Curry

I am thinking all you have to do is right click on the unit. You will then see a transport option. The unit must be in or near a port and will cost you so many points to transfer

Found an old copy of SC 1 and played a quick game yesterday. It's been years since I played at the height of this games popularity. Its still a great game and a great value. I remembered all the great battles I had with other people via email and live. Even after Terif refined the "cookie cutter" there were still great battles for a long time. Then there was the forums here - that was entertainment in and of itself and at its height could have charged for admission. If you have never tried this game and are looking here for some information give it a try. Its really a great hex based game with the right balance of simplicity and depth.

just around checking the board. Is this ladder dead?

Waiting for the demo - any word on when it will be out. For me the demo is crucial. If the demo looks good I will buy the game but I really want to see the demo and not just the hype. Give me the demo! Please

I dont have them but if you do a search you may find a old post that has that information. Sorry I cannot be more helpful.

It does sound good. I played the first one and enjoyed it. Nice work.

From 2002, was a long wait, EH!

Perhaps a little. But why not use the very best if, and its a if, if - Terif would have been willing. Did anyone at BF even ask him??? Anyone who knows SC knows how Terif is at this game. That he wasnt used as a beta is a mystery to me and just foolish. I don't often agree with Rambo but I think he is totally correct in this case and should be given his due. I remember him saying it several times. Anyway - Thankfully the game has the great editor unlike SC1 and many of us can ignore the competition game and play the mods. I keep going back to that because for myself its the best part of SCII. You dont have to worry about the cookie cutter or all the exploits. It takes the game back for me at least to a war game and not an exploit game.

This is sad. I also think its another reason why fewer people are playing SC2 in human verses human than played SC1. It has not turned out to be a war game of WWII but a game of knowning the exploits. Rambo is very correct in saying that he did say that Terif should have been a beta tester. He was correct. Terif should have been paid to test this game out.

JJ - on the Christians. Many, no more than likely most just went with the nazis and the pressure they applied. However, many did not, like Dietrict Bonhoffer as a good example who stood up against them and gave his life for it. I was in Berlin last March and some Christians like Bonhoffer were in the great display, the topography of terror. Which everyone should see and the Germans don't advertise too much as a tourist site. It is on the original location of the SS and Gestapo sites in Berlin which have never been built over to this day. If anyone goes to Berlin its a must see that will affect you. Here is a link http://www.topographie.de/en/index.htm However, my point is not just about Christians, it was like you said, a bit of anyone that would voice any opposition to them or anyone they didnt like for whatever reason.

But back to why the allies won, Go to Terifs always excellent comments on the game itself on why its harder for the Axis to win. Because the Axis player often makes more mistakes. True in real life of WWII. DA Fuhrer made many more mistakes. The Allies made some, but if we were to just list the mistakes I think that is the reason. Maybe too simple, but I think its true.

JJ - true. And more than just those you lised. Including Christians that devoted themselves to Christ instead of the Fuhrer, or many Artists that they didnt like, or writers they didnt like. JJ you would have been in trouble I think.

I really dont know what it is. But I agree it is not the same. SCI was a classic strategy game and it attracted the old war-gaming community, however, it was also so simple and good it attracted many people to play it. It was also a great game to play human verses human. For many of us we played it again and again. We gave it up and came back to it. I agree with Iron Ranger, I dont think people are playing SC II for whatever reason when it comes to human verses human. It just doesnt seem to be being played as much from a human verses human stand point. That is not to say people are not playing it against the AI, I think they are. For me I like the mod's and its worth the price of the game for that reason. I have not played the game against another human and that is from someone who must have played SC1 human verses human a couple of hundread games. For me SCII lost its simplicity and human verses human quality. That is just my view so please dont flame me for it. I could explain that in detail but I dont want to be negative to HC who is someone I greatly admire as a game maker. HC you did a great job in both games and thanks for all the hard work. Simply put SCII is a fun game to play against the AI and for the Mods. But it does not lend itself to human verses human play. I play Battle for Middle Earth by EA with my son. I got into the game simply because of my son and now I enjoy it. EA learned that many players will buy the game and play it not to play it because of the AI but because of the human verses human competion. I always read on these threads comments against people like Rambo who stressed human verses human game play and said people dont buy a game for that. Those same people said you need to make a game for people to play against the AI. I use to agree with them, I no longer do, I dont think that is true anymore. Times change, gamers change. Companies like EA are finding out there is a huge gaming market in making a game not only that it is fun to play against the AI but the market is huge if the game can draw in players to play human verses human. SC1 did that.

No doubt about it, its a classic. Great game.

No doubt about it, its a classic. Great game.