: "Spain must now have a pro-Axis leaning of 60% for DE 603 to fire." , will the manual eventually be updated to reflect this?

I just checked (with version v1.12.02 Beta) and the manual still mentions:

Event fires: If France has surrendered, Italy
has joined the Axis, Spain is neutral but with at
least a 30% leaning towards the Axis, Algiers and
Casablanca are in Axis hands, with a German
unit within 3 hexes of Algiers, and there are no
Allied troops in France, or within 5 hexes of Oran
or Casablanca.

Thanks,

C

[Hubert Cater]

We'll try and get this updated for the release version, we just need to get the appropriate translations and updates handled for the various languages (PDF files) which sometimes take time. We realize this is mostly just a change in the %, but there is a process and team that handles this outside of us with the original docs etc.

Hubert

[Taxman66]

Hubert,

Does:
-Fighters and Carriers in Fighter mode will now have their escorts reduced by 1 point when performing a recon or any other fighter sweep.

...also mean that Fighters & Carriers (in Fighter mode) that escort twice can't preform a strike (recon/fighter sweep) mission as well?

[Dorky8]

These changes make the game better. Well done.

[Hubert Cater]

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

Hubert,

Does:
-Fighters and Carriers in Fighter mode will now have their escorts reduced by 1 point when performing a recon or any other fighter sweep.

...also mean that Fighters & Carriers (in Fighter mode) that escort twice can't preform a strike (recon/fighter sweep) mission as well?

The idea here was to dissuade the tactic of drawing out enemy interceptors from recon sweeps, which would then give the ability of follow up bombers to attack without the fear of interceptions, i.e. if all enemy interceptors have been exhausted. So with that in mind it does not (at the moment) deny the ability of a fighter to escort twice and then perform a strike after the fact.

[Amadeus]

Most of these changes are in favor for the Allies and Air Forces in general. If you watch the results of the tournament this is counterproductive to the gameplay and outcome there. I do not understand that.

[Sugar]

I believe the results of the tourney to be misleading.

If any of the changes would be decisive, the DE 603 would be the one possibly influencing balancing, in a mostly appreciated and demanded matter. The other changes lack that potential.

The only way to prevent your fighters to react on a fighter sweep is to set them to escort/ground attack. This way they won't be able to protect units from being bombed, which is really no good idea; no commander would do that in reality.

On the other hand fighter sweeps are preparing following bombing runs; already damaged enemy fighters won't probably be able to do damage to the bombers after dealing with their escorts. I think this solution to be a good compromise.

[Taxman66]

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

Hubert,

Does:
-Fighters and Carriers in Fighter mode will now have their escorts reduced by 1 point when performing a recon or any other fighter sweep.

...also mean that Fighters & Carriers (in Fighter mode) that escort twice can't preform a strike (recon/fighter sweep) mission as well?

The idea here was to dissuade the tactic of drawing out enemy interceptors from recon sweeps, which would then give the ability of follow up bombers to attack without the fear of interceptions, i.e. if all enemy interceptors have been exhausted. So with that in mind it does not (at the moment) deny the ability of a fighter to escort twice and then perform a strike after the fact.

Hubert,
Not arguing for or against, just 'thinking out load' the only good targets for Fighter strikes are either: bombers, beat up fighters or possibly ships without AA. Still letting them have a 3rd action provides more advantage to the side with air superiority... even more so if you have a range advantage.

[PvtBenjamin]

ORIGINAL: Amadeus

Most of these changes are in favor for the Allies and Air Forces in general. If you watch the results of the tournament this is counterproductive to the gameplay and outcome there. I do not understand that.

The tournament is in no way is an indication of the Axis/Allied parity. Many of the tournament players have <10 PBEM games under their belt and only a few games have been played. There is absolutely no statistics of the level of expertise of each player and the total results aren't statistically significant.

ORIGINAL: Sugar

I believe the results of the tourney to be misleading.

If any of the changes would be decisive, the DE 603 would be the one possibly influencing balancing, in a mostly appreciated and demanded matter. The other changes lack that potential.

The only way to prevent your fighters to react on a fighter sweep is to set them to escort/ground attack. This way they won't be able to protect units from being bombed, which is really no good idea; no commander would do that in reality.

On the other hand fighter sweeps are preparing following bombing runs; already damaged enemy fighters won't probably be able to do damage to the bombers after dealing with their escorts. I think this solution to be a good compromise.

Get out your cameras folks, I agree

[Amadeus]

ORIGINAL: PvtBenjamin

The tournament is in no way is an indication of the Axis/Allied parity. Many of the tournament players have <10 PBEM games under their belt and only a few games have been played. There is absolutely no statistics of the level of expertise of each player and the total results aren't statistically significant.

How do you know? I played about 30 matches and lost my first tourny game as Axis. All in all I win 2/3 of my games. I have no statistic about it but I guess I won almost 90% of my games as Allie.

Anyway, the players who played the tourny should be respected too.

[PvtBenjamin]

I know because several of them discussed their experience playing PBEM during tournament events, some had just started. Considering I was once new I have the highest respect for new players. My point is that the tournament has players of widely varying experience players playing each other and that the results aren't an indicator of the games parity.

The 12.02 are very welcome changes to the game and really only rectify "gimmicks", the game is still very winnable by Axis.

[Amadeus]

ORIGINAL: PvtBenjamin

I know because several of them discussed their experience playing PBEM during tournament events, some had just started. Considering I was once new I have the highest respect for new players. My point is that the tournament has players of widely varying experience players playing each other and that the results aren't an indicator of the games parity.

The 12.02 are very welcome changes to the game and really only rectify "gimmicks", the game is still very winnable by Axis.

I think you are wrong. I would play you any time to show you my point of view. I still think that the game is in favor for Allies now more than before.