Jump to content

Skorpion

Members
  • Posts

    70
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by Skorpion

  1. While I agree that invasions of the US before anything else (see the "America first" thread) are gamey in the extreme and spoil the game, I can't see any sensible way of representing the US.

    Would they automatically surrender when Russia and Britain fall?

    What if they've occupied Portugal and Spain (or more) when the other two majors fall? Game Over? I don't think so!

    As there is no surrender code, the only way to win the game is to invade the US. Sure, it's unrealistic, but it's all we've got.

  2. I've always thought that the icons for ships represented an entire fleet, with the highest value ship being the one shown on the icon. I.e a battleship icon represents one battleship *and* a collection of cruisers, destroyers etc.

    So here's an idea...

    There should be a reasonable chance that an attack on a battleship group would result in the destruction of said battleship *thus resulting in the change of the icon from a battleship to a cruiser*.

    I for one am sick of seeing carriers going around at strength one when the actual carrier (which would of course be the main target) would have been destroyed in preference to all the other little ships that accompany it.

  3. What are the chances? I get home from work load up SC and at the end of the first turn "USSR Prepares For War", quickly followed by "Germany Declares War On The USSR" and a massive aerial bombardment by no less than six German airfleets.

    Surprisingly, I was able to delay this massive German advance sufficiently to get the standard Ural defensive unit in place, and with the british moving a substantial army group up from Iraq I've also held the caucasus.

    1944: The german campaign has stalled. Six level 5 jets (UK) and 7 level 2 jets (US) are massacring the feeble german level 0 fighters in the caucasus, and my invasions of Norway and Sweden mean that a third front will soon open up in Finland.

    Could this be my first victory against the +2 AI?

  4. Originally posted by Maytar:

    I had a similiar issue. When russia was neutral. Germay captured Poland, Spain, Vichy, France and then just stopped. In 1944 I turned off fog of war and noticed that they had massed all italian and german troops on the german/russian border 4 lines deep but never did anything but some simple bombing of london.

    There was essentially no activity from late 41 to 44 on the German side.

    Wow! Guess I should be praying that the USSR doesn't declare war on them then. That would be a really quick way of ending the war when he Axis has such an experience advantage.

    Skorp

  5. Originally posted by Kuniworth:

    Hi all

    I have some question before I decide wether I will by this game or not.

    1. If you play allies and the Sovietunion enters the war on your side, do you control their troops or will they be computer-controlled?

    You do.

    2. Can I choose just to play the soviets and not the western powers?

    Unfortunately not. You either play all the axis or all the allies, not individual nations.

    Skorp

  6. What should I do? I think that my enemy may be suffering from some sort of illness.

    Let me explain...

    I'm playing as the Allies at Expert with the axis AI having +2 experience. It all started so normally - Poland crushed in three turns and France invaded immediately. However, at this point I wanted to try something different.

    I move the *ENTIRE* Royal Navy into the med and proceeded to destroy the Italian fleet and capture both Tunisia and Libya. Meanwhile, France fell and I waited for the Axis to do its usual trick of invading the rest of the world.

    BUT IT HASN'T!

    I'm not quite sure what it is doing, but it is now August 1941 and all it does per turn is bomb Gillingham and spend MPPs in some way that I can't see.

    Have I found the magical tactic to defeat the axis AI +2 or has something just gone wrong?

  7. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by KiwiJoe:

    I use the 3.65 drivers with no probs. I can email if u like.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Should have said I'm on Win2k smile.gif

    There aren't any drivers that work properly with CM for Win2k. Yes, I know about the "force anti-aliasing in all applications" work-around, but how do I do this on an original TNT which doesn't do anti-aliasing?

  8. Well, it's both a hoax and a truth.

    There is a trojan that pretends to be the long filename backup tool, but it tends not to overwrite the original.

    But anyway, how many people actually use this tool anyway? I would have thought that it would have made more sense to pretend to be something useful so that if people did delete it they'd cause more harm than good.

    If you are even in the slightest bit worried - delete it. I promise you that you'll never use it anyway.

  9. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by wadepm:

    MGs don't confirm their kills very well. I had a battle where I had three MGs by themselves against a company advancing (at a run) in the open. The MGs all bought it after a couple of turns, but just before they blinked out I checked their kills and they didn't have any! However, in talking to my oppponent I later found out that they did considerable damage to the advancing infantry. Nobody believes the MG guys I guess.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Are you talking about your game with me wade?

    If you are then I can confirm that those three machine guns (1 .50 and 2 mmgs if I remember correctly) killed one whole squad and got about three casualties in each of the other five or six squads. Remarkably, however, all my HQs were unscathed smile.gif

  10. Ummm, while buying more RAM is always a good thing, it's not going to solve this guys problem.

    System Resources, as reported in windows refers to the 64KB section of memory (Also known as the stack space) that is used to hold things like window handles, icons and suchlike. It is easily possible to have less than 20% free system resources and still be using less than 96MB of RAM.

    Unfortunately, there is no solution to this, other than to load less programs and services, and most of the time this space can't be reclaimed when programs end. This is while you generally have to reboot Windows 9x every day or so or you will get errors.

    Of course, if you upgrade to Windows 2000 you won't have this problem, because the stack space is much larger in the NT kernel.

  11. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Clubfoot:

    Skorpion, the only real problems I've seen anyone have with the ModManager after v1.0g is due to inattention to the docs included with it.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Of course, you're right. I jumped straight in thinking that it would enable me to unzip about twenty mods into the folder without reading the docs at all. The problem was entirely my fault, and I can see that the ModManager woulld be useful in situations like DFDR or if you wanted to change all the vehicles from polish to british or whatever regularly.

    What I'd like to see is the ability to test a mod by installing it, and then allowing you to uninstall it if you didn't like it. Not sure about the feasibility of it though.

    Anyway, I'm sorry if Twosheds got the wrong idea. I wasn't trying to bash his work, just pointing out that idiots like me do exist and perhaps there should be a bigger warning or something.

  12. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Maximus:

    ...the Mod Manager is just another way to make an already simple method even simpler.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    LOL - I must be stupid then, because when I tried to get the mod manager to do anything it kept insisting upon deleting everything I had installed and replacing it with the twenty or so images I wanted. Result: CM doesn't run.

    Personally, I think that the ModManager interface is horrible, to the point that I might program my own when my finals are complete. That's not to say it isn't a good program, because it is, just that I don't think it's as easy to use as it could be.

  13. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sgt_Kelly:

    Most rivers in Western Europe (remember your CM opening sequence) have rather steep banks because they run through soft top soil. This more than anything else will prevent the crossing of vehicles because they simply tip in and bury their nose in the mud.

    Ground clearance or tracks won't help you.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    umm, we're talking about FORDS here, not just crossing wherever you think the water is shallow.

    I live in England and there are many fords, some dating back to medieval times. For those who don't seem to understand, a ford is a section of river where the bank has been dug out to provide a smooth entry to the water, and the river bed is generally reinforced with pebbles to provide a good grip.

    To my mind there seems to be nothing that would stop a tank crossing ones of these fords, especially as I frequently do it in a car!

×
×
  • Create New...