Jump to content

Covert Sniper

Members
  • Posts

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Everything posted by Covert Sniper

  1. I remeber a 1980's nuke game by Sid Meier called Balance of Power. It was probably one of his first efforts and it really sucked. The computer played the USSR and the human played the US. The idea was to avoid a nuclear war by 'negotiating' with the computer over things like diplomatic policy changes, troop movements, forgein aid and other aspects of forgien policy concerning allies, opponents and neutral third world countries. The problem was the computer was not a good negotiator. If the USSR (computer) wanted to send one million troops to Mexico and the US (human) objected, the nuclear war started. If the US wanted to send a diplomatic emmissary to Great Britan and the USSR objected, the nuclear war started. The computer NEVER backed down and ALWAYS started a nuclear war. Let's hope that all the folks involved in this situation have at least a trifle more sense than that. Randy
  2. ev, Have you given the Tacops demo here at battlefront a try? Not a WWII game but when I first found it back in the 90's I thought it was developed by the same person/people who developed PvR because the gameplay was so similar. No fancy graphics but the tactical level of gameplay is hard to rival! If you want the pressure of a 1st person shooter game, turn the order timer on to about two minutes for each company commanded and the pressure builds fast. Randy
  3. I'm not a programmer but the answer here seems quite simple. If the problem is that reloading can get better tech or dip results then simply change the place in the code that thoses events occur. Instead of the random events being calculated at the start of the turn, make it the last calculation that occurs at the end of the turn but just don't report the results until the next turn. Game start might have to be a special situation but there is no diplomacy in effect at start and has anyone ever gotten a tech hit at game start? That way the events are locked and all the reloading in the world will not change the outcome. It does not stop reloading for combat results or recon but as many have pointed out, the better overall plan will win no matter how hard you try to 'fix' results of individual battles or sneek a peak behind the lines. Randy
  4. As a kid played lots of Avalon Hill board games like Afrika Korps, Panzer Blitz, etc. Current board games are all the A&A series. I have also played the A&A Minitures which is a good game but I gave up buying the expansion packs because certain rare pieces were just to hard to find. Kind of silly to spend $200 on expansion packs trying to get one particlular unit. First WWII computer game was a Mac game called Patton vs Rommel. It was quite similar to TacOps (the one from Battlefront, not the first person shooter game). There was also a submarine game for the Mac called GATO(?) set in the Pacific pitting a US sub commander against Jap Merchant Marine and Naval ships. It was pretty neat as the computer would log your tonnage and names of ships sunk and carry them from game to game. If you got sunk you lost your log and had to start from scratch. Played V for Victory for a few years. Anybody know what ever happened to that game? It came in a couple of different flavors. I had D-Day, Velikki Lukki and a North Africa module. It was ok but the AI could be easily misdirected by massing troops in a particular area and the AI would abandon objectives to go after the massed troops. You could then disperse the troops and the AI went duh...what happened...where'd everybody go? Did the Operational Art of War demo a few years ago and now the version 3 is out, it will probably be my next purchase. Curretly playing SC2 and Uncommon Valor. UV is pretty good but it demands a lot of time because there are so many orders that need to be issued and one oversight or missed order fouls up the entire battleplan. Also playing TacOps and Decisive Action (non WWII). TacOps does currently offer a set of WWII units but there is no AI available for user created scenarios so you must play another human to play a WWII battle. TacOps has been on my hard drive for over 10 years and still gets played. Randy
  5. Thanks for the responses, they all helped quite a bit. I think my biggest mistakes were: 1. Allowing the computer to handle HQ attachment. For some silly reason I assumed that this would be a task well suited for the computer to handle but upon closer examination found that I was mistaken. 2. Not paying close enough attention to supply. I was originally playing as though a supplied unit was a happy unit. Now I see that the level of supply is an important factor. 3. Finally, I had fallen into the History Channel trap. I was doing a replay of WWII. The most pleasent revelation about this game is that you are not forced into a rehash of WWII. The reason that I usually avoid buying wargames centered around a specific war or battle is that the boundry conditions essentially force you down the historic path which eventually leads to the historic outcome. SC2 is quite different in that respect. It is becoming quite fun. Thanks again, Randy
  6. An invasion of Iran is unlikely. The US is currently involved in a two front war. First is the Iraq situation and second the ongoing operations in Afghanastan. It seems doubtful that anyone in the Pentagon would give Bush a thumbs up to open a third front. As Commander-in-Chief, Bush may order an invasion of any county or reposition existing troops at any time, BUT he must go to Congress to increase the size of the military. (As a note, there are questions about the constitutionality of the War Powers Act, that is, when a President orders troops to a location, Congress can cut off the funding like they did in Viet Nam or start a 'stopwatch' ticking to determine when the President must order a withdrawl.) The current size of the US miltary is too small for a three front war and reserve force for fast response like a MEU. With a Democratic controlled House and Senate and Bush a lame duck, it is doubtful that any effort to increase the size of the US armed forces is likely. BTW, even though carpet bombing sounds like some fun, the US will NEVER in our lifetimes ever carpet bomb again, just like they will never in our lifetimes detonate a nuke in anger again. There are those, however, that will do both. My 2c, Randy
  7. Gentlemen, I bought this game a couple of months ago and have been tinkering with it for the last few of weeks. I enjoy the gameplay and have had some fun but I seem to be missing something very basic about what I should be doing. I have been playing Fall Weiss and the scenario that starts with the invasion of Norway, beginner level with no experieince advantage for the computer. If I play the Axis, all goes well until about 43 or 44 and then everything just seems to unravel at once and it is not even worth playing out the scenario. On the Allied side, I just never seem to even be able to get the ball rolling and get on to the continent. What am I missing? Should I be playing a different scenario to climb up the learning curve faster? Is this game tailored to human vs human rather than human vs AI play? I am also curious about the AI and if/how it recieves a handicap. It seems that the computer has an uncanny knack to do things like locate my subs even though I move them away from the convoy lane and run silent after a successful convoy interdiction. The computer also out flanks my ground troops by maneuvering just out of my spotting range until it is time to strike. It is like the computer knows where I am as it rarely walks into the surprise attack situations that I constanly find myself confronted with. Does the computer recieve an MPP bonus or occasional free research/production? It seems to throw a lot of second, third and even fourth generation techology at me while I am fully invested in research and still waiting for second generation tech to be developed and when it is I am so strapped for MPPs with all the reinforcing that the hope of buying better units or even upgrading existing units is nearly out of the question. Is there a tech strategy order of importance that I should follow? Same question for diplomacy. HELP MR. WIZARD!!! Can someone get me on the right track? This game has a lot of potential but I need to get pointed in the right direction. Thanks, Randy
  8. Shows how long it has been since I messed with a two player game
  9. Stewart, Hmmm? I have not played a two player game but I have messed around with it to see how it works just in case I wanted to play a two player game. If fog of war is turned on, I believe it can not be turned off by one player without entering the oppossing players password. During the blue orders phase, only blue and spotted red units appear, during the red order phase, only red and spotted blue units appear. During the combat phase, only spotted units appear. If I remember correctly (it has been a while), there are menu selections to toggle from one phase to the next somthing along the following: issue blue orders [all blue and spotted red units appear], complete blue orders [all units dissappear], issues red orders [all red and spotted blue units appear], complete red orders [all units dissappear], begin combat [only blue and red spotted units appear and combat proceeds]. I would imagine that the opposing player would step out of the room for refreshments while orders are being issued. Randy
  10. A question for those with a military background: Goran noted that luck played a factor in his 0% casualties in Kincaid. Do miliartary planners factor luck into their plans? If so, how? Statistics can work to a degree, but statistics are not as effective when trying to string together a series of independent events. This is an oversimplification, but, if one were to flip a coin the odds of getting heads is 1 out of 2 or 50%. If one flips a coin a second time, the odds of getting heads are the same. These are two independent events and the outcome of the current event has nothing to do with the outcome of the previous event. If one were to flip a coin 100 times and get heads each time there may be a way to put a number on this, but when do statistics break down and this almost nonquantifiable, etherial event which we call luck take over? Luck, either good for the enemy or bad for the freindlies, has undone its fair share of military plans over the years. But do planners, at least in exercises, ever go out on a limb and say "this plan will work but we need a healthly dose of luck"? Maybe this question should be asked of philosphy profs . Randy
  11. Hi, In response to the questions 'what are zero causualties?' I am referring to the Game Status Report. This is the report that is flashed at the end of the game. For example, if one had an infanrty squad with P6 and ends the game with P1, and these were the only losses during the game, there have been five personnel lost during the game but the Game Status Report would show 0% casualites (I think) because no unit markers were eliminated during the course of play. That's what I am looking for, 0% casulties by the Game Status Report definition. If anyone can play with absolutely no losses, not even one one team or squad member of dismounted troops, I want to be on your side when I eventually play a CPX and I don't ever want a PBEM game with you . Clear as muddy water? Thanks for the responses so far, Randy
  12. Hi, I'm just curoius about how long people have been playing TacOps. I have been playing, with an occasional hiatus, since the v1.x release for Windows 3.x. The hard copy manual, which I do miss, was copywrited in 1996, so I have had the game on my computer for at least 6 years. That is pretty long lived considering that most games remain on my hard drive for a maximum of about 18 months. If you are relatively new to the game, do you intend to keep it around for more than 18 months or will a few months or year of play suffice? Are there any games you have kept playing for more than, say, two years? On the 'success' side, has anyone ever completed a mission with zero causualties? If so, what side, what game prefs and what scenario? Was there a time limit on the order phase and did you replay any turns to get out from under ill-given or forgotten orders? What about 5% or less, and 10% or less? I know that better players, of which I am not , can knock out games with casualties of 15% or less. Six years and counting, Randy
  13. Natman, IMO, the AI on Tacops is pretty darn good. It can't be fooled by massing forces away from an objective to draw off opposing forces, nor does it seem to cheat like other AIs appear to do. I have a lot of fun with solitaire games. Mr. Stoffel and Major H., If I had to use the vernacular that the AI 'sucks' my only complaint would be the lack of new scenarios with imbedded AI. I would really like to play some of the new maps, but the current solitaire games have only added a handful of new games since version 1.0 and most, if not all, use the old maps. I would like to play some CPXs to see the new maps but RL issues make a six or eight hour stint on the computer on a Saturday or Sunday very difficult. Hence, I might be able to observe for an hour or so, but that is about it. I understand that most of the enhancements for TacOps favor the multiplayer CPX and LAN world, but us solitaire users would like to see at least a couple more solitaire games in the upcoming releases, hopefully before v5. I also understand that the Major's military contracts must come as the number one priority, this means LAN and CPX. Is there any way to take successful CPXs and easily hard code the human controlled movements of forces, or portions thereof, that took place during the CPX into the AI to create solitaire games and place the scenarios on a download page? I heard that the November CPX was enjoyed by players of both sides. Even a hard to use scenario editor would be a great imnprovement and well appreciated. Happy TacOpting, Randy
  14. Lt., I have played Marks a number of times but not Fullerton. As far as dealing with the inner camp, I supect that they would be just about the same. I generally send in a couple of anti-armor teams, a few of MG teams and several infantry squads or teams for the assault and occupation of buildings. My usual approach is from the south. I drop them at least 600 meters from the inner camp. Infantry has to cover the ground on foot. MG provides covering fire for the infantry advance while anti-armor (just for insurance) watches for camp armor which should be destroyed with air and ICM strikes by this time. IMO trying to helo-drop inside the camp has just proven to costly. I struggle with my casulty rate enough as is. This method does take a lot of time, but the time to do it is avaialable. Good Luck, Randy
  15. Correction to my last post: The Strategy and Tactics Guide found in the Users Guide is Appendix B, not G. I was looking at an old V1 printed guide and not the V4 guide that is included on the CD. That appendix is a gem to get you going in the right direction. My Mistake, Randy
  16. Thanks for the replies, they helped. What are acceptable losses for offensive operations? I'm still struggling with 30%-50% losses. In the real world, that would probably place me as latrine CO for the course of my career , but I am working on getting those numbers down. Offensive ops are certainly more challanging than defense. It opened my eyes to a totally different stlye of thinking, planning, and playing. Thanks again, Randy
  17. WhiteSun, My usual 2c is to start with small scenarios that are defensive in nature, such as defend an objective or prevent exit of enemy force. The best resource I have found for starters in tactics is Appendix G (I might be mistaken on the letter) Strategy and Tactics found in the User Guide. The library that comes with Tacops is also very useful but it is huge and a handful to wade through. Some of the reading can be dry for those with no military background. Don't get discourged, I've been playing for about 8 years and still take my fair share of defeats. Good luck, Randy
  18. Hi, I've been playing Tacops since it was first available for windows. Since then I have mainly played scenarios that are defensive in nature, i.e., defend an objective or prevent exit of opposing force. I usually play blue force and against the AI. I would like to play more offensive scenarios but have had little luck in my success . I would like to concentrate on task force size scenarios. I need some general rules of thumb at two different levels involving offensive scenarios. At the first level, what is my best strategy in developing an overall battle plan? I assume that advancing two or three seperate columns is better than trying to advance a single long column, but should one be stronger than the other? Should one or two small battle group(s) be established to go down the slot(s)? What should the composition of these forces be? What is a good composition of recon forces and how much lead time should they have in front of their main bodies? How should routes be selected especially when trying to advance across clear terrain? At the second level, what should my tactics be upon encountering resistance? Beyond just spreading out, is it better to dismount and try to elminate resistance or retreat to cover and try to find an alternate route around resistance? Any sugestions for a good task force size scenario to start with? Shoot and scoot, masking by terrain and masking by elevation is pretty tricky when trying to advance to a specific objective in a limited time. I understand that I am asking a lot of questions and most are pretty basic. Some answers depend upon the specific scenario or the specific situation encountered. Other answers depend upon an individual commander's style. If anyone has suggested reading from the TacOps library about these topics or useful hints, it would be greatly appreciated. Just help get me pointed in the right direction (usually to the east ). Finally, the red force in TacOps is modeled around the now defunct Soviet military. Because Soviet military doctrine had a different slant than US and Allied doctrine, Soviet equipment has different capabilities and strategy/tactics are probably somewhat different. The TacOps library is US and Allied doctrine. Any suggestions for reading on Soviet doctrine/strategy/tactics? Thanks, Randy
  19. It looks like you have a pretty full game but if there is room I would like to observe. I'll check irc prior to game start to see if there is room. How does one observe only one side? I thought that all observers get the 'big picture' only. It is possible, but not certain, that I could join as an observer in reserve for whoever is shorter on reservists. Randy
  20. If I UNCHECK the box at startup labeled 'firing units are always spotted', thus the firing units are NOT always spotted, does the game engine take into account the caliber of the weapon being fired, the volume of fire, the availabily and suppresion of enemy units in the LOS, or is it simply a random chance? In other words, does a platoon of Abrams with cannons blazing have a better chance of being spotted than a four man rifle team firing M-16s? Thanks, Randy
  21. I'll give the bombs a whirl as soon as I am finished with my current game (Gallagher 4 with no smoke to hide in and getting result better than I expected). Hope I don't blow myself up with the bomb, a fate that awaits a significant percentage of civilians who mess with these things. Happy TacOpting, Randy
  22. Major H., Thanks for the quick reply. The 406 is my typo, not yours. Sometimes my fingers work faster than my brain . Randy
  23. I have noticed that if my strike aircraft appear during the first pulse of the combat phase, say 10 seconds into the combat phase, that as each 15 second pulse goes by, I lose sight of more and more of the units sighted by the strike aircraft. By the end of the combat phase, I have lost sight of some, many, most and sometimes all of the units sighted by strike aircraft. (Is this correct game behavior?) I see no reason why a screen capture at the end of the combat phase would not be reasonable intelligence because not all sighted units remain on screen. I assume that this would simulate a pilot under strees in combat at VERY high speed being able to give a report of units sighted but not being able to remember the whole picture. Gun cameras can not look every direction at all times and reviewing the images they captured would take several minutes at best. After all, five minutes later the tacical situation has probably changed significantly. Personally, I do not do a screen capture, but if I spot a lot of armor during the bombing run, it usually a good time for a missle stike in that area. Happy TacOpting, Randy
  24. A question about bombs. May a transportable or portable bomb be added to a solitaire game against the AI or are the bombs for multiplayer use only? Happy TacOpting, Randy
×
×
  • Create New...