i really like SS2, ill give you a game as soon as i am upgraded.
maybe in a few years we can leave audio messages on the forums, much better approach for lazy people like me
on the other hand i guess some joker would just burp on it and find the knowledge that other people unwillingly listen to it quite amusing… more work for the regulators then… nice idea though
i am in full favour of one world currency and world government… but too lazy explain my point of view… which of course also protects me from the (maybe) constructive criticism of other people… haha :lol:
right this might seem straightforward, but it is not to me:
why do americans refer to football as football despite that you clearly use your hands more than anything…
and then to our nice and sense making game football u give the name ‘soccer’? what going on there…
attempt of cultural imperialism or alternative marketing…??
all resposes clearing this myth are appreciated… 8)
sorry in advance about the silly question, but
can s.o. confirm that germany needs to take two capitals to win the game, whereas the allies have to kill all germans off?
also, can the germans achieve an economic victory like in a&a1?
thanks, laters :)
easy tiger, that smile is just there because i was happy that i could fit this rather amusing, but on the other hand quite useless information in. be happy for me too :)
i am german myself, i wdnt let harm to my people, would i??
anyways, bed time here now, laters
id go with the 109. it just a better killer i think. i think the spitfire’s are a bit overrated in relation to the battle of britain as the germans only had 30min fuel over england, so thats a hell of an advantage.
also this, most of the kills on the british side in that ‘battle’ were made by hurricanes not spitfires. the spitfire success was hyped because it was a ‘sexier’ plane
just like some people already pointed out this seems to be an ‘american best of’ list, but i am sure that there must be some decent military leaders from other countries too… :wink:
all in all, i d through my lot with Hannibal as well. clever guy
just because… did u know that ther germans actually didnt ‘invent’ Blitzkrieg… some english bloke came up with the original idea but his folks thought the idea was no good, until some german officers came across it and developed it into what it became known for… interesting fact i think :D
well friends, the list is long. wherever the US went to ‘sort things out’ and clean house with military means, all that it brought is more chaos. lets look at the list of achievements:
after WWI: US decided not to joing the League of Nation it forces on the rest of the world and therefore undermines long lasting peace efforts.
after WWII: US commitment to nuclear weapons starts the atomic arms race, which on several occasions leads to an out-break of nuclear war (e.g. cuba missle crises)
also: Establishment of the state of Israel, and you can see the success of that every week-end, when some idiot blows himself up in a bus!
Vietnam: the US supports a dictatorial south vietnam regieme, which leads to a civil war that costs 10000’s of lives
Afghanistan: the taliban are gone… from the surface but there is still no stable order.
latest example: Iraq, motivated by cheap oil, americans and iraqis have to die, and the dying continuous.
So then… the US is the only power that can make reasonable military and foreign political adventures. but as the list suggests wouldnt the world really be safer, if the US would build strong realtions with its partners
and use its strength to build consensus?
SO what are the answers???
Rommel and other generals actually warned that the allies would come through normandy, but hitler in his wisdom decided that that was an allied plan of distraction. that why he didnt allow the germa army to use its tank forces against the normandy beaches.
Hitler also split up the comman structure in the west too much because he feared that under a unified command one individual would be too tempted to try to oust him or negotiate with the allies.
So there again, Hitler brought and cost Germany the war.
another thing on Rommel. I agree witht he people that suggest Rommel wasnt a traitor, but loyal to germany. i think he could best be compared to gerneral lee in the american civil war. especially in the later stages he was more and more disgusted by Hitler, but felt he had to do his duty for this country.
lets have alook, lets see if i can help.
1. first the attacker rolls his dice. lets say he attacks with 3 infantry, 1 tank and one fighter.
he rolls 3 dice for the infantry. for each 1 rolled the opponent suffers 1 casulty.
then 2 dice for the tank, for every 3 rolled the opponent suffers one casulty.
one dice for the fighter. for every 3 rolled the opponent suffers one casulty.
a units attack power (the dice roll required to score a hit on an enemy) can be found on the ‘nation card’. so, also the defensive power.
then the defender shoots back with all the units in a territory including the ones that were hit by the attacker just before. for all hits the defender scores the attacker needs to remove these units immediately. they dont get another chance to shoot. the defender also removes the units the attacker hit before.
now the battle continues if the attacker deicides to go ahead.
2. then only the defender removes casulties, the battle goes on until the attacker takes the territory or calls it of.
3. you play until the attacker takes the territory, or decides to call the attack of.
5. an infantry unit can attack all land based units and air units.
hope that helps,
well lets think about that. if the thw whole Axis is made up of (for the sake of argument) 10 nations (ergo, 10 axis players) and the allies of at least 20 (ergo 20 allies players) then this could really developed into a game that a whole class room size of people can enjoy. oh dear, i better get a beer after my go then!!