heatrr
-
Posts
28 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by heatrr
-
-
In my AI testing -- me playing the Axis and the computer AI controlling the Allied -- of this mod, while I am quite pleased with the AI performance, there is one oddity that I observed when the Axis garrisoned Godthab after diplomatically getting Denmark to join the Axis. A link to the screenshot of the oddity is provided: http://i28.tinypic.com/2cdjpnd.jpg
-
I am playing the axis in my testing of this and from what observations, the computer controlled Allied Algerian navy is able to transit Allied controlled Gibraltar.
-
I have a possible bug -- if not a bug, definately an AI vs. Human oddity.
Still play testing this 'oddity' out a bit more but will post up a screeie showing the 'oddity' very soon.
Other than that, game plays fine on AI max settings. Thanks.
-
Had no problems with Vichy, but then again, when the option came up to agree to the armistice with the French, which invariably would have created Vichy, I opted for "No".......
At any rate, no problems with the mod thus far.
-
Reboot and resume...the game may have been saved to the point of the crash. Someone else in this thread had a like problem, they asserted resume worked and game ran fine thereafter.
-
I agree with Nupremal...Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were considered modernized battlecruisers; therefore, most battlecruisers were considered fast battleships. Accordingly, Graf Spree, Lutzow, etc were considered heavy cruisers, Emden and such fell into the classifications of cruisers to light cruisers.
-
Just downloaded and am currently messing around with.
-
I may be wrong, but from my experiences, I don't believe subs reduce port numbers....subs reduce, per turn, a random # of supply carried on the nearest convoy route to and from a port.
-
Me too. And the Japanese cannot enter the defeated USSR. I think there should be a script or decision event where Germany cedes a few Eastern Soviet cities to Japan.
There is no script that "cedes" a few Eastern Soviet cities in the event of Russia being defeated by Germany....there is only this:
After such a script is activated, Japan can enter those cities and defeated Soviet territories under the control of Germany.
-
You do realize that as the neutral US player/controller, that US ships can be used to block German ports? Talk about one pissed off German/Axis player....
-
Drop the A-bomb.
-
Yes, Hubert, I am running the most updated version.
It is a no biggie to me anyhow.
Just posted what I did for an fyi.
-
To hell with diplomacy....I declare war on everyone.
Additionally, the US is too placid for the lack of a better word.
-
Just an update....being the last to post here was made by Hubert on 3/19 and it is now 4/3...
Just ran my Malwarebytes and guess what?
http://i44.tinypic.com/2hdpuf5.jpg
http://i43.tinypic.com/7108kz.jpg
Btw,
1) I bought the game; not the demo.
2) I deleted it [the trojan] and SC:GC still works fine.
-
Why not change most of what you are lamenting via the game editor, Wushuki?
-
Rough Seas incidents do/does affect/effect the AI player.
-
1. HQs can only be destroyed by land combat.
3. HQs make only be struck by one air unit per turn.
What if the air unit, doing its once per turn hit on an HQ, destroys it?
-
UK can alternatively relocate their capital to Canada.
-
Is there any advantage to leaving the corps, cruiser, and carrier in/near Fort De France now that I've got the $$$?
I have left a corp parked in Fort De France with no real disadvantage. The US will repeatedly - every turn - demand the removal of the German forces from the Fort but the threat, as with the possible incremental increases in US mobilization, will be countered by the US Isolationist calls for the US fleet to return to the US West Coast. In other words, from what I can tell, it all balances out and the US demands for German forces to leave remains an annoying ignore.
Has anyone successfully employed a "South American" gambit to get the Argentinians, others involved? Is that even an advantage worth the trouble? That seems to be the only reason to keep them there, otherwise, I could use them back near the Channel or maybe the Med.
Other than some additional forces acting as a diversion thorn in the side of the US and UK in Latin America, I don't bother with activating the Argentinians.
Does removing the corps from Fort De France decrease the chance the U.S. will activate or has the damage been done?
Yes, it decreases the chance the US is or will be activated...again, because of the continued US Isolationist calls.
-
I have not encountered this, but here's a thought that I love to pull on the French because of my historical disdain for them: Do not accept the agreement that allows for a Vichy government to be created. Makes the humilation that Hitler historically imposed on the French look amatuerish.
-
heatrr,
Have you tried any of the higher difficulty levels to see if it adds a bit more of a challenge?
Hubert
Yes, currently playing a modified scenario on +1.5 expert. AI is still getting drummed, still takes 20+ minutes to finish its move, and still lacks competency such as keeping unit cohesion, etc. What the AI ultimately determines as a "opportunity" ends up being a half baked attack that is easily countered. Not saying the game sucks, Hubert....I love the game...it provides countless hours of fun. All I am saying is I wish the AI oppenent was better or had the ability to progressively learn and improve during the game and then used what was learned in other games.
-
Being I do not play against human opponents because of real life time schedule, etc., I find the AI lacking in competitiveness and competency. I can wage a world war on multiple fronts against the AI averaging 3-5 minutes a turn for me....the AI takes 20 minutes a turn....and still gets drummed.
-
And once those remaining Maginot units move back to Paris, their defensive value is gone, making them open to being shredded. Anyhow, yeah, too much wine and cheese is not good, especially in a war environment.
-
Since I am new here, please bear with me.
First off, I played Strategic Command a year or so back but eventually pushed it aside to play some other games. With the release of Strategic Command Global Conflict, my interest has been reinvigorated and I bought Global Conflict and have been steadily playing it since. Awesome game so far.
Here are a few of observations:
1) The AI opponents recieve a unit and then are able to move newly recieved unit the same turn new unit recieved, whereas I recieve a new unit and cannot move it the turn recieved. Example: US gets CV Wasp and moves it in the same turn recieved (typically to the closest harbor for upgrading). Likewise, I get the Bismarck and cannot move it in the same turn recieved.
2) Why does the Soviet AI build naval units in the Caspian Sea? To me, makes no sense.
3) AI needs to make better use of diplomatic points. I would wager that if scenarios did not have already preassigned diplomatic chits, the AI controlled countries would not use diplomatic chits. Example: I have done about 8 variations of the World at War and have repeatedly adjusted the US entry percent chance from 13-15% to well over 80-85% only to watch the UK fail to actively diplomatic chit US into war entry. In fact, not only has the UK failed to bring the US into the war with the increased US percent entry, over time, the US steadily drops in its percentage chance to enter the war...every turn thereafter (i.e.: I have checked every turn in these enhanced and edited scenarios to witness the adjusted US entry percent decline from a set 85% to 68% over a number of turns - which I no doubt believe the continued 'US isolationists' message has a reducing affect/effect).
4) The AI, in general, needs to be tweaked. If I have subs in the convoy route from Canada to UK, why would Canada continue to send out transports when I repeatedly sink them or when I have a sub sitting off Canadian ports, especially when not playing or using 'fog of war' and I know the AI can see what I see under the no fog of war option? Again, makes no sense and reminds me a suicide bomber who would repeatedly continue to run in and blow themselves up...if you get my point.
5) Also, as to the AI being tweaked, whether in several edited variations of World at War, the Soviets (i.e.: before entry into war against the Germans and eventually the Japanese) repeatedly fail to reinforce their Eastern flank/front/position with the Japanese and solely only reinforce their flank/front/position against the Germans.
6) The French are pansies...in that once one of the Maginot Line hexes are breached, the haul arse back to Paris when a human opponent would simply reinforce the positions surrounding the breached Maginot Line hex and hold the remaining two (being there are a total of three Maginot Line hexes). AI tweak....
Anyhow, I love the game and continue to edit scenarios to overcome AI deficiencies ... without touching the 'bad voodoo' AI scripts.
AAR Nupremal World AI test
in Strategic Command - GLOBAL CONFLICT
Posted
The oddity that I am attempting to point out is that of the Allied AI in stacking the sheer amount of planes - 11 total - to counter that one lone Axis unit at Godthab.