Jump to content

bmisc53

Members
  • Content Count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bmisc53

  • Rank
    Junior Member
  • Birthday 02/11/1953

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    bmisc53

Converted

  • Location
    Baltimore, MD
  • Interests
    History, Wargames, Stamps
  • Occupation
    Computer Consultant
  1. Just completed my first AD game. Just uploaded the 1.02 patch and starting the 2nd. A few observations from the first game (played Allied side): 1) I noticed the Japanese hardly garrisoned key areas including the Philipines, SE Asia, and the home Islands. There were a few naval battles, but most of the carriers were busy in ground support in China. I was able to walk into most of these areas and easily invade Japan in early '45. Anyone else notice this? Also, anyone notice the Japanese always love to invade Fiji? 2) From the earliest version of SC, the Allied side can empty out the UK and the Axis will never invade. Is this a flaw in the AI or some inherent limitation? Otherwise a great game.
  2. I've noticed the process speed of the AI is rather slow, at least compared to the earlier SC versions. Anyone else experience this? Anything to do to improve it?
  3. SC-GC sounds great! One question though: has the AI for war status been changed to allow for Russia and Japan to not be at war after Pearl Harbor? Some of the earlier attempts at global war scenarios using the existing SC engines had Russia and Japan automatically be at war after Pearl Harbor which radically alters the WW2 "landscape" from a historical simulation view point.
  4. Check out the attached shot of the buggy Welcome message I got today. Didn't know BattleFront's been on the Web that long. I don't remember logging on in '69, but then I don't remember much of what I'd been doing in '69 ..... ;-)
  5. Is there a projected publication date yet?
  6. I didn't like the change either, but some perspective - I've been a wargamer since 1965 and a software developer since 1977: hexes have been the standard for decades being most amenable to paper-based system (mechanically and aesthetically). It's what everyone was used to so it carried over to the digital world. However, squares are more amenable to AI, etc. To me the trade off is worth it for a more feature robust game. The first hex version of SC looked more like "home", but the square based current version is a way better game. I got used to it...... --Blaine
  7. SC2B looks great! However..... Why did the design move away from hexes to squares? I've always found hexes more cohesive. Squares distort adjacency and so forth. Were there some technical reasons? Either way, I look forward to publication.
×
×
  • Create New...