hoolaman

Rubble has never blocked any movement, ever, in any version of the game. So there is no such thing as a blocked door except in the cases Steve mentioned where the map-maker does something silly, but even then it should be blindingly obvious. There was a bug where a certain configuration of corner wall tiles stopped troops going through a gap in one scenario Thread. The rubble was coincidental.

I have not had problems with the roads over water thing. Works well, thanks for adding it.

I'd say the AI plays this one pretty well, at least as well as the original official ruleset. The only problem is that it doesn't repair units, but this is not such a big deal really. It would be pretty cool H2H because the slow ground combat allows some real tactical movement. A couple of observations: Artillery units in a stack die pretty easily and require a bit of micromanagement. Best to engage the target with them at max range and then send the other front line troops from the stack forward to attack directly. I kind of like the weak arty in theory, they should act more like a smaller attached battery rather than a massive division of pure arty. It is a bit hard to make it work that way in the game atm though. Ship vs Ship still works pretty well, ships already had enough HP to absorb a bit of damage. I didn't get too deep into the tech tree, my turns started taking 15 seconds to process and I gave up.

Great minds think alike there jeep I made a simple x5 HP ruleset out of the official 1900-2030 ruleset too, but didn't do any of the other interesting stuff you have done. Similar to the x10HP 1940 ruleset, the combat works a lot better. I think I'll keep mine back since yours seems to have a lot more to offer, I'll definitely give it a try. Modding new graphics would be easy I guess if you had a trick like posing a 3D model, or batch processing a new layer over existing images eg adding an AWACs dome to the existing aircraft, or a new combat animation over an existing unit. Otherwise it would be really tedious to do them all by hand.

Picture Attached

I've uploaded a remake of the original Strategic Command - European Theatre game map to the game server. It has an unplayable Africa (made of mountains) stuck on the bottom so that ships can round the Cape and come up through the Suez. Of course for it work as a Strategic Command 1 remake, I have to design a custom ruleset and set up units in their correct places, so that will take a while.

That's cool! I recently made a remake map based on Strategic Command 1's European Theatre map and I had to use deserts as a substitute for swamps. It also allows a bit more versatility if you want to make it impassible, you still have the other three terrain types to play with. If I could suggest another terrain type, it would be "City", an urban terrain type that allows the expansion of cities into larger urban zones. Also, how about allowing roads to be placed over water? This would give a land bridge type thing so that ships and land units could pass over the same spot. Think of the Suez canal, the Bosphorous et al, in EoS currently you can either make it passible by land or water but not both.

I've been setting +20% oil, +30% food and -10% steel on random maps and it seems much better. Interestingly I've roughly estimated that on some maps there isn't actually enough food in the game world to feed all the neutral cities.

Yes I think as far as accuracy and completeness goes, the eventual game + module + module orbat is going to be much more extensive and more chance of getting in some of the rarer individual vehicles. The module system allows BFC to continue to support the game, and add cool but rare stuff. Of course this means shelling out some extra cash , but plenty of times I've seen people claim they would be willing to pay $100 for X or Y unit to be in the long-since unsupported CMx1. I think they can make the modules worth the price, and I guess everyone has the option of passing on whatever module they don't like or can't afford.

I think it is pretty much esential to have an oil and a couple of food resources (eg +10 oil and +20 food) right next to the starting city or expansion becomes tedious at best and impossible at worst. Thats why I've found no resources option to be so much fun, its just a unit spamming slugfest, no worrying about your cities starving to death.

Empires of Steel has a great integrated lobby and player matching system. Unfortunately there is never anyone just waiting there for a game, but if you had pre-arranged a time it would be a great way to chat and auto-connect connect. A bigger community would make it more likely to find someone waiting for a casual battle. I hope something like that could be arranged for CM but knowing BFC I doubt that it is even on the first ten pages of "the list".

So the entire US Army is in the pockets of international criminal syndicates? I thought we were there 'cause of something about terrorists. Medicinal opiates are grown in various places in the world so I don't think Afghan poppies are really needed for anything good. The war on drugs is genuine and self perpetuating because it is wrapped up in outmoded international treaties and UN conventions. The various countries that police it do so individually with great enthusiasm but at the direction of the UN/US. Thats the problem with regulation/prohibition often it is very difficult to go backwards as a whole bureaucractic apparatus springs up and the people invested in it spend a lot of time trying to validate their own existence. After all EVERYONE knows the war on drugs approach doesn't work and hasn't worked. Politicians of every variety just don't have the stones to do anything about it.

I think there was a bunch of extra MOUT stuff that was planned or at least designed. I think the urban breaching kit even made it into the manual or the mousepad thingo, this is supposed to be SWAT style kit to smash down locked doors. Guess what, no locked doors either. I imagine much of it stayed on the drawing board, as we know there wasn't even time to code some of the basics before release. You could bold "if you have access to them" in relation to roofs too. That would be cool and that isn't in there. I'd guess that the stairs being abstracted as mentioned would look a lot like now in practice, but being able to choose where they are located would be interesting. Having stair access at only one end of a large building, or not having access to the roof would create interesting situations. Of course what we have is arguably better as it is simple and effective and doesn't require excessive micro management. The best one on the list is having a choice about the type or amount of clutter in an interior room.

What "sort of thing"?

I think there was a discussion about this before CMSF came out and the consensus was that running individual suicide bombers around the map would be extremely distasteful for the player and would be an overall negative for the game considering they wouldn't be very effective.

I think maybe the scale isn't quite right. However if you have the game it should be pretty easy to set up a Tactics II scenario

Assault should cause the AI to use ASSAULT so that is one extra option. You might find that the Syrians actually can't do that though due to their programmed in unsplittable doctrine. I think you are right that HUNT is not available to the AI.

Thats the problem with LCDs. Anything other than native res looks awful. I've still got my Sony 21 inch CRT as a backup for certain things, but the problem is it is bloody enormous!

Glad to help. I might be tempted to blame this on the fact that many of the buttons or drop-downs in the menu don't give any hint that they are buttons.

These would be pretty low on the priority list (maybe for EoS II ), but I've got a few suggestions for the ruleset editor: * Allow technology to change global values like default view distances. eg you research sonar and all naval units can see submarines at a +10% or +10 distance. * Similarly, allow technology to give a movement range (or rate) increase to units based on their movement class. eg. Give "air movement" units a 20% increase in range. To do this sort of thing currently I have to create a duplicate unit that is enabled by the tech with a larger spotting distance and a duplicate unit with a faster move distance. If To do three levels of bonuses for both, I need to create an array of 9 identical units. * Allow a change to unit upgrade settings. Currently this is listed but cannot be changed unless I am missing something. If I want to give all existing units a free upgrade or upgrade to a unit that has the same production values I cannot do that at the moment, right? * Expand the batch processing to give things like hitpoints and damage to hit values the batch treatment as well. * Add a function for cities growing their population for every turn there is excess food.

"Don't taze my granny" sounds like a hoax to me, but maybe my BS detector is set too low.

I'm not sure if I understand you correctly, but did you know you can click on the flag in the player selection section and change to any one of dozens of flags? Afghanistan, EU, Pirate etc. etc.

I've uploaded/shared a new ruleset that makes a big difference to the fun factor of the game imo. Here's the description I put in the ruleset: It probably won't be for everyone, for example it can take three turns to destroy a militia unit, but grouping units and playing to their strengths will make combat quicker. The most exciting thing is you can actually understand what is going on with combat. It always takes more than one turn to resolve, so you actually can withdraw, reinforce with other units during the course of a battle, and see the hitpoints ticking down, and get an update during each orders phase on how the battle is going. It also becomes neccesary to rest units for quite a few turns to repair them up to full strength. I'm imagining it would be possible to get into some massive battles and actually apply some tactics as more and more units are produced. Air units also seem to work really well. They will take many many sorties to destroy a unit, but they will harrass and pick away at the hitpoints, and take bits of damage themselves. Please try it!

Thanks for the update Brit, I'm particularly looking forward to seeing how the "both units don't die" works. I've made a report of some instability/crashes using the combat simulator, maybe it got broken in some of the changes you made.

...using the 1940 ruleset, in the combat simulator I set up a tactical bomber to attack a tank, and it says the bomber gets 100% chance of 0 HP damage? It seems that it can't be killed! However in the 2030 ruleset, a tactical bomber vs a tank with seemingly similar attributes as the 1940 matchup does the normal damage you would expect on the bomber.