Jump to content

Bromley

Members
  • Posts

    284
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Bromley

  1. Nice to see you admit the US's newbie status . On the religion front, the Middle East has moved on (haven't you heard?) and the latest in the line of prophets thinks you guys are behind the times. Are they saved? Like I said, your sect is very limited, both in geographical and number terms. That's not to say you're not powerful - you've got your guy into office in the last superpower. Heart of pride? You're almost alone in the world and yet you're the one saved. Now that's PRIDE . EDITED spelling [ August 12, 2007, 01:23 AM: Message edited by: Bromley ]
  2. It's a matter of faith. I choose to not have faith in the teaching of my childhood as, now I know better, I can see that if I was born in another part of the world my ancestors would have been just a sure of the supremacy of [insert god/belief system here]. That's a simple version, but imagine what someone who's a fundamenalist in a nice, western country would be like if he was born elsewhere. :Blinders off: .
  3. Well, assuming your lot are correct, I'd say he's pretty evil. Lets forget people in the past (and as your lot are a relatively new phenomenon, that's being more than fair). Lets be generous and say there are 100m of your sect of Christians today. That god is damning over 6 billion people alive today. The overwhelming majority of those are merely being faithful to their own god(s). A large number of those that aren't Christian even believe that it's the same god, in one form or another. Although they may have heard of Christianity, they won't have had a convincing case put to them to change. Even if they had, they'd convert to RC or possibly Anglican. In that context, I'd say the Cathars had it right .
  4. jon. Considering the all-powerful nature of your god, he's a little limited geographically. Who's saved - do you know how many of your type of Christians there are? I don't, but I'd guess we're talking tens of millions. He's a chronic underachiever.
  5. I was all for it at the time, just based on the logic position that we knew Saddam had had WMDs and so therefore he must have WMDs (oops ). What pissed me off was watching CNN sometime in the first few weeks of the invasion. Reporter: "Why are you here?" Young soldier: "To kick Saddam's ass for 911" Reporter: "Some people say he wasn't involved" It wasn't "some people". It was everyone, with one notable exception who had a conflict of interest ("he tried to kill my dad"). I stopped treating CNN as a reputable news source on that day. jon. Assuming the "they" in the suitcase nuke is a terrorist organisation, the chances have greatly increased since Iraq. We didn't have Western Islamic terrorists before then (sure we had jihadis, but at that point there wasn't much difference between them and the people who went to fight in Spain in 1936). Imagine what it's done for the cause over in countries where the coffee shop talk was already about killing Jews.
  6. arado. Actually the rogue state justification is a fairly decent one. Whether the increased risk of conflict with a non-rogue state outweighs the reduced risk from a rogue is a different matter. Either way, at least the rogue can't blackmail you. As you say though, it's just too easy to stick the bomb on a ship/plane/truck and drive it in.
  7. Expanding on what Timskorn says, the way to do it might be: 1. Subs are invisible. 2. There's a base chance that units/resources will spot them if they're within range. 3. That chance is modified by ASW, Sub tech, sub posture (silent or hunting). 4. If it's ship that spots them a surprise encounter is initiated. 5. I'm unsure about what to do with air. Maybe a surprise attack that doesn't reveal the location of the air unit? 6. The "pull" incentive to move subs closer to land might be an increased chance of convoy interception vs. hunting in the middle of the Atlantic. 7. Except for (6), convoy routes have to be kept as they are. Otherwise at this scale the sub hunt becomes either too involved or too difficult. You'd also need a rule to allow subs to move through occupied ports, othrwise Gibraltar could be blocked. Either that or you move the port and allow fortresses opportunity fire against surface ships.
  8. I think the point is that they'd have had little choice. Even if there had been a swing in public opinion when the UK fell, what could the US reasonably do? No army, no experience in combat, no experience in amphib landings (hell, no good base anymore where they can stage from). Remember that SC2 is extremely lenient, even after patching, with amphib operations (a product of the IgoUgo turns and no stacking rule). At the "best", you might have seen the US reinforcing the Monroe doctrine via gunboat diplomacy. And supplying Russia, naturally, although the Arctic convoys would now be impossible.
  9. I wonder if that photo is of the Yank, although that's what it says in the description. From the article: Whether there's just one gory goring or not, great photo .
  10. Japan didn't do too badly either . I've always believed that WW1 & WW2 are what allowed the US to leap ahead to superpower, but I couldn't find historic GDP data online to back that up. Although without those wars there likely wouldn't be a EU, so over time it may even out. Messianic stuff aside (and the >1m Jews still in Europe might be surprised to hear that they're not here - likewise the slightly-more-than-the-Jewish-population-of-Israel number that's in the US), it's only just hit home how many Jews were killed. Six million, purely as a number, is increasingly small in the modern world, but it was just under a third of the world population of Jews at the start of the war and just under half of the current population. [ July 14, 2007, 04:41 PM: Message edited by: Bromley ]
  11. Looks excellent . One possible logic problem with supply is well illustrated here. The Allies have isolated Siwah but there is no effect on the Axis assault through the desert. Of course Siwah should always have a base supply level, but perhaps it should be more like that scorched earth example that you gave (i.e. Tobruk supply level for the ongoing supply chain = 0 therefore Siwah reduces to 3). It'd be more noticable in the West, but even here the Axis supply level at the gates of Cairo drops from 2 to 0. That would encourage the Axis to leave screening forces to prevent the Allies marching on Tobruk, in this case preventing possible misuse of the southern route. The main effect though would be to make the supply system more visually logical. Either way though, great additions!
  12. Some scripts were added a couple of patches ago to spice up the game against the AI. Just wait until Il Duce drags you into Greece with no warning . ; US War Entry: ; Historical date of event was 1941/12/11 { #NAME= USA Joins The Allies (25% - Allied AI) #POPUP= Germany Declares War On USA #FLAG= 1 #TYPE= 0 #AI= 2 #COUNTRY_ID= 3 ;Set US war entry #TRIGGER= 25 #ALIGNMENT= 2 #DATE= 1941/12/11 ;Germany politically aligned with Axis and not surrendered #VARIABLE_CONDITION= 5 [1] [100] [0]
  13. No difference. Rockets are the only unit where that happens.
  14. Not fair Blashy. The SC2 weather categories may (I'm assuming Hubert knows more about weather than I do ) be more accurate than the basic seasons as most people know them, but they're not the same as the seasons that most recognise. Late Fall is early winter to me. Half of Late Spring is early summer to me. Early Fall is a month later than I'd expect. Late Winter is early spring to me. All that aside, it feels really wierd to get to July before Summer hits (turn duration wise)
  15. Just to clarify, that's 10% chance Turkey will join whichever side the AI is (i.e. 0% chance that it will, via this script, ever join your side).
  16. [Edited as I reread the script] Looks like Turkey's alignment is immaterial. The condition doesn't look all that logical to me, in that it would presumably be the presence of the British in the Middle East and the Soviets to the north that would encourage Turkey to join the Allies. Still, no big deal. ; Turkey { #NAME= Turkey Joins The Allies (10% - Allied AI) #POPUP= Turkey Joins The Allies #FLAG= 1 #TYPE= 0 #AI= 2 #COUNTRY_ID= 43 ;Set war entry #TRIGGER= 10 #ALIGNMENT= 2 #DATE= 1942/03/01 ;Germany politically aligned with Axis and not surrendered #VARIABLE_CONDITION= 5 [1] [100] [0] }
  17. It's ports that matter. ; US naval units in vicinity of Spain ; 25-35% increase in Spanish activation towards Axis { #NAME= US Naval Aggression Near Spain (Spain->Axis) #POPUP= Spain Alarmed Over Local US Naval Activity #FLAG= 1 #TYPE= 1 #AI= 0 #COUNTRY_ID= 38 #TRIGGER= 50 #DATE= 1939/09/03 ; 25-35% activation increase towards Axis #ACTIVATION= [25,35] [1] ; Set variable conditions: ; 1st Line - USA politically aligned with Allies (not fully active) and not surrendered #VARIABLE_CONDITION= 3 [2] [0] [0] ; US has 1 naval unit within 5 tile range of Bilbao port OR #CONDITION_POSITION= 57,22 [5,5] [1,1] [2] [3] ; US has 1 naval unit within 10 tile range of Lisbon port OR #CONDITION_POSITION= 50,27 [10,10] [1,1] [2] [3] ; US has 1 naval unit within 5 tile range of Valencia port OR #CONDITION_POSITION= 62,28 [5,5] [1,1] [2] [3] ; US has 1 naval unit within 10 tile range of Casablanca port #CONDITION_POSITION= 51,32 [10,10] [1,1] [2] [3] }
  18. There is one thing that you can do to maximise the transfer. THe HQ units created are those at the top of the build list, so don't build Zhukov before the Siberians arrive and you'll get him, saving you a few MMP and IIRC giving him a medal's worth of experience. You can also overbuild air units by one if you build all the Soviet air units before the transfer, but tying up all those MMPs might compromise your ground defence.
  19. Yep. If it's unchanged from the manual, once no capital remains in that country's hands, the chance of delay is 3%*number_of_units. Against the Russians that can be quite a high percentage . Minors are either 5% or 6% per unit (a typo in the manual means that it's not clear ).
  20. My first ~8 HvH games were 1940s Russia ones. It worked more often than it failed, but I had everything timetabled with very little margin for variation. All it took was one little spanner (which any experienced player will be able to provide) and I was boned. For example, a weak UK European landing in late 1940 would be enough to throw my plans. Also, Spain was easier to diplo back then and you needed the extra MMPs and garrisons. Pre-barby your big decision is whether to attack Spain/Vichy or not. I believe that Finland would be a mistake, but Sweden is a possible (as the Allies will almost certainly be in Norway). You can do a Sealion, but that's pretty risky.
  21. You'll trigger a free US army of 1 HQ, 2 corps an army and a tank. Russia will also be unmolested. Not sure about the AI, but against a human, it won't work. Actually you wouldn't really be allowed to do it as most HvH games have a no-neutral-US-fleet-moves rule, which implies a no-Axis-landings-in-North-America. The very fact that that's unstated indicates that no one has considered a US attack as a valid possible Axis move. If you want to do something wacky, and if your opponent is the AI or is relatively inexperienced, you can try attacking Russia in June 1940. Head for the mines and then the Caucasus. Takes a lot of micromanaging to make sure you don't trigger the Siberians until you're ready and, frankly, it relies on your opponent making mistakes or getting depressed . ; USA ; This event will be called (by the game engine) when either Canada or US is ; invaded by Axis units { #NAME= USA Mobilizes National Defense #POPUP= US Mobilizes National Defense #FLAG= 1 #TYPE= 1 #AI= 0 #COUNTRY_ID= 3 #TRIGGER= 100 #DATE=1948/01/01 #DESTINATION_RESOURCE= 2,23 ; Set Condition Position: ; 1st Line - Axis units within range of Washington D.C. ; 2nd Line - Axis units within range of Ottawa ; 3rd Line - Axis units within range of Halifax ; 4th Line - Axis units within range of St. John's #CONDITION_POSITION= 2,23 [7,7] [1,1] [1] #CONDITION_POSITION= 8,19 [3,3] [1,1] [1] #CONDITION_POSITION= 14,20 [3,3] [1,1] [1] #CONDITION_POSITION= 23,17 [3,3] [1,1] [1] #UNIT= 0 [10] [1] [] HQ #UNIT= 1 [10] [0] [] Corps #UNIT= 1 [10] [0] [] Corps #UNIT= 2 [10] [0] [] Army #UNIT= 6 [10] [0] [] Tank
  22. Exceedingly good point. Not sure, but as Engineers are visible in those circumstances I'd say that paras probably are too. That destroys my round-down theory . I've definitely had an opponent's para unit disappear though even though it was adjacent to an unoccupied Smolensk.
×
×
  • Create New...