Hubert Cater
-
Posts
6,372 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Hubert Cater
-
-
The Vichy navy is composed of different ships than what you start with for France, notably the ones that were at Mers El Kebir/Torch and under contruction at the time of the Fall of France I believe... it's been a while so I can't remember for sure, but something like that.
Hubert
-
Disbanding will still be available, but the amount has been reduced to make it a little less attractive and obviously less abused
Hubert
-
Don't get me wrong it's a great idea, but you can still work around it by reloading games over and over again, I'll probably include it and it will help, but don't expect the silver bullet to cheating here
-
Could anyone who has had problems with blank text boxes please send me an email at support@furysoftware.com, I think I might have a fix for you to test.
Hubert
-
Sounds like your video drivers have not been fully installed. Perhaps going to the control panel and clicking on Add New Hardware might help. Allow windows to search for your new hardware automatically and it should find a driver for your video card and intstall it on its own.
Hope this helps,
Hubert
-
Adjustment has been made
-
Seriously considering it
-
It's interesting to hear that subs are not effective enough and too easily beaten upon, yet they are also too devastating against capital ships in a single thread
This really is going to be one of those issues that nobody will be happy with, but like WP said, it's perhaps not modelled perfectly but I also don't think it breaks the game. If the map could be bigger it would make things better for sure, and the fact that subs may end up used more as tactical units shows the difficulty in modelling naval warfare at this scale, but it's not to say that they also could not be used this way. Some other games have avoided this entire issue by just using naval boxes and random calculations of who has taken hits and who has sunk etc., but I think that having the ability to move around your own naval units and attack and hide and so on more than outweighs the shortfalls.
The effect on MPP's is based upon the number of subs in the area of convoys and their overall strength, and it cannot exceed the value of the MPP's it is effecting. So if the UK is only getting ~30 MPP from Canada sub raiding cannot exceed that value otherwise it would truly be unfair. Is it tough to stay alive out there as a sub, for sure, but this is not all that far off from reality as German sub crews suffered the highest casualty rates of the war ~70-80% and could very well be the reason why they were forced to abandon the strategy for the most part after 42'. Note: Advanced subs may help in this regard
As for subs being devestating against captial ships, well they were, sometimes 1 torpedo was enough, but you are all right it was tough to get that shot in there so the trick is being in position to do it, so if you decide to use your capital ships in anti-sub duty in the mid atlantic, be prepared to pay the price. Now I know there are no destroyers etc. in the game, and before you all jump on me and say how else am I supposed to hunt subs down with no other naval unit types, there is nothing stopping anyone from grouping their naval units together or using air units from both England and Canada to help spot and attack subs (as was done historically) and make them easier targets to thus limit capital ship losses.
Now if somebody experiments with all of this, and says hey this is still not worth it for me, well I think that is a valid point as well. Subs are/were risky as part of the overall grand strategy and choosing to avoid them all together and focus on other parts of the war machine could very well be the strategy to pursue. After all the Germans went with the partial sub strategy and were almost completely effective with it, but ended up losing the war in the end. More investment towards sub warfare could have ended up winning the war for them, maybe with a severly weakened UK (that they would still most likely have to invade to finish off), but perhaps not, perhaps abandoning it all together and focusing on tanks could have won the war in Russia and then the entire war itself.
Now all of that being said, I have made adjustments to decrease the spotting of subs to properly include Air Units and tweaked the "Surprise Encounter" losses a tiny bit, but this is just on my end (seems to be OK) and hasn't been fully tested yet.
Hubert
-
Spotting rules will stay as they are. As for the subs, I have recieved posts on both ends of the spectrum, some that say they are not potent enought and some that mention very good use of them... so this tells me that the current implementation is probably about right for the current game design and most likely is not going to see any major changes. I would suggest reading some of the posts regarding successful sub strategies and maybe these will help. I don't have the links off hand but a quick search might help.
Good luck!
Hubert
-
OK thanks, that could have been an oversight, I'll double check that!
Hubert
-
Again this was just a design decision, found that assaulting an enemy unit directly from a transport could lead to a lot of abuse, i.e. just keep trying until success, it's definitly a tradeoff right now and does make areas like Malta that much tougher. Exploiting the current design more often than not doesn't really happen. Most countries do not have the luxery to build enough units to guard the entire coast line and actually when I think about it, guarding an entire coast line would probably make an amphibious assault next to impossible using either design choice, so I am OK to leave it as it is.1. Maybe just my own ignorance, but is it possible to conduct real amphibious assaults? i.e. assault an enemy unit directly from a transport? If this isn't allowed for I can see major opportunities for exploitation (line the coast with a wall of corps). Specifically I've found that Malta is nearly impossible to capture because of the strength of the defending air unit and the fact that you can't land any ground troops. Admittedly, allowing for real amphibious assaults is difficult since there's no automatic retreat in the game, which brings me to point 2:
Sub spotting is currently implemented as you describe (this is a special rule for all units that can spot a sub, just subtract 1 spotting point from the spotting range of all naval and air units when dealing with subs)4. Sub spotting range and sub ops. Right now subs can be seen from 1000 miles away (literally) and attacked by anything, even battleships which would realistically have no anti-submarine weapons. IMHO reduce sub spotting range to 1 hex (can only be seen from an adjacent hex)
Hope that helps,
Hubert
-
Did you manage to get SC working? How about reinstalling CM?
-
Guys, the partisan corps is an abstraction for the game to give you the feeling of an annoyance in your rear
They start at strength = 5 and with a supply = 0, not really all that threatening if you've kept a few units down there to deal with them. As for being ahistorical, I really don't know what to say, I think it would also have been equally ahistorical if the Axis were to completely abandon the area and not even leave garrison troops in the surrounding cities as it sounds like some of you have done. I don't think that the Brits would have minded so much if the Partisans would have moved in to take a completely undefended area (esp. Tirana), and since it's all ahistorical it's all a matter of conjecture at this point. Try leaving a few units down there and see if you still have any problems, you might, but after all that's the point.
Happy gaming!
Hubert
-
So the partisans are giving you guys a hard time... hehe
-
I've seen this now in a couple of posts, and I just want to clarify before the myth becomes legend so to speak.For a game that was designed to be mainly PBEM I think the AI is great!
The game is designed for all modes of play, but I have mentioned that it was balanced for PBEM/Hotseat play first, which is probably why the statement has become misleading.
The reason for balancing PBEM/Hotseat first was to guarantee that all modes of play would be balanced, otherwise if it were done for the AI first then it would have been too easy to employ the standard AI cheats like extra units or MPP's or favourable battle odds etc. If this was done, no PBEM or HOTSEAT game would be playable as one side would always have a huge advantage over the other, and there are many games that are like that unfortunatley.
I think the results have been very good where you know that you are playing a game that is balanced for all modes of play (well as close as possible), and that if you want to give the AI an edge, you are in full control and know what to expect, i.e. increased experience etc.
Hope that helps,
Hubert
-
I am not sure what has happened since you first applied the patch and from the first time you ran into problems running SC. My guess is that a clean install will remedy the situatuion. I would suggest deleting the entire SC demo directory and all of it's contents, then follow either option#1 or option#2:It will not run and I get an exception log everytime I try.
1. re-download the demo package at
http://www.battlefront.com/products/worldwar/stratcom/download.html
or
2. reinstall the original package you downloaded, and then reapply the patch in the demo folder to replace the original executable
Prior to doing this make sure your system does support 1024x768x16 and you should not have any problems running SC.
For CM, perhaps when reinstalling your video card drivers something else has been removed that supported your 3D acceleration caps. Maybe DirectX needs to be reapplied as well, or perhaps there is a later driver available for your video card. I would suggest trying the demo tech support threads for CM and maybe they could be of more help.
Again, sorry for any inconvenieces you've encountered so far.
Hubert
-
Please try the patched EXE at:Originally posted by Thermopylae:The entire game has nasty way of shutting down after a pro-longed conflict in france and Luftflotte IV attacks a border hex...
ftp://ftp.battlefront.com/pub/demos/stratcom/SC.zip
This should resolve the issue you have encountered
-
Please download the patched EXE available at:
ftp://ftp.battlefront.com/pub/demos/stratcom/SC.zip
The game will run at the default refresh rate for your system with this patch file and you should no longer have this problem.
Hubert
-
Just to clarify, since winter starts in december I commonly refer to the first winter in the demo as the winter of 1940, and the second winter as the winter of 1941, i.e. the winter you will not see in the demo and the winter that there were transfers made from the siberian front by Stalin, notably in the defense of Moscow.the demo period covers one winter, the winter of 41 with no apparent effect
I agree it would be nice to have extra hexes down there as well, and as I've said before it was something that was finalized many moons ago when I encountered limitations, but it's not to say that I don't think it would be a good idea, it's just that the map will not change at this point unfortunatly.think i would also second the comment about africa else where Ie another hex row or two that gets some "flow" into the battle. it was after all a battle of flanking manovers.Hubert
-
If you take a look at the FAQ or the instructions.html that comes with the beta demo package there is a section that covers research and development. It will be more detailed for the final game manual but it should give you the insight you are looking for.
Hubert
-
Actually the AI is implemented to play blind like you under FoW. One special rule is for sub hunting as you've encountered. Sub hunting (by Allied ships) is based on a small percentage chance that raiding activity has been accurately reported by the affected convoys to the capital ships. Even if they proceed to the area, it will still be at their disadvantage as they are surprised by your advantange as the Allied hunter usually suffers big losses under the first surprise encounter. If there are other Allied ships in the area, they now know your immediate position and attack en masse.... this may explain why you've felt that they know exactly where you are, where it is rather a process of hunt and discovery and hunt somemore....although it is impossible to use subs with it off, since the AI will mass a lot of ships to take them out since it knows where they are.Hope that helps,
Hubert
[ May 26, 2002, 11:51 PM: Message edited by: Hubert Cater ]
-
Some of the conditions for Barbarossa are not apparent in the demo due to the time frame (may40-may41), but keeping the 'Scorched Earth' option on will make things interesting for the Axis player as they drive deep and may have supply problems, also there is the possiblity of a 'Soviet Siberian Army Transfer' from the winter of 41 onwards under the right conditions.
-
All spoting ranges against subs are decreased by 1 (this is one of the special rules already in place for subs). So it is already implemented as you said for Bombers, Air Fleets and Carriers as well as for other naval vessels
-
Send me an email at support@furysoftware.com with your system specs and we can take it from there
Hubert
History Rewritten - France Kicks Germany
in Strategic Command 1
Posted
I think since the category is 'Heavy Tanks' that an advanced level over the Germans sounds about right since they were heavier tanks.
Now does this make them better overall than the German tank philosophy of use, I would agree and say no for a couple of reasons and I think that this is fairly covered in the game. For starters, you will have to purchase a Tank Group which is a step forward for the French tank doctrine (as Straha and others have alluded to) and it is an additional cost and something that will be expensive and risky for them to do, especially at the stage when Germany is planning a tour of the Eiffel Tower, and the overall organization would most likely not have been as effective as the Germans which I think is reflected by the fact the French start with no HQ's and even if purchased, the command ratings are limited relative to the German counterparts.
Hope that helps,
Hubert