Hubert Cater

The increase in supply is due to the narrow straights between Denmark and Sweden and this passes on to Norway as well. The same affect/effect? (I believe) will happen from Gibraltar to Spanish Morrocco. Not a special rule really, but automatically calculated by the game engine as narrow enough to count as a virtual connection.

Thanks, and I do realize that many of the comments and criticisms are all constructive and ultimatly towards the goal of having the perfect game. I am interested in the same goals and I have done what I think is necessary/reasonable to enhance game play so far while remaining consistent with my original vision. If I've left anything out or have decided to leave some things as they are, believe me it's not pride, but rather trying to get as many things done as possible while maintaining the above mentioned balance. I am always listening/reading, even if I don't have the chance to post, but for me it's one step at a time, one game at a time, and I am just as excited to see what the future holds Hubert

If anyone else has recieved the message "DirectX 7.0 does not appear to be installed on your system..." please send me an email at hcater@furysoftware.com. I believe I might have a fix, and I would like to test it on your system before I make it official. Thanks, Hubert

If anyone else has recieved the message "DirectX 7.0 does not appear to be installed on your system..." please send me an email at hcater@furysoftware.com. I believe I might have a fix, and I would like to test it on your system before I make it official. Thanks, Hubert

OK this part seems to be working properly, and if you could also send me an email at hcater@furysoftware.com I'll try and figure this one offline with you as well, since this seems to be the same problem with Marc, and then I'll report back here once I get a proper solution to the detection issue. Hubert

Correct, it should not affect game play at all since I have it default to the original setup if it *thinks* it can't find it. The only affect will be that if your system has the desktop problems reported you will not notice the difference just quite yet. Actually Marc, if you have some time, please send me an email at hcater@furysoftware.com and I'll try and figure this offline with you and report back here when I have a proper solution.

OK I'll have to double check the detection performed by SC, but if you are positive that you have DirectX 7.0 or higher installed on your system, and SC has already tried to detect DirectX, then you can set the line in your 'SC.ini' file 'directx = 0' to 'directx = 1' and it should work fine. Edit: Actually I just realized that changing this line won't work right now, could you also tell me if the file 'SC.ini' has had either of the following text added to it after the first time you run the patched 'SC.exe': "DirectX 7.0 or higher not installed" or "DirectX 7.0 or higher installed" If not then check the read/write permissions on the file and make sure that the file is writable as this will also have an affect on the new patch. Btw, what OS are you using, and if you can let me know where the file 'dx7vb.dll' is on your system that will help me track this one down. Hubert [ July 29, 2002, 04:28 PM: Message edited by: Hubert Cater ]

Only happened when Italy was still in the game

Hi Everyone! I am pleased to announce an update to the Gold Demo that now includes DirectX support. This patch should fix the resolution/refresh rate/icon rearrangement problems etc. that have been reported by some of you with earlier versions of SC. For those systems not running DirectX 7.0 or higher, the game is still backwards compatible and will launch with the original setup. The full demo package has been updated to reflect these changes and can be downloaded as per normal at ftp://ftp.battlefront.com/pub/demos/stratcom/SC_Demo_Setup.exe or if you would like to just apply a patch to your current version, please download the following zip file that can be extracted to your current demo folder. This patch includes the new EXE as well as an updated 'SC.ini' file ftp://ftp.battlefront.com/pub/demos/stratcom/SC.zip All changes included in the Gold Demo are as follows: Changes Made For v1.01a (July 25th 2002) - added use of DirectX 7.0 or higher to initiate resolution change to 1024x768, appears to have eliminated desktop problems including: refresh rate issues, icon rearrangement, and window resizing (backward compatibility still maintained for systems not running DirectX 7.0 or higher) - squashed rare research seed bug - reduced AI tendancy to attack from cities when it is surrounded - Soviet ports now included in 'Scorched Earth' - added disbanding of naval units (max return 10% of purchase value) - fixed minor FoW glitch during PBEM replay, showing of final destination of operated and rebased air units eliminated - eliminated anti-aircraft research bug, UK research values were included in Allied Minor defence calculations during combat, now only applies to home country and occupied territory - added text string "Facility" when describing Soviet destruction of "Oil" during 'Scorched Earth' - fixed gamey tactic for Sub raiding in the Med. Double raiding positions eliminated - fixed connected friendly resources bug, calculations now include all friendly hexes that can trace a line to a friendly capital city, not just of consistent color from capital to friendly resource (i.e. Italian Albania can now be fully supplied through a German occupied Yugoslavia) - fixed minor reorganizational issue with Allied AI once Germany surrenders Enjoy! Hubert

I think the newly added PBEM replay and the 'Disabling Undo Move' option should help somewhat in detering PBEM cheating. With the PBEM replay, it is not an option, so basically everytime you want to reload the game, you will be forced to watch your opponents last turn over and over again, and with some of these replays seeming to last about 5 minutes or more when games get really advanced, it can be quite annoying when abused (I had to test it!). By disabling 'Undo Move' you won't be able to use your naval units like pinwheels to discover your enemy units on the same turn, but would have to reload and this is where the non optional PBEM replay comes into play. Now is this perfect, not at all and it is in no way THE methed employed by me to deter PBEM cheating, it's just a few additions to make it less attractive. I will be adding in a PBEM reload counter to let you know how many times your opponent reloaded their turn, but even with this, unfortunatly there are always ways around it. Hubert

The campaign editor will be the same editor I use to generate campaigns, except your campaigns will be flagged as custom. There are no programmed events that can be set but you will be able to specify the different alignments of active countries, technology, start MPP's, date, who starts, edit unit strengths, entrenchments, names etc. and so on. Hubert

Interesting idea but the answer would be no. Hubert

Hi Dave, Got your email so I'll respond in more detail there. Hubert

The formulas SuperTed gave you should give you a basic understanding of the 'behind the scenes' game mechanics, as for the rest you'll have to wait for the many tables and other formulas provided in the user manual Hubert

Nope, just the one seed bug, the rest is either bad or good luck. Hubert

This is a bug with the random number generator that recieved a seed of '0' on rare occasions, sorry to say that it has been fixed Hubert

Like I said, you've made good points, and they will be something that I consider for the future, but as it stands now, it's not going to change. I have tried to avoid special rules for this game, and for the style of game that this is, I like the idea of having all resource income based on "what you see is what you get", not based on a special rules regardless of historical context. So in working with the current system and not having to make wholesale changes to engine setup, I have tried to make adjustments based upon the feedback and adjust accordingly. Some people found that Sweden was too easy to invade and wanted more units or a sizeable Swedish navy etc., I went with the addition of two units and positioning them accordingly. Sweden did have a Royal Air Force, now as for it's size I cannot say for sure, but I am taking some liberty with it since I discluded adding naval units. In the end it may not be perfect I agree, but I think it is a reasonable addition and the option is still there if you wish to invade, now the question is, is it worth it or not? Hubert

Changing the sound value to "1" does not shut the sound off completely, rather it is a fix for systems that won't play the sounds asynchronously, so I force an interruption for each time a new sound is requested, i.e. button clicks etc. Hope that helps, Hubert

There is no special weighting for the different avenues of research, %'s work the same for all categories and for each country. Hubert

Just a design decision Hubert

OK your line of questioning is a serious problem and quite frankly this not something that is going to be tollerated by myself of Battlefront.com Hubert

Currently, the main incentive to not attack Vichy and Sweden are that such an attack can bring both the USSR and US into the war earlier. This is of course difficult to gauge and appreciate the full effects of in the one year demo, but in general delaying other major allied incomes to the war effort can be beneficial to long term Axis plans. Attacking Vichy France and Sweden are still options but have to be weighed against this negative. The idea of having part of Axis income to come from either Sweden or Vichy France as resource or reparation income is a good one, (and something for me to consider in future versions for sure) but in the end the net effect will be the same as it stands now for this game. What I mean by this is that if I add this type of income to the current Axis coffers, it would certainly throw the balance out a bit and in order for me to adjust this, part of the current Axis income would have to be taken out from elsewhere, i.e. less initial resources or adjustment to plundering amounts, or adjustment to unit costs etc. to maintain the same overall balance. Hope this helps, Hubert

OK I've come up with something that I think will work, I'll give out more specific details in the next batch of changes. Hubert

For the minors it is event and date based Hubert

The changes made to the Air Fleet potency probably gives the impression that these cities are tougher nuts to crack than they really are, when actually I've just realized that there was a small bug that magnified this change into something bigger than it really should be. Right now the UK's anti-aircraft research is being included in Allied minor defence calculations when they are defending from a resource, which should not be included. OK expect a few small changes once I fix this and a few other things up. Hubert