Jump to content

Augustus

Members
  • Posts

    53
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Augustus

  1. Hi all: Correction to pop-up message: FAILED (lost_surfaces): Segmentation violation Thanks... Augustus
  2. Hi all: Correction to pop-up message: FAILED (lost_surfaces): Segmentation violation Thanks... Augustus
  3. Hi all: I've been looking forward to playing the demo, but haven't been able to get it working properly. The download works well...the install works well. I can open the demo, but when I get to the point where I click to play a demo scenario, a pop-up window occurs with the following message: FAILED (lost_surafaces): Segmentation violation Any ideas why this is? If I buy the full game, do you think this problem will happen again? Cheers... Augustus
  4. Hi all: I've been looking forward to playing the demo, but haven't been able to get it working properly. The download works well...the install works well. I can open the demo, but when I get to the point where I click to play a demo scenario, a pop-up window occurs with the following message: FAILED (lost_surafaces): Segmentation violation Any ideas why this is? If I buy the full game, do you think this problem will happen again? Cheers... Augustus
  5. Hi all: I've been looking forward to playing the demo, but haven't been able to get it working properly. The download works well...the install works well. I can open the demo, but when I get to the point where I click to play a demo scenario, a pop-up window occurs with the following message: FAILED (lost_surafaces): Segmentation violation Any ideas why this is? If I buy the full game, do you think this problem will happen again? Cheers... Augustus
  6. This is my preference for icons...reminds of the old SSI War in the West/East. Cheers... Augustus
  7. Hi all: It would be nice to see Allied AI keep an interest in Egypt after Axis control. Cheers... Augustus
  8. That pretty much sums it up jon j...it better be the best thing since sliced bread!
  9. A super idea...makes great sense...how could something so simple be so over-looked in SC I? A pragmatic rule such as this would have increased game-play satisfaction immeasurably. Cheers Augustus
  10. One of the best suggestions to come out of this forum...so simple, yet for some reason over-looked! This should be included in SC II... damn the release date! Cheers Augustus
  11. Not bad...I might take a closer look. Looking at the screenshots on their website, they have something that SC I does not have, and hopefully SC II will have...paratroops! Cheers Augustus
  12. In SCI, Athens is a port, Rome is not. Will Rome be a port in SCII? Augustus
  13. I like the rail idea, though I can see how it may not work at this scale. Perhaps something can be done to include this? Augustus
  14. I like the disband for reasons stated above. Keep it. Augustus
  15. With all respect, not sure if I like the idea. I find that having to take turns to re-equip fleets adds to the excitement and realism of (simulated) battle. Nothing like chasing a wounded adversary in open sea. Anyways, I like it as is. Cheers
  16. Good questions, but let me offer my opinion on Axis control. Country that conquors retains control and MPP's throughout the game. Final. However, I still chuckle when I see Italy conquoring other nations, it is just stretching reality a little too far, in my opinion. I know SC is to allow for IDIC (for you non-Trekkies, that's 'Infinite Diversity through Infinite Combination', a Vulcan mantra), but SC should try to keep its' AI or user outcomes somewhat realistic/historically balanced as well Cheers...
  17. I like this idea....reminds me of the old table-top game SSI's "War in The West"...maybe SSI??? Anyways, the production 'spiral' allowed for the building of SS troops, and they were almost invincible. So, I like your idea. Cheers Augustus
  18. I hope the AI is better...game play for France '40 should not have an Allied advantage, the beauty of playing strategic games of this mature is to (sometimes) re-enact historic tactics...ie: blitzkrieg, etc...) So, a strong Fr. in 1940 (or anytime) would frustrate me to no end...I expect some historic balance.
  19. Hopefully we can expect a better strategic game...the AI in SC1 is pretty uneventful, Axis or Allied. Nothing more frustrating when playing Allied to sell off Fr. air and HQ, buy tons of Fr. Corps, line these up on Fr-Ger border, then watch the 'vaunted' Axis AI bang their heads against the Fr. line for the rest of the game....boring! It's even worse after a Dutch Gambit! Anyways, a better AI would be a start, but more strategic options without any easy 'win' plays would be useful as well...maybe I'll go back to PG II for a while...some of the user-made scenarios there are truly difficult.
  20. LOOKS VERY GOOD...BUT ALMOST THE SAME OPENING ORDER OF BATTLE AS IN SC1? CHEERS...
  21. Interesting points made. Though by the end of July '42 Montgomery ceased responsibility for the military side of the Dieppe raid, Monty was the senior military planner for Dieppe. Even though he was in Egypt at the time of the raid (Aug. 18) his plan was not altered in any significant way. Early '42, he was General Officer Commanding-in-Chief South Eastern Command (Home Forces). Also, Canada as a major power? Difficult question. Certainly helped western allies stay alive (namely UK) from '40-'43, yet I suspect by '44-'45 US material dominance shifted the significance (not importance) away from Canada. Cheers Augustus PS- its' nice to see a thread on Canada...a country that played an important role in WWII.
  22. Jersey John Yes, it is Gathering Storm campaign. Yes, it is against AI, not human opponent. Cheers... Augustus
×
×
  • Create New...