Jump to content

Blashy

Members
  • Content count

    3,061
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Blashy

  • Rank
    SC Beta Tester
  • Birthday 01/01/1973

Converted

  • Location
    Gatineau, Quebec, Canada (next to Ottawa)
  • Occupation
    Network Analyst
  1. This game. iOS would be such a wonderful platform for a basic SC. Although it seems Hubert is doing pretty well as is. Really sad they killed playing via virtual console .
  2. Good points EV. Takes were not proficient in what they carried to destroy fortifications or well entrenched forces.
  3. Blashy

    Sc3

    Hi Dave! I've informed Hubert that I will gladly beta test if he ever goes iOS. It would be my sole reason for buying an iPad! I very confident there is a lucrative market for a simplified version of SC. As simple as SC1 in play. -- See in you in there
  4. Blashy

    Sc3

    An iOS simplified back to basics version just using units from the original SC, keeping the game purely on a strategic level.
  5. Agreed, I really don't like that this is giving out so much information, that's what "intelligence" investing should be for... WAAAAYYYY too much information and not required for this type of game IMO (Strategic).
  6. I see my long ago nag finally made it in, I never liked the addition of AA guns, AA upgrade of units seemed more sensible and made for less clutter on the board. Same goes for anti-tank unit and TAC bomber (should be an aircraft upgrade instead). Blashy the minimalist
  7. Blashy

    Hawaii's Garrison

    I agree that the whole operating concept of air power needs work, it has been so since SC1. We just need to find a very very simple way of doing this.
  8. Green = Fighter Mode Yellow = Mixed Mode Red = Tactical Mode I suggested a single letter: F, M, T but it was faster for Hubert to simply make it a single ball with those 3 color modes. Works just as well IMO.
  9. Yep, modding an earlier start date requires some work to have some historical sense. It is not that easy. Hehe. BTW, you can easily take Hawaii with the current default start date.
  10. Yes in my case, both were taken by my opponent or by me.
  11. Actually SeaMonkey you have been around long enough to know I am a big proponent of various possibilities, the big push for increased flexibility with diplomacy probably came from me, at least I remember in SC2:Blitzkrieg beta testing continually being the biggest poster (Hubert might say "spammer", hehe) in the beta forums for more options with diplomacy and possibilities ON the board when you do DoW. I just want it to make historical sense and not totally go into the virtually impossible and my opinion is that peace with Germany was not possible unless it was late 1945 and Germany still held on in some way and asked for an armistice. To be precise, my opinion of holding on means the following in SC2 terms: Major Axis Victory for Germany = the following parts still in German hands by December 1945: Germany is secure (includes Poland), Italy has Rome plus 2 other cities. Minor Axis Victory: Germany is still alive (includes Poland). Or the idea that Germany could obtain a nuclear bomb... simply not possible, remember that to this day it is still the most expensive scientific project ever undertaken. Germany was nowhere near having the resources to do what USA did. Ok so not impossible but if the Axis invested in nuclear tech (if it existed) then it would pretty much sink its economy in it and put all its eggs in one basket "hoping" it would be enough to stop the Allies and negotiate peace. The project also displays USA's economic might, they were severely outproducing the Axis (combined!) by 1941 and they were putting billions in that project. The idea that the Axis could somehow DEFEAT the Allies when they are being outproduced in all areas by everyone as early as 1941 is simply not looking at it from a sheer numbers perspective and I do not believe that having the better commanders (still debatable) would have made a difference because the Allies would have needed to be total idiots to screw up their humongous advantage.
  12. You will fin AAR right here! Already a few have been posted, simply look at the forum post history. And if you ever want to play someone you can post here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=85155
  13. IF I had to choose just one... Pacific Theater by a longshot!
  14. Read official government doctrine books pre WW2, even during WW1 and USA had goals on dominating the world in influence. This does not mean comparing them to Nazy Germany in any way. But yes it does put them in the greedy category just as much as ALL great powers in history have done, USA was already trying to do so in the early 1900s, the wars, especially WW2 gave them the ultimate push in doing so. UK saw their loss of power throughout the world and they were not about to give Europe to Germany. There was WAY too much at stake for any of them to want peace, the long term consequences of giving in were just to clear... another war and Germany continuing to act like barbarians for certain types of citizens. The Allies were the good guys in that they liberated countries and let them be. But they used their influence post war in MANY intolerable ways. I am all for concrete historical possibilities... what if type possibilities, no.
  15. Was peace EVERY possible? We can forget UK and Germany agreeing to peace, UK knew full well that not getting it done now only meant loss of influence and more trouble later on. USA and UK were just as a greedy in keeping their world influence as Germany was in making their own.
×