Jump to content

RepsolCBR

Members
  • Content Count

    1,445
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    6

RepsolCBR last won the day on June 3

RepsolCBR had the most liked content!

About RepsolCBR

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location:
    Kristinehamn, SWEDEN

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Yepp... I guess that like most i'm really hoping that this new partnership will improve things... Significantelly ! Othervise it will be a long wait...
  2. The sad thing is...after F & R is released we are still 10+ additional releases short of being able to play the whole (or better part of) the eastern campaign... I will probably be an old, drewling man...wetting myself before that happens...😖
  3. Maybe the old stuff needs to be left as is... But couldn't they not add a 'slider' to the editor now that would allow the designers to specify the surender treshold on the future scenarios... If the slider is left untouched it would default to 40 %.... Allowing already released scenarios to work as before but give some options...going forward 🤓.
  4. Getting your own Dropbox account is very simple...and free 🙂... And then you simply provide the link to it...
  5. My question was actually more aimed at Anonymous_Jonz...😎 With regards to a 'fix'...i agree that that would be welcome. Tweaking the moral threshold as you mentioned is probably the easiest fix. Having the option to specify a retreat- as well as a outright surrender threshold for each AI group (preferably at each induvidial waypoint) as well as a force-wide surrender threshold for the scenario would be even nicer imo. Even better if the scenario designer could also asign the pullback locations for the AI groups if they are forced to retreat. 🙂
  6. acceptable casualties are highly dependant on the difficulty and importance of the mission i would say...
  7. witch answer are you refering to ? Erwin or nik mond As far as i know it has been the consensus for many years to use reinforcements to prevent early surrender.
  8. Aha...yepp that sounds weird ! Seems like you are doing it right... Could it have something to do with the scriptfile ? But that shouldn't mess up the first scenario one would think...
  9. I don't really understand what you mean with this line... That is not something you usually do...the core units are core units...you usually do not change that file between different scenarios in a campaign.
  10. I have never heard of any limit... The most common limitation with regards to size is...when playing the scenario... The FPS might be struggeling with anything close to regiment size... A corps might be asking to much...😊 But i guess that you do not intend to use such a huge force in each scenario...
  11. Guerilla/special forces ambush kind of scenarios is a cool idea but due to editor/gane engine limitations they are very tricky to get to work well... One of the main problems...atleast with a MOVING AI is the current limitation with... ONE way forward or none at all... An AI group set to patroll/move in a certain direction can not be made to abandon that move in reaction to a player ambush...and all of a sudden start down a different path as a result of that ambush...the tac AI might halt the group in place and return fire but other then that they will not take any new actions..
  12. Like you i would prefer 41-43 but if you're intrested in the eastern front...it's a very good investment anyway 😁 Atleast you get to play around in 'the right' theatre...and there are a decent amount of comunity campaigns and scenarios to download...i doubt you will be dissapointed 😎...
  13. Hopefully the stready stream of Youtube videos will continue for a while yet... Those videos ought to bring some possitive attention to the game atleast.
×
×
  • Create New...