daystrom

Great idea! I have a Sun Ultra 10 not doing much of anything I could donate for the effort. There may be one issue however. It is located at a local university microelectronics lab where I work part of the time. The lab is partly funded by the NRC and if the funding ever goes away (possible with fickle Canadian govt. agencies) then so does the lab bandwidth. I will look into this tomorrow. I know the current mandate _should_ have the place running till next fall. I will do some more checking. I have a virgin install of OpenBSD 3.2 on the box now (Apache, PHP, MySQL) so it would be quite suitable. CVS is also on the box and can be used for revision control. I can also donate some coding time, but I wont have a terrible amount of it until early December (when a major project deadline and code freeze goes into effect here at work). So, someone (else) start designing this thing eh? Anyone interested in working on this can contact me. My address is in my details. cheers, Ray

I have just taken a look at it in the last month or so (because of SC). Your best bet is to ask Hubert for the full story, but here is my take (based on limited experience). Yeah, it is an object oriented langauge (very object oriented). The syntax is Ada-like. It is quite easy to learn and very forgiving to program in. Eiffel seems to be more than the language though, in that it is closely tied to a very mature design methodology. I am very impressed with Eiffel. I have been in a C/C++ shop for the past several years, and it would be a pleasure to make the switch (not likely given my boss . Incase you are interested, I will recommend a book, Object Oriented Software Construction 2nd Edition by Bertrand Meyer (the creator of Eiffel). Hubert recommended this to me and I have read it twice already. Hope this is of some help! cheers, Ray

I agree with everyone here. Buy it! I have games that I have paid $70-80CDN for and they sit collecting dust in a shoe box. SC does not sit in any shoe box! (well, maybe if SC2 come out ) I would have paid the same $70-80 for SC and been quite happy with the decision. SC was a steal at $25USD. And plus, it is written in Eiffel which is *very* cool! cheers, Ray

He is not my Queen Rogue. Ray

As a Canadian, I don't really have a direct interest in the outcome. My hope, however, is that a unified, right wing congress and white house will be good for the financial markets in the US (which will invariably have a positive effect here in Canadian markets), because my investments are in /dev/crapper at the moment. Ray

If you guys play, post the results here. I would be very interested if Jollyguy is able to counter. cheers, Ray

np wind. Anytime. Ray

Hey Windstarz, I don't think you are nuts. Anyway, check your mail, I put a copy of the patch on my ftp server. I have sent you the username/password you will need to get it. cheers, Ray

Dude, click the hyperlinked text in Hubert's initial post "downloads" at the top of the thread. The 1.05 link is right there in yellow/gold. If it is not, clear your browser cache. cheers, Ray

Yep, the army might do it. But the Allied player can skip the conquest of Italy (i.e. skip going for Rome) and relieve her of several cities instead. While this does not conquer Italy, it has a very devestating effect on the Axis as well. Perhaps a mandatory initiative loss for the Allies on an invasion, and having the Italian entry always occur at the end of an Allied turn. I dunno, it is a tough problem. cheers, Ray

Agreed. Take Poland on turn two. DoW on Denmark in turn two, taking it on turn three. Hit the Benelux (and take them) on turn 5 and throw everything but the kitchen sink (hell throw the kitchen sink as well) at France. I am guessing that this would make it quite difficult for the Allies to pull off this Italian adventure. As Jeff brought up, I hope it is addressed in the next patch. cheers, Ray

On... it is a great feature. Ray

Some excellent advice Norse. I can say from experience that their is nothing as unsettling as pounding your Axis forces into the SU only to find that they have retreated most of their forces. cheers, Ray

Thats all I need Kurt. We would cease using our enigma machines in favor of an elaborate system of smoke signals, secret handshakes, and winks. cheers, Ray

OK, I'll bite. Let me start by saying that on many an occasion I wished I could do that very thing (but not allowing my opponent to do it at the same time ). Here, however, is why I feel that the current model works as is: In terms of realism, I would say that the ability to do this would be a feat of logistics far surpassing Hannibal's crossing the Alps. This would amount to launching a corps or better sized attack, withdrawing them while engaged head-on with a hostile enemy, moving another corps or better up to the front and then launching a second attack. In terms of game mechanics, can you imagine the blood bath that the Eastern Front would be with both sides having this ability? It can already be a bit of one as is. If both sides had this capability, I think losses would far exceed either sides ability to replace/reinforce them, so that by 1942 there would only number some 7-10 corps per side (Germany & USSR) hammering it out to decide the fate of Europe. Just my $0.02 (so take it for what it is worth) cheers, Ray