Hubert Cater

Nice idea and this most likely possible but I'll have to take a look as it has been a while since I've looked at the Partisan scripts. My guess is that Edwin would probably know better than me at this point

Thanks, and while there is not always that simple solution, where the AI will in fact need some tweaking, sometimes you have to take a few steps back and look at the big picture before you start implementing too many *needed* adjustments. From experience, more often than not a tweak here and there can cause an unanticipated fallout in another area where you get into that analogy of the guy cutting at the legs of a table just to even out the height... but before you know it the table is flat on the floor where perhaps that slight wobble wasn't so bad after all

Excel, As far as I know and this is unless of course there is a bug somewhere or I have misunderstood the questions... the answer to both questions would be no. Added note: Essentially it is the same system as in SC1 except now with tiles. Also, the path finding algorithms, which include supply, take into account land countours etc., so this is why there is no longer the supply bug that allowed the supply path to pass from Denmark to Sweden as was the case in SC1

Bill raises some good points that a lot *faults* can simply lie in the the scenario/campaign designs themselves and do not necessarily require AI adjustments at all. For example, wrt the D-Day mini-campaign some of you have noticed that the AI will occasionally unload HQ units in more vulnerable positions. After taking a quick look it appears to be, in this case, mostly the fault of the Battleships and Cruisers which during their shore bombardment phase block many of the potential landing positions thus forcing the eventual landing of the HQs to the periphery of the invasion. Considering the scale and the fact that artillery already has a range of 2 tiles, a simple tweak giving Battleships and Cruisers a strike range of 2 tiles (for this mini-campaign) seems to have mostly resolved the issue... i.e. HQs now land in the desired *safer* pockets at a much higher percentage than what was happening previously.

Very true Kuniworth as it is a bit of a balance between Historical Accuracy and Play Balance.

Sounds good

GrognardFortyPlus, For me Eiffel was one of the programming languages that got it right. Technically it is one of the better languages but unfortuantely it is not one of the better known entities. The pros and cons for this are obvious as it had made programming SC2 that much easier, i.e. it is unlike C++ where I would have to manage memory manually etc., but it is also unlike C++ where it does not have extensive multimedia libraries ready for use. This can be a double edged sword as I found the backend programming, i.e. all of the data structures, classes, essentially the bulk of the software engineering is quite easy to do in Eiffel (due to the language and easy to use tools) but it was a bit of a challenge incorporating DirectX as essentially I am the pioneer in this area with respect to Eiffel. Things are improving however as since the original release of SC1 there has been 3rd party work done on a new multi-platform multimedia library which in theory would allow me future developments on not only the Windows platform but also Linux and Macs. I only say in theory as I would have to redo a good portion of my original DirectX code and have to use an alternative library for the GUI (Graphical User Interface), I currently use a Windows specific one and I am not sure if at the moment the extra effort would be worth it. FYI, Eiffel was the language I had used in University for Software Engineering courses and it is used quite extensively in the Academic field simply because it is one of the most academically sound designs. It's use however seems to be much more limited in the commercial field probably because a lot of resources have already been thrown behind languages such as C++, Delphi and JAVA but hopefully projects such as SC2 will one day change that For programmers I would suggest taking a look at the Open Source version of Eiffel Studio (their IDE) found at http://www.eiffel.com as well as an Eiffel book called "Object Oriented Software Construction -2nd Edition" as it really is a must read for any Object Oriented software developer in general.

Thanks Craig, it is much appreciated

Karhu, Finland?

Unfortunately this is not currently possible

Good catch! I'll take a look and fix this

SMG42, This is simply one of those areas where changes to the game mechanism do in fact work very nicely in a multiplayer game but unfortunately require a bit more ingenuity on my part in order to have the AI handle it better. Either way, the good news is that these are areas that I have already identified and will continue to work on in order to improve the overall AI game play.

Originally I posted that you could change the resolution setting via the ini file but apparently forgot this is also done just by selecting the 'Settings' dialog in game. Must have been tired junk2drive, Have you tried 1280x1024? I use this at home on my 19" monitor and find it is a nice balance between text size and game play.

Oops! Sorry already fixed the AF attacking neutral ships bug

I'm glad you think so and thanks

1. This can only be done in the Editor 2. There is a second 'localization.txt' file that can be found in the D-Day subfolder. If you look under the 'Campaigns\_D-Day' folder you will see how in this second 'localization.txt' file the appropriate text has been changed. Additionally take a look at the 'campaign.ini' file in this folder as you can see how the option to turn on #CUSTOM_LOCALIZATION, #CUSTOM_BITMAPS etc. is there as well. This way you can have specific customizations for each individual campaign without ever having to overwrite the original *master* data.

Glad to hear it

I had actually experimented with this about a year ago or so but one of the problems was finding just the right color, as not all highlight colors look good on the map (and since I've used up quite a few of them already) but with more pressing things to do I had to put it off... something I'll probably go back to when there is more time though.

Santabear, Reinforcement is the exact same as in SC1, right click on the unit and it will give you the 'Reinforcement' option This is actually the same as in SC1, i.e. once you move a unit the 'Undo' move button will appear in the upper right hand corner of the screen in the Button area. We've posted the full User Manual and it is available here: ftp://ftp.battlefront.com/pub/guides/SC2_pdf_manual.pdf Hope this helps, Hubert

This is just how the current system is setup to work, i.e. similar to how once France surrenders any Vichy territory currently held by Axis will still automatically become Vichy. In this case, the existing forces in these territories will get returned to their home territory, i.e. Italian troops occupying Marseilles will be returned to Italian friendly territory. I'll admit that I haven't tried the Iceland first strategy but it should essentially happen the same way. In terms of how this generally functions I have considered making a few adjustments where the territory transfer will not always be automatic but all I can say for now (for sure) is that it is on that possible future enhancement list.

Essentially with the 6 month demo there is of course going to be a lot of experimentation and although a lot of these strategies are possible, the game is of course about making choices, I think you'll find that over the long haul some of these options may not be as viable as you might think. For example, USSR could declare war on Turkey first turn but if this happens under the situation where the Axis player has a well prepared Barbarossa (ready to go) you might find that some of those Soviet Amphibious troops were more important to be held back elsewhere.

The problem with landing them first would be they would be pushed to the front of the invasion force and most likely even more vulnerable. I've noticed the AI HQ landing behaviour as well and while in some cases, if the AI has cleared enough units prior to landing, they land in an ideal friendly pocket sometimes it occurs where they are forces to the edges and land next to enemy or exposed positions. I'll take a look and see what tweaks I can make.

Timskorn, Actually The Victory locations are on the map as the *flagged* cities, and yes you can place them wherever you like with the Editor

Correct

The demo is actually the same base code as the release version with just the noted restrictions. As for missing this, I guess none of us, myself included, bothered to test it on Novice or Green as we are such *Experts*