Elmo
-
Posts
202 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Elmo
-
-
Well perhaps Hubert will weigh in and tell us whether this thread is a waste of bandwidth or not. If it's tiles and no going back then that is that. If not then I'd certainly urge him to reconsider.Originally posted by Exel:...
I wouldn't like to rant about the issue so much, but I just think that hexes would have been a better choice - hopefully changing back is still an option.
-
Hear that clicking sound? It's Moon getting the lock ready...
-
Germany should not start at 1 either. They didn't put their economy on a total war footing until a couple of years into the war IIRC.Originally posted by pzgndr:OK, here's a bird's eye view of Military Production in SC2. A new industrial modifier will apply to each country, with 1 equaling 100% production from resources. So with a modifier less than 1, we can see PARTIAL production. Like for USSR and USA prior to entry...
-
-
You're not bursting my bubble - heheh.
I don't give a rat's a$$ where you buy your games. My impression was that Matrix was only selling online now. If that is incorrect, fine, but since I buy online from them and Battlefront it's all the same to me.
-
I hate to burst your bubble but Matrix announced a while back that they are going to online sales only. No more retail stores for them.Originally posted by Kelly's Heroes:Heheh. . .
I won't be sitting around waiting for the retail version.
I not only have lots of great games to play, but there are many wargames that are going to be released this year by Matrix, that will appear at retail or through their distributors, and which I will be buying.
-
Never mind, we're obviously stuck with tiles so no sense prolonging the debate.
[ April 16, 2004, 12:34 PM: Message edited by: Elmo ]
-
If the game must have tiles then at least offset the rows so movement is equal in all directions (basically square hexes
). Crude drawing:___ ___ ___ ___ ____
I___I___I___I___I___I_
__I___I___I___I___I___I
I___I___I___I___I___I
[ April 16, 2004, 12:18 PM: Message edited by: Elmo ]
-
Just checking. Thanks Moon.
-
Agree that rail lines are a must have. They were critical to strategic planning, and their conversion in the Soviet Union was critical to the Axis for logistical support.
From a strictly aesthetic POV can units have a facing? It looks weird for the Soviets to have their backs to the Finn's in one screenshot, although not completely unhistorical in the '39 scenario.
-
No, we ate all the swine and cheese, you ham.Originally posted by Les the Sarge 9-1:...
Eggsalad
Figures, you ate all the ham and cheese, swine -
Nope.Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:What's up? doesn't anybody else want to watch the big games?
-
Didn't see anything at the SC2 page or here regarding a demo. Will there be one? Thanks.
-
Nope. It's not due to ship until next Friday.
-
Sure ignore my post, see if I care!Originally posted by Cardinal Fang:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Elmo:
I don't need no stinking demo, but it does look like I'm the first one here to confirm my preorder.
Now where is that NyQuil?
Cardinal Fang </font>
-
I don't need no stinking demo, but it does look like I'm the first one here to confirm my preorder.
-
Try doing a Search. You'll find plenty of opinions previously posted. It was worth it for me.
-
There is a new interview posted at The Wargamer that features Martin talking about CMAK.
-
Any ETA for the new look? When it's ready?
-
Haven't played that sceanrio but try to maneuver for side shots if possible. Rear shots sound unlikely from your brief description of the layout. Also if you locate one enemy tank then move several of yours into position to shoot at the same time. He may get one of yours but you should get him, then move on to the next. Keep your infantry ahead of your tanks, and if you have any tank hunters then move them up for a close assault. A stationary tank that is not well protected by infantry is vulnerable to tank hunters.
-
Got it. Thanks to the whole team for the support of CMBB.
-
Looking forward to this. How about another bone?
-
Sivodsi
Played that scenario quite a while ago. However IIRC you do have some smoke to use. Judicious placement of smoke rounds and taking advantage of every gully, dip, and low spot, on the map should allow you to make a careful advance without getting shot up or going low ammo. I won as the Germans so I know it can be done.
Also, it is one of the scenarios discussed in the Strategy Guide.
Elmo
[ June 27, 2003, 12:24 PM: Message edited by: Elmo ]
-
John - You're welcome.
Ligur - Sounds like they mutually agreed to a ceasefire. See pg 43 in the manual.
Figures, you ate all the ham and cheese, swine
Tiles / Hexes
in Strategic Command 2 Blitzkrieg and Weapons and Warfare
Posted
Take a look at the attack difference diagrams Hubert posted at the beginning of this thread. Note that with tiles he will allow units to attack if they are adjacent to the defender where the tiles come to a point. That is what allows 3 or 5 units to attack.
Note however that you can accomplish the exact same thing by allowing the attacking units to the rear but along the hex spines (between the current attackers) in the diagrams to also attack. If you do that then 3 or 5 units can attack using the existing hex system in exactly the same manner as with tiles and so there is no need for tiles.
In fact he could even program it so that in the vertical attack example there could be up to 5 attackers, not just 3, assuming the two empty hexes along the defenders frontal spines also had attacking units there. That would make hexes even better at preventing a stagnant front than tiles.
So we get the best of both worlds by keeping the hex grid and changing the attack programming code to allow those spine attacks.
Unless I'm missing something this kills the primary argument presented so far for going with tiles.