targul

Normal I have noticed your 82nd Airborne All American All the Way notice. You mean the 82nd no longer allows foreign nationals to gain citizenship via joining the military. The laws may have changed but when I was in the Army many of my fellow 5th Special Forces troops where from different countries and where allowed to apply for citizenship upon completion of there tour in Nam. Seemed fair to me. Thought it was a great way for people to earn citzenship.

The oil issue is interesting. I really like it in CEAW. Strangely it actually works in that game whereas most things dont. The extreme weather effects produced in SC2 provide basically the same thing. I like both but I find the weather too extreme in SC2 while I find the oil in CEAW to be just about correct. Both of these control factors are good but with the weather of SC2 I would be reluctant to add the additional oil factor.

I play HOI2 but I havent played in about a month maybe 2.

Borsook game is nice. It is not ready to buy. Give it a patch and ask this quest again. TCP/IP is not working well. PBEM does not have playback so not very good. AI is asleep. Good in Russia but otherwise it snores so loud you cant play the game. Hope this helps.

I would buy it also but it is a huge endeavor. What might be an easier approach would be to design the Japanese verses China campaign first. The expand as the comfort levels increase. War in the Pacific is fairly good but too complicated so it is a nice model that would need to be toned down alot. What would probably work best would be to take one of the old AVH designed Pacific games and bring it to the present with a little more zest. Nice thing is the units and sea units already function well. So you need a map and the big dog AI.

Sorry Hubert that game went on retail shelves in 1994. I dont even have a copy of it anymore other then the copy from the copyright office. I am not a programmer. I have a good friend who was an awesome programmer and he wanted to develop it. I wanted to do WWII something similiar to War in Europe. (It was just prior to the release of Computer War in Europe.) Anyway I paid to develop and distribute the game. Total cost was slightly over 350K. I recovered slightly over 10% of that. It is funny I still see copies of it in stores in there dollar bins once in awhile. It was a horrible game even I didnt like it. First I dont care for that genre second the AI simply sucked. Hesds up it was okay though. But I had spent all I had agreed to so I published it and took my hits.

Nok I am on like Lucia server in EQ2 or something like that looked today for you and then didnt take the time to really memorize is sorry.

As the producer of Civil War General. I really understand barely enough here Hubert. I lost my butt on that game and have never done another. If you are doing enough to etch out a living with this I salute you.

Being a historical player I never wait for Barbarossa to attack Yugoslavia. I like to have Hungary but if the Italians go to war I march troops to assist them. Yugoslavia is just in the way of those troops so they are doomed.

Hurbert thanks for you kind responses. Your beefed up Spain seems adequate. The Axis doesnt seem to go at it haphassardly but Sweden is another matter entirely. Once Norway is occupied transport is cheap enough to support a large contingent in Norway and then an attack without Amph and the capture of Sweden in a maximum of two turns. As I have said I do not think it bad to allow invasions anywhere the Axis or Allies go but there must be consequenses. Maybe when the Axis invades a Pro Axis nation the other pro axis minors wonder if they are next. ie lower slightly the diplomacy of Bulgaria, Hungary and Romania when Sweden is invaded. Even if only 5 points it means using diplomacy to keep everyone in line. Allies invading Portugal would I am certain have scared the hell out of Spain. So I would up there diplomacy by 50 points if Portugal is invaded. This would not guarantee Spain joining the Axis but would make the diplomacy much more critical for both sides. As to your AI it is wonderful. Performs above all my expectations. Gives a great historical game. Two small items though with the AI. It very rarely invades Algeria and in about the 2 dozens games I have played against it so far only once did it invade Italy. I appears if the AI has not captured Tipolli by mid 42 that it ignores the med and invades either Portugal or France. There maybe good reason the AI acts this way but I do miss my Italian campaign and the battles in Africa. If that date where the AI appears to be redirect its movement could be moved to late 42 with an invasion of Algeria planned in mid 42 it would perform more in line. Russia is the other area that lacks enough power. The units perform well but Leeningrad falls too easily and the Russians just start to fall apart. I suggest the square next to the port be fortified with an army in place to beef that up which will make it much harder to take Lenningrad.

I use that as a cue I am behind and immediately attack Yugoslavia. You can get there using the Albania port but I would not recommend it.

I disagree with George Bernard Shaw. Patriotism is the love of your country above all other countries. Soldiers (at least me) did not go to war because they felt superior to anyone. They go to war to defend there country. Even though the war maybe ill concieved the soldier is not a political man he is a man willing to scrafice to make things better and safer for his family and country. So Mr Shaw to your statement I say Bah Humbug!!!

Nok why do you wish to remove the cause of all wars politics and religion from speech. It maybe contraversal but when we are discussing why Hitler, Churchill, Turman, or Stalin did this or that it is political. I think if we eliminated discussing these two causes of wars we would not be talking on the forums much. I would prefer to say lets speak respectfully when discussing these Hot Button Topics and not go off on our own believes and stick with the points as they are within the game. Try and temper your words with wisdom and not individual idealogy and they should be fine.

I agree in part Iron Ranger. As an Allied Player you would never get Egypt without a fight. I also try and help in Greece depending on how the sea battles have gone. Norway is pretty much undefendable as the allies but possible I could harass Narvik in order to keep units involved. Problem here seems to be that by the time you can react to Norway Sweden is already gone since it too is a one trick pony. Other then these and the obvious defense of France there is little the Allies can do against the Axis trotting around Europe. My feeling is that the loot you receive from each of these ahistorical exploits adds an additional unit to the Axis due to looting. This is almost immediate and since the any globe trotting by the Allies is pretty much ahistorical I simply will not do it without just cause. Example I would not attack Ireland because the Germans attacked Switzerland. I sincerely doubt the Allies would have either. They may have attacked Ireland for other reasons but certainly not because Switzerland was attacked by there enemy. Now if the Axis attacked Spain I would sincerely consider an attack on Portugal but instead I would probably simply send troops to support the Spainish. Anyway I agree with some beefing up with the major minors especially Sweden which once Norway falls it is dead. Spain seems okay and I havent seen anyone attack Turkey until Turkey attacked them. I still feel it would not stop or prohibit players from attacking nations. If the minors did not provide loot other then the city, oil and mining the whole map does I believe many players would focus on what they need to do instead of gathering all the free units. It would make it less viable to do Globe Trotting and maybe players would instead concentrate on the missions of defeating the areas historical challenged during WWII.

After a closer look at your opponents for President Rambo I am leaning in your direction. Is this to be a write in vote? Popular demand I suppose? The lobby is getting behind you so you need to make some speeches you can ignore. Otherwise how will we know you are lieing if you dont tell us what you intend to do. Jail is the place to go BTW. Note that Paris found God there and many others have so it is my firm believe God lives in Jail. And since he lives there I am certain he has interent probably T1 connection.

"Not everyone is able to do that, of course, but a lot of the time I think it's a matter of you yourself making the other player pay a price for doing something like that, rather than throwing in more scripts." So your response is for the other player to play fantasy instead of attempting to make the game more historical. I say fine but at least give me the option to play a historical game. Simply because the game allows ahistorical play doesnt make it correct. There must be consequences that were concievable at the time. Not well Joe did so I did it too. I desire to win within the guidelines of what was possible during WWII not by some fantasy of invading all the world expecting the remainder of the world not to react. Germany nor England invaded simply to capture another city to plunder. There needs to be reasons other then theft to motivate a nation. These may not be accurate but they must be conceivable. Germany considered invading Switzerland but didnt because Switzerland made both a economic comprimise and it was not cost effective. Had Norway been invaded by the Allies I do not doubt the Axis would have invaded Sweden to protect there ore shipments. But without a threat I can see no reason the Axis would invade Sweden. I just want a small amount of common sense not random running to capture the flags. I do not want them to curtail all possiblities I would just like to have the option to play historical and within that option rules that make playing historical reasonable. Almost all these type of games are played as fantasy without any thought to WWII this one is the best simply because the AI does play historical. The players do not. I find it strange that the complaints about AI are normally it doesnt do everything but this one operates very well with historical play. When you evade history the game AI isnt as compatible. Most of the problems could be solved by house rules but there should be a historical option so players actually know the house rules.

I too enjoy open strategy but I want the game to motivate the player to play historical. I agree with invade Portugal Spain joins the opposition. Allies invade Norway Sweden joins Axis. I do not care who goes to Iraq, Iran Syria they were and are unimportant. I have the same care for Vichy France. What I do say is remove the loot from them. I just do not see any true loot gathering in these poor nations at that time. You will receive the money from there cities, oil and mines. For some this maybe enough to attack but most would not because the cost reward would not be there. I believe most of these were not invaded simply because of the cost reward. Eachtime you invade someone there should be clicks up and down on the diplomacy giving diplomacy the chance to react. Example Spain joins Axis if they reach 100 but are normally at 40. Give them a 50 point jump if the Allies invade. The Allies would think twice about invading but still might make it without war verses Spain. Possibly these options could be placed when you choose the scenario you choose historical game or freeflow. That would allow both sides of the argument to be happy. Those who dont want to be controlled by history can play ignoring it and those like me who demand history can play there game.

Problem with SC2 is only in Human vs Human play so I simply do not play Humans in this game. I do in many others but the design is for people to attack every country so they can gain a little coin that they can use to attack the next irrelevant country. This is beyound ahistorical but true fantasy. Allies running off and attacking everything they see would have oonvinced the US not to enter since there would be no way to distinguish Allies from Axis. Axis attacking its allies again makes no sense. Sweden why? They were already providing the Iron Ore. Best you could hope for with that is to lower the amount of ore you would receive. Switzerland is attacked because it is there. Portugal on and on. I prefer a game where there are some sort of controls that make the game quasi historical. When you play the AI it does play historical and this is a great game but players only care about some fantasy victory since they are not following any historical reality. To sum it up this is a great AI game but NEVER will I play players with its present design. BTW AI is horrible in Commander but Human play great because there is no advantage to go anywhere outside of what is historical victory conditions. So if they wanted to make this a Human friendly WWII game they would simply remove the looting from all the countries that were not attacked historically. So other then the city points week to week there would be no benefit and most players would not go anywhere but where needed.

Well, I have play Commander long enough to see its advantages and disadvantages. The AI in the game is asleep. I think you can actually hear it snore during the computers turn. Suggest not buying until after the patch maybe someone there will shake it awake. Jim

Could the world learn is the real question? I must say they havent in many thousands of years so I remain doubtful. Look at the present day actions still war. No reason other then politial failure. It is a shame that politicans can convince otherwise intelligent and kind people to act without cause against another nation is beyond me but it has happen since the beginning of time. We live but we dont learn. We do prove that the same mistakes can be made any number of times. History is never even considered whenever the world marches of to start its next war. Only thing that comes from this is good wargames. Since I like these guess I will stop complaining.

I have played Commander for a couple days now and I have to agree the AI is really substandard. SC2 is significantly better. I am trying some multiplayer email games they might just make that game really good. There is no reason I can see to play ahistorical like in SC2. If then game will still need weather. I don't play multiplayer email on SC2 since the games are so strange only fantasy can be what they are. The strange running around and capturing every nation instead of some historical balance is just insane. Jim

Sorry nOk I am not on Runnyeye. Cant remember which I play on since it automatically picks up my character. Must say the receent improvements in EQ2 are remarkable though. Jim

I remain unconvienced that he was incapable but we are all allowed our opinions. I spend, as I am sure many of you do, hours reading the accounts of Germany and other countries during the period and find no evidence to support most claims until the war started going badly. His actions were similiar to many religious fantantics. Even though they were not done for religion they were done in a similiar manner. I am admittally opposed to all wars since I believe wars are caused by politicians failing to do there jobs properly. It is easy to sit at home in our modern economic positions to pass judgement. But many people were straving had no work and no hope. Without these wars are inevitable. Had the politicans not placed these peoples in such a horrible environment maybe no war would have happen and men similiar to Hitler could not gain power.

Everquest II, Making History (BTW bad game but I keep hoping for improvement), Civ Conquests, HOI2, and Commander Europe at War

Right on Pzgndr. It is a game so fun is important but for me it is not fun unless I am competing against real possibilities in WWII. Fantasy is just not for me. I want the game to stay within the groundwork of the diplomacy, economics and environment of WWII when it strays to far from these I just get bored quickly. I feel a true victory when most of the history remains but I still am more victorious then was historical.