Friar Bellows

Thanks Martin.

Don't Combat Mission and Close Combat use an underlying tile system? Granted, it's invisible to the user, but isn't it still tile-based? I have no idea, except some hazy memory of it. Would like to learn more about the system used by Highway-to-the-Reich. Thanks for your responses.

I'm wondering why tiles are used at all in computer games. Computers can handle 2 or 3 axes of real numbers, so why use tiles at all, whether hex or square or octogon or Penrose ? I suppose designing the AI is easier in a tile-based system. You can navigate the AI units a lot easier, find shortest paths a lot easier, that sort of thing. Maintaining AI front lines might be easier. But I don't really know, I'm just guessing. I'd like to know the advantages of using a tile-based system.

Damned hexpots the lot of you! What you need is some hexual addiction therapy.

I was wondering about this recently. Toggling the hex grid ON clutters a map, and subtracts from its "aesthetics". Toggling the hex grid OFF makes it difficult to know where to click when you want to move units. So, my idea is to have another option: hex grid OFF but show a dot at the center of each hex. This way, you know where to click to move units, and the map isn't as visually polluted as it would be with a hex grid. What do you think?

I've had them join me while invading Britain, but only if I invaded Britain before I invaded Soviet Union. YMMV.

In my last game as Axis I won around Sept 1945, +1 AI exp, 0% difficulty, all options on, with a rating of +281. Summary: First I took Poland, Denmark, Norway and then France. Then I took Yugoslavia and Greece. Then I launched my invasion of Soviet Union. Managed to conquer Soviet Union by November 1942. Then I did some mopping up of various minor countries like Turkey, Iraq, Sweden, Spain, Portugal, Vichy France, while at the same time building up my navy and air force. During the invasion of Soviet Union I had repelled one major US/UK invasion of France. Around summer 1944 I had destroyed the UK/US air force and navy, and launched an invasion of Britain. After taking Britain (and Ireland) I took Canada and USA in pretty quick time.

Yes, John, I've noticed this, too. The AI isn't brave enough. All it really needs to do is keep that front line for as long as possible, like humans generally do.

SC2 should be a world-wide game, and sod (most of) the realism issues in the Pacific theatre! I'm more interested in playability.

Fair enough. It's good that it's hard. Almost never even encounter a British unit in France. Perhaps I'm too quick for them!

OK, I must suck or something. I need your tips. The setup: all countries are random; +1 experience for the AI, 0% difficulty; all rules/variations options set; me playing as the Axis; starting from 1939 against Poland. So, there's no real problem with me taking Poland and France. It's easy. I usually take Denmark as well. Then comes the first really important decision. Take on the Soviets or Britain. Now I want to believe that it's possible to win if you take either choice. So I choose to invade Britain. It's late spring or early summer 1941. I've extracted my Italian navy from the Med, as they will shield my transports on the south-western end of Britain. I've built up my German navy (add two battleships) and most of it is used to shield my transports on the south-eastern end of Britain. My airforce is also built up slightly (I can't afford too much). So I start the invasion. What happens? Well, with a bit of luck, I'm able to land 2 HQs + 5 infantry + 3 tanks (give or take 1 inf or tank) within two turns. There is major naval battle going on. I want to destroy the British navy, and with a bit of luck I do, but with a lot of damage to my own navy. But it seems impossible to destroy the British airforce as well. I haven't invested in long range and jet aircraft, and there's no room on the British mainland for me to land them there. So my troops on Britain, who can only get strengthened to a max of 7, make absolutely no headway. Time drags on, and by spring/summer of 1941 the following really bad bad things happen: 1) The USA declares war on me. This means that the USA navy will finish off my depleted navy and bring infantry and air units to Britain, which then proceed to demolish my land units. 2) The Soviets declare war on me! Aargh! With a bit of forethought, I've built up my eastern front with German/Italian corps units and any minor Axis units (Rumania, Hungary, Bulgaria join me by now). But I only have so many MPP's! Either my western front completely collapses, or my eastern front does, or both, and that's the end for me. I mean, spring '41 everything's looking fine, and then autumn '41 and it's all over for me! What a turn around! OK, smoewhere in between I launched Operation Sealion, so I shouldn't expect a walkover! So, any hints? Should I forget my navy and invest in a bloody big airforce (including research)? Should I forget both navy and airforce and just keep buying infantry and tank units? I'm stumped. Should part of my Britain invasion force land on the east side of Britain (just north of London)? Currently all of my forces land on the south end of Britain, and I find it impossible to surround London. I must say it was much easier when the AI experience was 0. Setting it to +1 is challenging. I fear +2 would be an exercise in masochism.

Warning! Major rant ahead! Take seriously at your own risk! ********* My problem with Libertarians (capital L), the ones who generally support the ideals of Harry Browne's party, is that they're not libertarian (in the true sense of that word) enough. When I look at my life, and indeed, the lives of most people around me, where is my liberty most directly and forcefully violated? The cop stopping me for a breath test? The local council enforcing helmut laws for cyclists? The government passing laws to curb free speech online or pollution from my car? Nope. All these things can be considered violations of my liberty, but none of them come even close to the greatest threat of all: work. Think of all the indignations you've had to suffer because of work. The surveillance, the brown-nosing, the alarm clock, the traffic, the backstabbing, etc etc. Your boss is free to order you when to come to work, when to leave work, when to have lunch, when to go to the bathroom, what to do at work, how to do it, how fast to do it, what clothes to wear, etc etc. All this for 5 or 6 days per week, nearly every week of the year, and nearly every year of your adult life, until you drop dead from a work-related illness. Oh yeah, the boss is also free to fire you. As a "free" worker, the only difference between myself and a slave is that I'm free to choose a new master. Wow! What a wonderful freedom! Of course, I may face starvation by leaving my current hard-won job, but hey, at least I'm free! Uh huh. I'm living longer, but all of a sudden that hunter-gatherer in Alaska is looking freer than me. And this is progress? *burp* For me, freedom and liberty are utopian concepts. None of us are free. A small minority of us enjoy a fair amount of freedom. But most of us enjoy very little. And such will always be the way. Unless you believe in utopian visions. Oh hell, why not? That's one freedom I do have: to believe in utterly impossible utopian visions of total freedom and liberty, including the freedom from work! ********* End of rant. My next rant will be entitled: "Anarchism, Communism, Capitalism, Libertarianism, Socialism, etc etc: You All Suck!"

Yes, Reichsfuhrersa, when you win the whole war a screen pops up showing a lovely picture of a naked Eva Braun. :cool: For the rest of us, well, we have to make do with the enjoyment we get from playing the game. Something to do with enjoying the journey, regardless of whether you reach the end.

Is your PBEM opponent using version 1.03? Maybe he's using an earlier, incompatible version like 1.0?

What he said.

They will remove the cd check with the next patch.

LOL!

I wonder if the reason that the AI is building so many corps is because you, the human player, are doing too well in your offensive in the Soviet Union? Maybe if your offensive stalled, then the AI would consider it worthwhile building armies instead of corps? I'm just guessing.

On each of the two occasions that I reached the Urals, there were enemy infantry units there that I had to overcome. The first time, it took quite a while for me to force the Soviet government to move to Stalingrad (which I had ignored on my drive to Moscow).

You are aware that you can get the Italian fleet into the Atlantic without taking Vichy France (or even France for that matter)? Just checking.

I agree. I think maybe people forget the sheer scale of partisan resistance in Yugoslavia and Soviet Union. It was an annoying problem for the Germans, and should be simulated in this game for those two cases.

I'd actually prefer a US Civil War game. The scale would have to go down, but I think it would fun. Whip those damned Yankees or teach those crazy Rebels a lesson. But for now, I'd just like to see improvements to what is admittedly a good game already.

Ah great, I'm still playing with v1.02. Thanks for fixing it. I figured that it was the sort of thing that was fixable.

Maybe some of these things have been mentioned before: 1. The AI has trouble with transporting reinforcements from the USA to Britain. As the Axis player, put a couple of strength-15 subs, for example, in the region between Ireland and Britain and the US transports blindly suprise-encounter them and are wiped out immediately. That this happens once in the same turn is OK, but that it happens 3 times is not good. It's like the AI has a bad memory and forgets what happens during the course of a single turn. Maybe have the transports vary their course if the previous one caused pain? 2. When I have my Italian navy try to break out from the Mediterranean to the Atlantic, the Allied navy in the Mediterranean (I think they're near Egypt) totally ignores them, yet they should know about them, I think, because there's an Allied unit in Gibraltar. 3. The AI of land units needs to be improved. I think Hubert should concentrate most of his energies on this. I am well aware of the difficulty in designing an AI which can attack with reasonable skill, so that's why I think Hubert should concentrate on improving the AI defense. After all, I think most of us prefer to attack against the AI (e.g. We play the Axis in 1939/40 campaigns and the Allies in the 1943/44 campaigns). And with a static map, maybe Hubert can "babysit" the AI by creating defense "scripts" for it follow. I dunno, I'm just thinking out loud.

1. I actually don't care if the AI cheats (and I'm not saying that it does). I care how it cheats (it shouldn't spoil general play), but anything to help the AI should be a good thing. 2. I've had the demo for a week, been playing 4 hours a day, and absolutely love it! 3. Haven't tried pbem. 4. Read the Troubleshooting Guide. In a game which has just been released, bugs are inevitable. Notice that Hubert the developer has already released a few patches. 5. Yeah, like the price of a game should be in proportion to the number of MB. I, for one, am happy that the game takes up little space on my hard drive. 6. Oh well, a couple of days extra wait. Big deal. 7. I don't care what they do with the money I'll give them. They could use it to promote a stupid cult like Scientology for all I care.