SeaMonkey

"I wonder if any of the playtesters ever researched Ground Laying Radar - to improve the strength of their surface naval units. " Now Edwin don't be trying to confuse the newbies here. As a matter of fact my GLR research resides on either side of my nose(nasal not naval) and of late its been getting a tad bit foggy from time to time. Now I did get a kick up a level using some of my PPMs (personal pocket money)for a couple of clear radar dishes and now when I'm laying on the ground the Moon, Stars and Sun are in total focus and I do feel a lot more secure in my position, even when I'm on one of my naval vessels(surfboards). So I conclude that yes indeed, Ground Laying Radar is a good investment. [ March 20, 2006, 06:58 PM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

Come on Liam, can't you show a little enthusiasm for SC2, after all HC has slaved for at least 20 years to get this out the door. These yung'uns have no respect for anything these days.

I'm not sure, but in light of TJ's comment, won't the research catchup bonus from SC1 still be in effect? In addition, just because you have 5 chits invested doesn't mean you automatically attain the next level that activates the 1% bonus/penalty. Is there a max attainment level for this category?

Personally, I preferred jbrunelle's(sp?) counters for SC1 as the icons changed with the research upgrades, excepting the naval units. I'm still playing with them presently. I'll mention some other counters I like also which are in HttR. They have a number of attributes that constantly change with units' prowess. Since fatigue, supply and readiness are all characteristics of the SC2 units, it would be nice to track their levels on the game counter, perhaps with color tints. Dark green at 100 percent and dark red 0. The more information on the counters for the intial map view, the one that everyone uses, the greater situational orientation will be available to the players at first glance. This will expedite game turns and allow for better planning and minimize the need to access other game screens.

I have to agree with Todd here and Lars makes a good point also. I've been playing WaW for awhile and it does force the player to plan accordingly for offensive and defensive operations when the advanced supply feature is chosen. Now there are no HQs in WaW, so there is a valid argument that they do perform that task in SC. Their deployment synonymous with logistical maintenance. Thing is WaW turns are set at 3 months, seasonal, and SC2 has variable capability. To institute a supply feature may be complicated for the designer and possibly not applicable to all potential SC scenarios. With the SC2 editor having such enormous range of creation, time and space, a consistent supply feature for all occasions seems dubious at best. Better this is addressed as an "optional" feature presently and later after the game mechanics are more familiar we can elaborate.

We have discussed this item before and although I like the model that WaW displays, it can be a bit burdensome at times. However, there are some good ideas here and we all know that in the interest of realism, the use and co-ordination of logistics is vital, even at this SC2 scale. I have always thought of the HQ role as being the organizing and distribution center and not the origin point of supplies, so the toggle support on and off feature is good. If we get into this more detailed SC supply feature we will have to ask questions about expenditure of MPPs for naval and air actions, both significant at this scale. But do we penalize subs as well as capital ships? And then there are the discrepancies between attack and defense, does one use MPPs and the other not. What about movement, excepting the operational type, allow only one tile movement range without MPP use...definitions...definitions? I believe that the game engine could track most of these ambiguities without to much additional player micromanagement, but can our cluttered little minds handle it all? There is already much more to contemplate. I say let's wait and see. [ March 15, 2006, 09:49 PM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

Beg to differ HR, they have plenty of problems reading and understanding most all types of account statements, especially the part that asks for remittance. But you are right in implying that they are focused on the account balance. Don't ask them to arrive at a balance! But they will sure take notice how many places on the left side of the decimal that the figures occupy. 6 is good! :cool:

Believe me, after making the map of SPI's "Wacht Am Rhein" using the TOAW editor, anything will be a piece of cake.

For you graphic modders, check out the counters in MWiF. In my opinion, some of the most appealing I have seen since TOAW. All we need is the Nato unit type representations, size designation, unit name, strength and upgrades on the counter. For air and naval the artistically rendered silhouettes should be sufficient.

Hey CC, don't forget the fine red wines and the Manchego. :cool:

Don't y'all even believe Mm for one instance. Everything is limited, there is no such thing as unlimited as defined by "infinite". There will only be a limited release of SC2, I guarantee it. So don't dally, get your limited release of SC2 NOW!!!! Only at battlefront.

Hubert, I was wondering, is there a possibility that later we can get an addition to the scripts that would allow us to link them? The simplest way would be through the #TRIGGER entry. If we can have a unique definition/designation for each script, whether AI or not, like the number "$2" defines the second script. This would be in the #NAME entry line. #NAME=..............,$2 For the AI it could be AI$2. Anyway we could then make an entry into the script dialogue line, like #TRIGGER=[$2],100. This would mean that the trigger to activate this script was dependent on the second(defined "$2") script being activated and this would have a 100% chance of occurring. [ March 04, 2006, 03:28 PM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

Blashy, DD, thanks for your feedback and please don't allow our other SC brethren to intimidate y'all into subservience postings. Many of us enjoy the insight into SC2 that y'all have allowed us and we are appreciative. It never fails to amaze me how us humans are easily aroused to mistaken judgements, it is not necessarily a bad thing, actually can be quite productive in some cases. For the calculating ones, it makes for easy manipulation. Grant our fellow SC posters forgiveness for they are just anxious for "The Game", as I am. I'm just a little more patient, but I can identify with their strife. As a great entity once spoke: "And this too shall pass."

The editor is not only the genius, it is simply the omnipotent factor of variability. I have only had one other experience with a script editor on the level that SC2 presumes to have and that game was TOAW. For those of you that know TOAW....enough said, for you that don't....if I may borrow Ike's words, "a lot of meat on those bones" and I'll add those are very long legged bones. Evidence the massive following that TOAW has sustained for what, maybe 8 years. I just looked at my player's guide and the copyright date was 1998. Imagine SC2 to be that good. More food for thought, Matrix has decided to upgrade and re-release TOAW. We may find that SC2 is better! :cool: [ February 21, 2006, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

The editor is not only the genius, it is simply the omnipotent factor of variability. I have only had one other experience with a script editor on the level that SC2 presumes to have and that game was TOAW. For those of you that know TOAW....enough said, for you that don't....if I may borrow Ike's words, "a lot of meat on those bones" and I'll add those are very long legged bones. Evidence the massive following that TOAW has sustained for what, maybe 8 years. I just looked at my player's guide and the copyright date was 1998. Imagine SC2 to be that good. More food for thought, Matrix has decided to upgrade and re-release TOAW. We may find that SC2 is better! :cool: [ February 21, 2006, 05:07 PM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

It says TOAW has hexes and TOAW is old and slow. What does HttR have, which is a better operational game than TOAW, ....newer, cutting edge, faster? Old and reliable is Ok, but times change, the world is not flat, and the contemporary move is? If you want to discover better, you have to explore, you can't be stuck in old and slow, and this is coming from a wiser, older, slower.

Yogi has made a good point about "appearances". Remember life's lessons about the misleading nature of "Appearances". Once the Earth was deemed as flat, because from our surface perspective it seems that way. For a real life exercise, draw a large circle, it is round. Now take a small segment, a very small segment, from the circumference, and isolate it from the rest of the circle. What do you observe? A straight line. Its all about the illusion or the delusion you wish to maintain.

Edwin, you could use the #VARIABLE_CONDITIONS to define certain countries leanings to trigger the operation. Some countries likely will never be biased to certain percentages and others in the proximity of your operations or because of your operations will change their leanings. Perhaps TACTICAL_CONDITION parameter to let the AI evaluate which plan is more likely according to the disposition of friendly and enemy units. Who knows.....right now is time for study and contemplation as we can't really model anything with the game to ascertain the detailed consequences of our AI script entries. We have some definitions and we can get clarifications from HC and we can theorize.

In refering to HC's above example of an AI script for Germany to attack LC, I don't see a START_RATIO/CANCEL_RATIO entry. I'm assuming that this is an internal AI game function and a modder will not have control over S_R/C_R entries? Maybe it is dependent on the #SIZE entry? In the above case 8, which would mean 1/2 the start ratio and if cancel ratio=1 then the plan would be cancelled if Benelux has 4 units within a tactical conditon/condition position set for the German plan. Also the tactical assesment value range is set at 5(land) and 8(sea), again I'm assuming these are not editable, but can be viewed with the ~ key? [ February 17, 2006, 11:30 AM: Message edited by: SeaMonkey ]

So what you are saying is that it(the event) will not be selectable(0=False) under the options menu? Well that makes sense.

Concerning the #FLAG entry, why would you not want to have an AI event be a default event(selection 1=True)? What are the repercussions of choosing 0=False?

Just to help JJR avoid the plagiarism thing. "Gallows Pole"...Led Zepplin III, 1970, Robert Plant/Jimmy Page. His(jjr's) version is a little off, but the idea is there. "save me from the wrath of this mad...man"

Not so fast CC "The Cop is gonna get you" "Gonna knock you off your feet" "Better recognize your Brother" "Everyone you meet"?????

No doubt about that SB, very encouraging. The anticipation builds.

Ah Oh!!! :eek: Hmmmmmmm, It seems I may have been a bit premature with my prediction. Okay....revised.....SC2 .....release....end of March.