Bruce70

1) Move a HQ to the middle east, then you won't have any supply problems. If you are the Axis player you will have to find a way out though. 3) This is worth looking at for version 2 and would be a natural complement to adding an upgrade cost. [ October 09, 2002, 07:32 PM: Message edited by: Bruce70 ]

Perhaps there could be a system built in where if you haven't received any advances after a certain time period (varying with the amount invested) you automatically get one advance of any type (whether you have invested in that or not). There are a whole bunch of reasons why I don't like this idea but it would make some games more interesting.

That worked, thanks.

I have the same problem as above (dos screen flashes during turn replay and then SC closes). I have already played 2 PBEM game to near completeion with no problems and the game in question is up to turn 23 or so (the axis player has just declared war on Sweden, USSR and Greece). We are both using Eudora, running on W2K. We have tried resending the file, zipping and then resending, going back to a previous turn and doing all of the above - nothing works (except that the replay crashes at a different stage each time). I can send a save file if it will help. [update: Just tried opening thew file on the computer it was created on and it still crashed, so the problem isn't in sending the file.] [ October 07, 2002, 10:53 PM: Message edited by: Bruce70 ]

A command to do this sounds like a good idea. ATM you can land an axis corp on a resource hex with no chance of holding it but the russians still destroy it. It would be much better if they could choose not to destroy it, while the axis player had to stay there for a turn if they wanted to destroy it.

This is not directly related to this thread but could someone break this down into frontline troops/artillery vs support personel for me please. By may calculations a brigade would have about 2000 troops which would give 3000 support personel which sound like too many but maybe I am underestimating something? I apologise for being too lazy to look this up for myself but you grogs love this kind of thing dont you?

I agree with the assertion that research shouldn't be resolved completely by luck. Luck should play a large part, but if you just remove the possibility of extreme events happening (like Jollyguy's that is, Welshwill's was quite reasonable IMO) then there would be no "ruined" games while the vast majority of games would be unchanged.

The situation you describe does not sound desperate or unreasonable. The Brits have admittedly been lucky and have had 3 advances in Jets. Assuming they haven't had advances in IT as well then they are going to have a hard time reinforcing those and will almost certainly not be building more. OTOH you have invested in IT and have had 3 advances. Had you invested in Jets instead you would be in a very strong position as far as the air war goes.

I am having some system stability problems playing CMBB (no problems with other games/apps including CMBO). Twice my system has rebooted itself and once it has locked up. I have only played about 5 games so far. System: Athlon XP 1.8 256M RAM Radeon 8500 (64M) Latest Drivers Windows XP nForce M/B (onboard sound) DirectX 8.1 Any ideas?

It seems to me that if you take a defensive posture to the USSR early then the Finns stay out of the war for the entire game (well untile you declare war on them anyway). I guess this typically happens when you try Sea Lion. IOWs I think you need to make early gains against USSR for the Finns to join.

Mine had been opened and resealed and a little bit bent but I wouldn't say damaged. I suspect it was customs making sure it was software. Signed: Bloody Tasmanian.

Got it in Tassie, damn those turtles are fast.

Not a bad idea.

And you pushed the guns to the battle, in the snow, in bare feet, uphill, both ways - right?</font>

Bah, at least you live in Adelaide it will probably take an extra week to come down here on the Australia Post mule train.</font>

The only solution I can think of is to introduce a cost for upgrading units, but that is surely a job for SC2.

I try to play the game in an historically plausible (not necessarily accurate) way when playing against a human opponent. Although against the computer I have experimented with some gamey tactics - I like to disband the French air and navy assets and also invade Norway, Sweden and Finland with the Brits (but maybe thats not really very gamey). If I play a game with someone and it was fun I'll more than likely play with them again regardless of whether I think their tactics were gamey or not. Some people who are complaining that the game has lost its fun also seem to be using gamey tactics excessively.

Ahh do you pay 10% more for replacements for each increase in tech level. I think you said that in another post, but I didn't quite realise what you were saying. But... Don't L0 air fleets at tech L5 cost 200 MPPs? just a typo? And I am not sure how you get a replacement cost of 100 at L5. How do you feel (Hubert and others) about it being cheaper to buy units at low tech level and "upgrade them" than it is to buy them at the higher tech level? I am not trying to make a big issue of this ('cos its not) but it does seem like an inconsistency to me.

If you buy an L0 air fleet (cost 400MPP) then wait until you get to L5 then reinforce it to 15 (cost 100MPP) you get the unit for a total of 500MPP. But if you wait until you get to L5 then buy it, it costs you 600MPP. (Also the first way you get to use it while you wait for L5). If you do the same thing at ind tech L5 then it costs you 250MPP (200+50) the first way and 400MPP the second way. Is this the case or am I way off? And if it is right does something need to be done about it? It certainly seems counterintuitive to me.

I will be interested to hear how much extra RAM improves performance.

My thoughts exactly Jeff. For me the reason is that it would make the game less fun. It reminds me of the joke where the guy goes to the doctor and says "my arm hurts when I do this, can you help me?" and the doctor says "sure, just don't do it" Also on the issue of plunder (which John raised) would it be better to give you the *option* of plundering a captured country with the down side being much lower production than if you choose to not plunder. You could possibly get the dibanded value of all captured units for free but furhter plunder would result in reduced production. [ September 26, 2002, 08:11 PM: Message edited by: Bruce70 ]

Hubert, it is good to see you are not about to blindly implement all the changes that we have blindly suggested. An holistic approach is what is needed and it appears that you have some good ideas on subtle changes that should address many of the problems at once. I find your approach very encouraging.

I am also very interested in this. Anyone played an operation yet?

I believe that in the new "1" position you can now look around without losing the vehicle "lock" (someone will now tell me you could do that in CM1 as well). It could be that the new view works better with this feature.

Don't suppose there is any chance of it getting across Bass Straight before the rest of Oz gets it, so I'm baracking for Sydney... and Adelaide and Perth and... [ September 25, 2002, 10:21 PM: Message edited by: Bruce70 ]