UFC Addict

Awesome input. So '5' seems to be the All Important number in almost all aspects of GOLD.

Hi. I am presently playing the other vastly more intelligent newcomer, Strategiclay. We are on Turn 6 and he is the Axis. I think we are learning from each other, well to be honest, Strategiclay is helping me enormously. I am up for another game. I can do 1-2 turns in the evenings during the week and maybe more on the weekends. I will take either side, it does not matter to me. Did you see the AAR, Catacol is going to whip you terribly. But I am sure you will learn a lot from that massacre and use your experience against newbies like me. I will send you a PM with my email.

Sweet, sent a PM!

Thanks guys. Strategiclayabout, what are those modifiers you circled (SA=1; ND=0 (+2DB)? It seems you are I are new to this, except you appear to be much smarter than I. Are you interested in a PBEM? I will do either side. If so, can we do the 1939 regular thing? Also, if one of us is really killing the other, maybe we could call a truce in like 1942 and start a new game switching sides or something like that? I say that because I think GC can get out of control very fast if you do not grasp the vastness of the events (does that make sense)? I am usually only available in the evenings for a few turns. On the weekends, I can do more. If you are not interested, I have no problem with that.

ahh, so TACS are more butt-kickier? Great.

The PROPERTIES for TAC still have it as causing 2 Entrenchment loss. Apparently under the new rules, it does not get -2 until you are at Level 2.

Thank you. I did not so much have a problem with damaging my BBs, I had a problem that the Entrenchment was unaffected. That is a game changer if you have an elaborate plan to capture something and you are willing to lose lots of MPPs (repair BBs) and you get no result.

From my prior posts, I am just starting GOLD because I was incorrectly practicing on the nonGold version. I am on turn 2 of the 1939 campaign and I just Naval Bombarded the heck out of Foochow with two BBs and two Cruisers. 1. No effect on Entrenchment and no noticeable affect on any factor of the Chinese unit. 2. My ships were hurt badly (each BB lost two). 3. Message that one or two MPPs had been affected. I know I just started with Gold, but that HAS got to be wrong. I am not a programming, but I think the tinkering with the Entrenchment Reduction changes (from Tac) may be the culprit. But I could be dead wrong on the reason, I was just throwing that out there.

After looking at the screenshots from Strategiclayabout, I just realized I was spending all my time NOT on the Gold version because I did not follow the download directions. As you can tell, I am not very bright. So after spending all this time on the unGold version, I was wondering if someone could provide input on some quick observations I have reading the Expansion notes? 1) Are subs now signficantly weakened as a Naval weapon and are now just Raiders? This hurts Axis? 2a) Tacs are not as good because you need to spend separate research and cannot get the quick loss of entrenchment (need level 2). This hurts the Axis because they have all the good stuff in the beginning? 2b) Do Fighters still cause any Entrenchment loss? 2c) Do Bombers still cause 2 Entrenchment loss? 3) Are there details on what causes something to Retreat? 4) National Morale's ONLY role is to make sure you do not get <1%? 5) Research is much easier to achieve results? 6) Something about being able to turn off Raiding option. Is this new, I thought this was how it worked? Thanx again for all of the Forum help.

I have been playing both sides vs AI through to about March 1941. I am seeing units pop-up on both sides that are not in the production que. Some of them significant (USA CV Wasp, Ger Paratroops, USSR northern Fleets, Brit Desert Fighter, the Flying Tigers in China), I may have missed some others. My question is, is there an area where I can see all of these things coming up? I am thinking all kinds of unforeseen units will pop-up once Japan bombs Pearl Harbor.

Excellent and thank you.

I get that Convoy thing in that you put a Raider on it or next to it and you can reduce the MPPs on the Convoy. I am pretty sure that is how that works. My question is the Merchant Ships. If you put a Raider on them, that affects the operating efficiency of the Port and not the MPPs? Is that correct? And can a Raider be next to them to do this, or do you have to be on them? Also, on Convoys. If a Port is at 80% and you shipping in 40MPPs, does that mean you only get 32 MPPs? Just a little confused on the whole raiding and Port thing.

I was playing around with the Morale formula [Morale = Old Morale * 75% + (Strength – Old Morale * 75%) * Supply / 10 * Old Morale / 100]. If Strength is at 10, it makes sense. But if you go below Strength 10, it does some weird stuff. For example, if at Strength 9 and the Morale is at 87% or higher, Morale goes down if everything else stay the same (Supply). Another example of this is if you are at 100% Morale and Supply 10 and Strength 9.., the next turn, your Morale would drop to 90%. Are my calculations wrong? Is it supposed to be this way? If so, I guess GC wants you to keep everything else at 10 Strength or else you suffer horribly.

When the Vets PBEM with Global Conflict, does everyone use the Production Delay? Cheers

Excellent and thank you. I am on my 6th hour of studying the manual. Cannot wait to start practicing against AI to prepare for PBEM.

Hi Hubert. Are you saying that the default is that Air Base changes are OPERATIONAL MOVEMENT?

I see that this feature is somewhere in the Editor and not a readily clickeable feature with the other options. I am slightly confused on what this is explaining. But it seems to say that there is an option to make all Air Base changes an OPERATIONAL movement. I am thinking this would be a HUGE change in the gameplay. So I was wondering (for future PBEM purposes), is the option to make all Air Rebasing OPERATIONAL used by the veteran PBEMers? Cheers.

Advice from the AAR Master. Okay, enough said -- I am giving myself the Soft Build option as I continue to prepare. Thank you VERY MUCH.

This is my second hour of my long journey into understanding this potential masterpiece. My goal is to PBEM. So with that said, do the veterans on here use the Soft Build option, or do they enforce the strict Hard Build stuff? I just want to know so I know what setting to use as I prepare for the coming battles? As far as the other settings, I am about 98% sure you guys leave all of them on. Cheers.

After reading the AAR for this, I had to get it. With that said, the download is complete and I see it says v1.07. My question is, does Battlefront update its manuals? I think I am seeing that the manual is updated with all of the new stuff? Is this correct, or do I need to be aware of changes to the manual by reading the forum? Thanks in advance and anxiously awaiting some more AAR posts.

Wow, what an incredible super awesome AAR. I am buying this over the weekend. Is it possible you two could switch sides and do this all over again? Thank you.

It is hard to find PBEM, I have 2 games going. I am hoping after the patch things pick up. As far as how is it without the patch, I cannot vouch for play balance yet, but it works great. There are some enhancements (assistance with movement because it is almost impossible to determine in the mountains and other places; and right now NM means nothing). But it is good to go. If you want to give it a try, I have never been CP and I will try that. Or you can be CP, whatever you want. Be aware that I am highly confident that I am not very good. So if you want a top player, pass me by for now.

You fear my skills.., that is why you decline. Actually, I suck so that is a good call on your part.

Lettowvorbeck, I am ready now. The patch might take a bit.

CIV 5 does this. I know that CIV 5 is frowned upon on forums like this, but that "switcheroo" thing works great.