Major Spinello
-
Posts
264 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Major Spinello
-
-
I for one appreciate classic sci-fi ... and so I´m looking forward to scenarios like this one!
-
Great news! I´m looking forward to a map with more room to roam and corrected geography. I think your decision not to add more terrain this time is a wise one - keeps things "focussed". I just hope that you will add the political events regarding border changes etc. from your former mod, though. It provided a feel of historical depth and authenticity no other SC2 mod had.
-
I just fiddled around a bit with the the full expansion - it´s REALLY great. Indeed the only letdown is the map, which I hoped to be much more improved. Sadly, the European mainland is the same as it used to be: too small and with that strangely contorted middle European geography.
Edit: I just saw the map for pzgndr´s mod and was completely awed.
-
I for one had no problem downloading once I got the email - and it was extremely fast too! Retributar: Maybe you are not logged in properly at the shop?
-
Price still seems good - I preordered five minutes ago.
-
Just dropped by to say OF COURSE I will order it. The expansion looks fantastic and I have a feeling that due to the people in the beta team it will not be too buggy either. (And iff Honch is still around to graft his scenario onto that engine, I will be the happiest camper ever).
-
Maybe I found the problem with Honch12: I downloaded, extracted and installed as usual - and then found that the campaign file does not have the extension "cgn". Seems a simple renaming does the job, though.
-
@Retributar: thanks for encouraging me to share my thoughts.
@Blashy: thanks for answering - upping US mpps is indeed a good idea.
@Dave: Thanks for shedding light on your design strategies in that last post.
@everyone: I´m a bit confused. I had applied the new "superpatch" 1.05 and then Honch11 - game worked just fine (played only one turn, though). Should I stay away from Honch12 for the time being?
-
As a single player gamer I do not care for the 50/50 tournament approach. However (and that´s not at all meant as an offense, Blashy), I´ve been into history and wargaming too long to not become extremely suspicious whenever people claim "historical correctness".Originally posted by Blashy:I have the historical production in my mod.
So: what exactly do you mean with "historical" production? The de facto amount and type of what was actually produced in the war each year? Or the industrial potential? And would that be dynamic (i.e. changing with the industrial regions and resources occupied by the player) or static (i.e. changing, but only corresponding to the de facto historical output of each side per year)?
"De facto" plus "static" would not only be rather boring IMHO, it would also not be sound insofar as this
a) would not take into account the actual development of an individual game
would confuse actual historical production with historical production potential. (Just an example: I´ve read somewhere here on this board a while ago that the UK "outproduced" Germany in 1941 - but an argument like this of course totally neglects the fact that Germany did not even see a need to change to war economy until somewhere in 1942!) Another difficult issue regarding production is that the amount of stuff produced at a given time does not readily translate into effectivity. A good example for this is fighter production: The UK did produce alot of fighers in 1941 but at that time didn´t have the pilots to man them. The same goes for Germany and Japan late in the war (actually Germany´s production de facto peaked as late as 1944!)
Don´t take me wrong: I don´t have anything against realism and historicity in games, on the contrary. The devil lurks in the details, however - in how to decide what´s pertinent and what not, and if pertinent, then to what degree.
For example, there is an influential school which claims the only pertinent variables in a war are those pertaining to economy and resources. It downplays the impact of doctrines, the importance of certain persons being in certain positions at certain times, even the impact of things like weather or chance. I think, though, that this line of thought is too simple. It is only applicable (with correct results) with respect to prolonged wars of attrition - and even then the neglect of psychological factors (e.g. war tiredness, religious and cultural bonds, the unexpected death of certain key persons etc) can still falsify prognostic hypotheses based on economic variables alone (see Vietnam).
Gosh, I´m sorry that my post got so long - I usually avoid such discussions altogether. It´s probably just that I wouldn´t like to see my favorite mod to get "historical" in a too narrow sense of the word.
[ November 25, 2006, 12:17 PM: Message edited by: Major Spinello ]
-
Hubert, you once said something about impending future support for people having widescreen (unfortunately the thread is gone)- atm I can only use the 1024*768 resolution. Having at least a *somewhat* better resolution available (the best at my system is 1440*900) would be really appreciated.
-
... of course, I couldn´t resist firing up the scenario and play at least one turn right now.
I have to say that, for me, the sheer beauty of Dave´s scenario is overwhelming - especially since the "map coordinates" were relocated. What´s missing to make it perfect now is just that the southern part of Africa is not yet"de-abstracted". We will lose some colonies that way, and there will have to be arrows to get around the cape, but the payoff in terms of geographical correctness (and "focus")will be much bigger.
By the way, screw the engineers, I *love* the milita. I hope they will work out fine as they are now. Shouldn´t we be allowed to buy more of them, though?
-
Sweet. I wish I had the time to play right now... but as soon as this project I'm on is complete - I'm going to play your mod like crazy. Can't wait! </font>Originally posted by japinard:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Honch:
Version 11 (1.05) is on cmmods!
Changes since V10:
Renamed units:
Battleship -> Heavy Battle Group
Cruiser -> Light Battle Group
Carrier -> Carrier Group
Air Fleet -> Tactical Air Group
Bomber -> Bomber Group
Changed the Engineer NATO symbol to "Militia"
Changed the Militia/Garrison bitmap to one figure to differentiate it from partisans.
Reduced Militia/Garrison soft and hard attack values to zero. They can only attack other land units if given some infantry weapons tech. Therfore, minor militia/garrison can only ever defend in combat with other land units.
Reduced the Soviet Siberian Transfer slightly.
Updated all scripts for patch 1.05.
-
Coolness, considering the readme, I expect this to be the mother of patches!
-
I´m sorry, but my only explanation for this thread is that Robert seems to have been bored enough to succumb to the lure of setting up some elaborate trolling scenario. I can´t believe someone *really* doesn´t know that he´s not in a position (especially if he never contributed anything of his own up til now)to demand things (in a schoolmasterly voice to boot) from people who are doing what they do for their own enjoyment and who share the results for free.
-
Small traffic on the site doesn´t necessarily mean people lost interest, Hubert.Originally posted by Hubert Cater:Just checking to see if anyone visits the site
I gather many customers (like me for instance) just fell back to "lurker"-mode in the meantime. But we are still here to watch your every move! 
-
Quiet in here - seems we are all still waiting for 1.05 to happen ...
-
Interesting readme, many bugfixes. I wonder whether this will have a noticeable influence on AI behavior.
-
Hmmm ... the graphics and many features looked so much like HOI to me that I first thought it must be another game from the Paradox guys. (Seems like everybody can rip off everybody else in this business?) I didn´t play the demo, but am I correct in assuming that it is a turnbased WEGO-game? Because this would be indeed a GREAT feature. (It would be even better if it had hexes, of course.)
-
This mod sounds promising - I will sure check it out once the errors are ironed out.
-
I think the garrison units are great in principle, but there probably should be some restriction which lets them drag behind in tech.
-
Dave: these OOB changes shift the game more into the direction of "Clash of Steel" - AND I LIKE THAT! :cool:
Normal Dude: good to see that you are still around.
-
Very true!Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:We do have some good micros.
-
I consider myself a run-of-the-mill customer. I posted more when the game was released simply because I had more questions. I´m still here playing the game, but am now mainly waiting for new patches (the promised AI-patch comes to mind
). And I´m still convinced that SC2 will live long and prosper because of its outstanding moddability. -
Hell ... I would like to play Oblivion, but I cannot because my compy does not satisfy the system specs!
would confuse actual historical production with historical production potential. (Just an example: I´ve read somewhere here on this board a while ago that the UK "outproduced" Germany in 1941 - but an argument like this of course totally neglects the fact that Germany did not even see a need to change to war economy until somewhere in 1942!) 
SC is not as good without HONCH!
in Strategic Command 2 Blitzkrieg and Weapons and Warfare
Posted
I´m patiently waiting for that one too. WAW vanilla has great new features, but I simply don´t like the map and really miss those political events of the "Honch mod".