Steve C

You kwow, I think you're absolutely correct on that Hubert, now that I think about it. Let me repatch it and I'll see how that goes.

No. You just get a disclaimer message announcing that the other player has the different version of it, but I never encountered any issues where there was incompatibility which hampered play. As I said, my two current opponents and I are all using v1.07.

xwormwood, Thanks for responding. We are all running v1.07. Even v1.06 vs. v1.07 was just a warning message - the two versions seemed to be entirely compatible in terms of being able to run concurrently. This new problem is a show-stopper.

This morning, I downloaded the files from my opponents and got a "Can't read file" message. Up until today, everything worked fine. After clearing this, I could see a couple of old files is Saved PBEM but not the recent ones. Thinking that perhaps SC had become corrupted (as I had the identical problem with files from two different opponents), I uninstalled and reinstalled SC. Now I get a DOS-style error message window which says: SC>EXE system execution failed. Game Application <019859C8> Invalid retreival type: retreival error. Game Application <019859C8> Routine failure. Any idea what's gone wrong ?

I agree, let Kuniworth back. I regret that my post during his rampage ("Kuniworth = Troll") may have contributed to his getting banned. Over the months, he has contributed a lot more to this board than I have.

Dude, what's the point of all this ? Spamming the board with silliness, unearthing dead threads. Are you bored ? Go play a game of SC or something. You're a funny guy, but everything's better in moderation. I don't come here that often these days, but when I do, I'd rather not sift through two-thirds of Page One turned into BS at your instigation.

scady_11@msn.com

Sounds good. I'll play too.

RevengeMD/Dean, Those are good guidelines, but I concur with some other posters, Conceding is not always a bad thing, provided you give your opponent his due. For example, take our game when you threw me way off the Barbarossa timetable with the Double Gambit. What would have been the point of continuing that to the bitter end against a player of your caliber ? I think the other extreme can be worse - to borrow John's chess analogy - the kind of player who makes you queen your pawn and then walk his king to tne edge of the board for a checkmate instead of having the class to resign a hopeless position. I have never had a problem with an opponent conceding a game, or even dropping it for personal reasons, providing he lets me know about it and doesn't just disappear. Then there was the guy over on the Blitz HQ forum who would register as a newbie, start up a few games, and when things would start to go poorly (as they always did), would then fake his own death (with a note from his Mom, the Belgian police, etc.), log in as another alias and start all over again. [ May 21, 2003, 10:55 PM: Message edited by: Steve C ]

Shaka, LOL, I am not so naive. I'm well aware of the current popularity of RTS, I was speaking in "quality of gameplay" terms.

Here's another byte of intel, from the Timegate Studios website: "Axis & Allies: RTS will feature gameplay elements such as unique organization of units; command of land, sea, and air units in real-time; dynamic fronts and supply lines; interaction with Generals and Leaders of the era; and intense online play with a powerful random scenario generator."

Now that is something that would really reek. Never played the original PC version, but I'll take Rambo's word for it. PC Risk is no prize-winner either. Makes you wonder what converting to RTS will add to the mix, except perhaps helping weak AI by letting it cheat, building new units with insane speed. I agree, the concept is interesting, but we need to know more about it.

Welcome, Alvin. I am also new to the game and I think it's great. I have also played some Steel Panthers Main Battle Tank. It's also very comprehensive for the modern era, but I find that TacOps has a quicker flow and pace to it. Still, the animations and sound effects on SPMBT are terrific and that comprehensive encyclopedia is just great - the games render a different enough take on the same subject matter that both can be enjoyed on their own merits.

I tried one more time and got in. Thanks for your offer to help out though, Major.

I'm new to TacOps and would like to continue to learn about the game. As things seem a bit laconic on this forum compared to the heavy traffic on the Strategic Command board, apparently most of the activity takes place on the e-mail list. I have tried joining the list here: http://lists.perilpoint.com/mailman/listinfo/tacops However, despite trying twice to subscribe, I have never gotten the confirmation e-mail. Is the list administration a part-time gig for somebody and I should just be patient, or is this not normal ? It's been several days now since my first attempt.

HoI sucks, big waste of my $50. Serves me right for the impulse buy. Anyone else play TacOps4 ? Just getting into that and it's great. Not as stellar as CM when it comes to graphics(and I wish it had the replay capability), but like SC, huge bang for the buck at $25.

I'm having a great time with the Gallagher 6 scenario in the demo (my wife isn't nearly so thrilled about it ). So I ordered the game today and will sign up on the mailing list.

Hey, me too. I came over from Strategic Command. It's a great game, don't get me wrong, but I'm looking for something more modern to play also. For sure the scales are vastly different but it's nice to change up now and then. I haven't ordered TacOps4 yet, but I'm just getting into the demo and enjoying it. I second Four Stringer's words, redwolf. That was a great review and helped whet my appetite for the game. First, I need some practice against the AI.

I started as a CM player (sort of). I got CMBO, played it a little, ditto CMBB. Then I got curious about SC, bought that and haven't touched CM since. I know that CM is an excellent game, I do enjoy operational level combat, I don't know why myself why CM ultimately does not appeal to me. Maybe I just haven't given the CM engine enough time to really grow on me. But with HPS's Panzer Campaigns: Smolensk '41 and Fulda Gap '85 in my stable of wargames, I'm not sure when I'll ever have time to do that.

Sorry to see you go, Les the Sarge. I'll keep you posted at The Wargamer. I recently joined over there, my handle is "Corporal Trim".

In a current PBEM game, I am playing Axis. I'm at the gates of Moscow, the towers of the Kremlin are in plain sight to my troops. We're still in '41. Leningrad has fallen, but I bypassed the Crimea. I am starting to encircle Rostov, but it has not yet fallen. No sign of the Siberians and last turn I moved into the hexes adjacent to Moscow, and my panzers are already east of it to the North. War in Siberia is not selected in the Options menu. Perhaps you're onto something with the Rostov thing, sogard.

Heh, looks like maybe it was a fluke after all. Tested again in hotseat mode, tried the Malta thing without the HQ to see what happened, only one ship survived. Thinking that must clinch the HQ effect, tried it again twice with the HQ and darned if only one ship survived.

I just play-tested this against the AI. Built a French HQ and transported it to Malta, clustered the whole French navy around it. I then purposely evacuated Paris and handed the key to the city to the Germans. France fell, the whole French fleet survived. So based on the data we have so far, it appears that it's not a fluke. But, further playtesting revealed that it only works at Malta. I tried again at Scapa Flow, twice. In the first instance, I left the HQ on the transport in Scapa Flow and clustered the French navy around it. When France fell, they all vanished. I repeated the exercise by unloading the HQ in the land hex and then clustered the navy around that. Only the ship in port survived. Thinking the HQ must be in a fortress hex or city, I tried again at Edinburgh with the HQ in the city and three ships gathered around it in the sea hexes. France fell, they all vanished.

Yeah, I saw Things to Come, years ago. Wasn't Raymond Massey in it ? Trying to recall the details but they're quite hazy. Seems to me there was a WW1 style conflict which went on and on, a new world order emerged with neo-barbarian chieftans flying biplanes dressed in caveman furs, etc. Am I halfway close here ?

Some excellent historical content here, and any thread with Babe Ruth, Wally Pipp and Walter Johnson in it can't be all bad. But, strictly one man's opinion here, mind you: it's small beer whether SC2 has nukes or not. As they were never used in Europe, ditto chemical weapons, it won't bother me a bit if SC2 lacks WMD.