hellraiser

maybe they were diplo-ed by beer@spaghetti

file sent

Bob, you only play PBEM ? If you go for tcp, maybe we can play a game this weekend. Seems you're a rising star here

Maybe the need for 40% spanish pro axis stance influencing RO/HU joining , needs reconsidering. There was no influence IRL. RO and HU could care less about Franco's position. Wrt diplo chits, there is a fairly common Axis' strategy to scrap intel and rockets tech chits and sink 4 diplo chits in Spain during the first turn of the game. pretty powerful move and with lucky hit, you can push Spain in the 80's. I would propose to eliminate the residual cash from scraping tech chits. Yeah, you just make room for some more important tech, you don't get any refund. This way you allow England to have a shot at diplo starting with turn 2. And perhaps another interesting ideea would be to eliminate mega diplo successes like +35% in one turn. You can sweet talk a country only so much per turn. Getting Spain in by turn 3 is a joke.

patch 1.02 said: - Fixed a unit sprite error wrt upgrades, i.e. units were sometimes not shown with the proper level sprite (Blashy, Normal Dude) I was playing the AI and noticed a german tank (techs were 3,1 i.e. ht3 motor 1) but it was displayed as a lvl 0 HT sprite. Once I get home, I'll send the save game.

Err...I guess sent to Romania..., to Budapest, Hungary it can sail only on the river Danube

ambitiously sent?

I found a reference in the manual about this, seems i missed it the first time i looked into it. my bad , thanks for the reply [ August 01, 2006, 02:08 AM: Message edited by: hellraiser ]

While playing the AI, I noticed the italian air fleet could be operated away having supply lower than 5. I checked the manual and it seems it should be at least at supply 5 to be able to operate away. Italian AF was near some african town (5 strength city). I tried moving a corps outside Cairo and it couldn't be operated due to low supply. Moved the AF next to another city and it could operate very well despite lower than 5 supply. I have the save game if it helps.

Does embarking-disembarking or operating away units reset this morale stuff so it starts rising again? Has anyone tried it yet?

Back then I remember Hubert saying something about a 'very rare error', misscalculation or something. The conditions needed for this error to appear are unknown to me though. You should send the save game to Hubert so he can have a look at it for 1.03. This is the link where I reported this issue: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=34;t=001418 Can you confirm the same simptoms? [ July 31, 2006, 02:21 AM: Message edited by: hellraiser ]

I would rather solve the current 'bomber from brest hits liverpool thus starving uk' stuff first. If Eddie's feature was to be implemented, I would rather see it as a 'raiding' effect type (the one the subs provide) Maybe AA tech could help to diminish the effect in the way ASW helps in reducing convoy losses due to subs' raiding. But what if Axis place a bomber in Brest and gets super LR tech? Will it interdict med AND atlantic convoys?

Gave it a try, 2 times - at normal settings and +1 setting. Unfortunately the allies never seem to react to diplomacy so I got Spain both times - kinda game winner vs the AI, regardless of settings. Indeed in Russia the AI did a better job - upgraded its stuff which made it defend a bit better but it lacked any tactical/strategical plan for defence which makes it fairly easy to destroy its units one after another. The AI apparently tries to defend almost everything which is kinda impossible. Both times, my Axis plan was the same (more or less the same plan I use vs human opponents as well, which is money in the bank 95% of the time): - 1st turn, scrap rocket and intel chit and sink 4 chits in spain; 2nd turn i got 5 chits in spain. - wax poland, operate some troops in west, wax france, build bomber+AF, operate units in africa, rape the uk down there. - with spain axis, the whole axis fleet is controlling the North Atlantic, uk fleet very damaged (tried to fight in the med and around england with absolutely no chance) - once the bomber is out of the queue, it gets based at Brest and starts hammering Liverpool port - i.e. UK welcomes poverty...no more convoys. - Corps building program - swarm of corps+3 HQs prepare for russia - don't bother to buy tanks or invest in tanks; armies are produced only after the corps limit is reached. - USA never launches anything because it simply cannot ferry troops over the pond - axis dow USA and the mega navy destroys the US fleet (with pacific assets transferred due to spain being axis) in ports. Russia gets destroyed easily because axis can focus 90% of its army in east. So, the problem is not playing at +1 here against Tim's AI. The problem is, axis shouldn't use diplomacy at all because the AI doesn't respond in any way to it. Another problem - if you want tough western allies, you must refrain from using bombers on Liverpool (i hope this crap gets fixed in 1.03 so allies can use other ports for convoys) and do not attempt to Sealion at all - the AI does a lousy job protecting the UK - not that the humans do any better ) Try to follow the history and you may have a tougher game. Too much imagination and boldness scares the living sh*t out of the AI It is a clear improvement over the standard game though. The mere fact that I faced lvl 2 or 3 red infantry made me smile

It appears to be the very same bug I reported some time back. I had this problem of a german tank in Russia which I couldn't upgrade despite supply and everything being ok. I know mr. HC did something to this for v 1.02 but it seems the pesky bug is still here, although it appears not often at all. I guess I encountered it only once since the v 1.02 patch came out.

'Multiplayer support (Internet/LAN) ' WOW!!! I just can't wait to see Rambo wondering what's wrong with his Sherman gun shells keeping bouncing off Yoda's Tiger 'omg, game is bunta biased' Nice pics guys, hope this turns out to be THE ww2 rts we've been dreaming of.

having a refreshed and relaxed HC working on it sounds promising welcome back

@Liam - if you use a 10 strength corps in a boat for spotting subs, even if they get fired upon, they won't get sunk for good. It is left at str 2-3-4-5-whatever, shipped back to the mainland and reinforced while the UK cruisers finish off the raider at leisure, right? Something has to be in place so as to deny the use of transports/amphib transports until the readiness is high enough. It makes a lot of more sense this way, when the piss off ratio reaches some critical level, the neutral is far more concerned on what's happening here and there on the map. @Seamonkey - indeed a lot of interesting ideeas in your post. I'd be happy if at least some of them could get implemented in the future.

This is a very good ideea RJ, indeed very good. BTW, IRL, mr. Churchill even sent a letter to Musso, asking him not to enter the war 'not because we are afraid...' as he said Anyway, at least Italy should always join on Axis' turn, never on allies' one (if things will stay the same are now) - think that Axis do not have the opportunity to twist readiness % otherwise than using legit diplomacy, so it is a clear disadvantage in this case. IMHO, allies should be give bonus mpps, troops in the queue, whatever but not the ability to use gay readiness % twisting to gain the upperhand. You want a piece of pizza? Dow them italians and assume there are also costs involved. I would also like the possibility for active ships/transports to pass thru tiles occupied by neutral ships, just to avoid another gamey tactic of establishing blockades with a neutral power (i.e. italian ships blockading the greece-crete-tobruk passage, effectively interdicting allied shipping in the med. Another ideea would be to restrict the use of transports or even ships (AP = 0 for ships and no possibility to use the embark feature for ground units) until the activation percentage reaches a certain value (say +50% or even more, perhaps 70%) - just to deny the gayish tactic of spotting the subs with US transports/ships or the uber gayish tactic of blocking the british coastal tiles/English Channel with US transports to prevent axis units from landing and conducting the Sealion. Now, this thread has become more of a 'technical forum' thread = maybe there it will be considered by mr. HC, once he's back from his h-day [ July 26, 2006, 02:21 AM: Message edited by: hellraiser ]

Clearly armies should have at least double the firepower of a corps yet less mobility (as it is now). A nice addition would be an improved ability of experienced units. To me, experience should matter a lot more.

np dude, was busy anyway on Sunday

@Yoda - true, that's why I stepped out of competitive play and only have a game or two once in a while. I don't care if it is historical or not, I only care for some balance, nothing more. This what we are talking about it is not strategy, it is twisting the italian readiness percentage in a way that was obviously not intended. As it stands right now, the default campaign still favours Axis. But I would like to see valid allied counters not the need to employ gay strategies to offset their weakness. Aside from setting up the no-SL rule and no Turkey dow rule, I really do not remember myself 'crying' about anything like strategies... I advocated back then for those 2 rules (back then we were in the same boat...), I stand up now against this 'cool strategy'. You're smart enough to win games as allies, no need to twist readiness %

@Terif -> you probably are reffering to that game we had when I quit after 5 turns or so. It's not that Italy lost the fleet that mattered, it is the very concept of that strategy that is gamey. Historically or not, when you are on the defence, you don't want to have another enemy...or at least delay it for some time. You say Sealion is flawed. Agreed. I say this crap is flawed as well. This is what pissed me off not that I lost 2 ships or something. Don't come here playing the teacher and trying to convince ppl that this strategy is fair game. You may have audience in the PL forums with this, but not with me. Can it be countered? Yes for sure, but this is not the point. The point is there are way too many flaws right now, exploits of game's engine, bugs and abusing them has become some 'cool strategy'. I don't think I am one of those 'omg i wanna beat terif at all costs' guy. I enjoyed all of our games whether i won or lost. Remember that game we had back in v 1.0, when my axis offered a draw just before the tank was to enter moscow (with uk knocked out), because of f*cked up victory conditions ? Never boasted bout it here, because i take no pride in winning an unbalanced game. The 'no Sealion before barby' rule is a direct consequence of that game we had. I guess this should speak for my fairness. I even wouldn't have mentioned it now but it kinda annoys me your support for a clearly exploitative strategy.

hellraiser? it's hellranger this time o_o

@Barcelona -> you could have just told me: ok, i gotta show you some weird sh*t, let's test something - it would have been ok and you could have proved your point. But instead you wasted several of my hours and in the end pretended that you hadn't cheat - this makes you a punkass cheater and not a 'bug finder and reporter'. And btw, why did you previously use this sh*t against Iron Ranger as well ? Wasted his time as well? Oh yeah, you wanted us to learn there are bugs at large, but to learn it the hard way, right?

You do not even need to transport ground troops from UK to get North Africa (only bomber and air). The default med troops + the french fleet and the uk med fleet are enuff for the task. The problem is ppl have adopted no SL pre-barbarossa rule because of game balance. Ok. But it is unbalanced as ever to force Italy in the war while gerry is busy taking paris, by the means of emptying the med cities to increase the italian war readiness. It is a pure gamey exploit, nothing more. No way in hell when you are at war , you try so hard to get another enemy, right? If Allies want Italian Africa, then DOW Italy. I would rather see it as: if allies attempt this gamey strategy then Axis has free hand to attempt the Sealion. There has to be a consequence to everything, otherwise it's just an allied cookie cutter