Sapare
-
Posts
213 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Sapare
-
-
So, th black screen freezes are indeed caused by the fullscreen mode, so I switched it to windowed mode and that runs fine.
As for the crashes caused by moving the german ships in the north, I can not currently reproduce it because in my game against the AI I have almost won(and Russian fleet and ports are long mine). So I'll have to look into that more at a later time.
-
When you have your carriers selected, there are two kinds of "circles with lines" (movement indicators) that you can see from them. One is the green one (usually within the highlighted movement area) and another is a red one, usually appearing when you hold your cursor over the enemy, or an area in the fog of war after you have moved. The red one is "sending your airplanes". Use "properties - set mode" to choose a "mode" for your carrier, CAP (defend against incoming aircraft), "naval tactical" (strike against enemy ships) and so on. Do this before you move!
To add to this, hold shift if you wish to send out planes without moving/before moving.(the indicator should change to the red colour)
-
Well, I may be way off with this, but this is what I'm thinking;
The germans tend to concentrate their aircraft to effectively destroy several units and open the way for the spearhead thrust (classic blitzkrieg). Each aircraft (if it is in range) only intercepts once (I think), so I need lots in the same area to intercept as much as possible. Also, I intend to move this "deathball" agressively now that I have lvl 3, when I see where his airpower is, I'll try to concentrate mine in and hit his air on the ground as many times as I can to destroy it.
The fact is, that every single time he has used his airpower, all of my fighters have intercepted. But they just cant stop the luftwaffe as his escorts survive my interceptions (relatively unharmed too so far it seems) and the bombers go through unmolested. That's why I need to do the deathball move and try to hit him on the ground with massed fighters.
They do intercept twice. but if they have been intercepting as they should then all is good. Was just worried that maybe you were using them wrong from lack of knowledge. And sorry about the lack of sucess, but it is indeed rather difficult to wear him down(to part because whenever it rains he gets a "Free" turn to restock, because normally you would cause him to stay grounded simply by making his airplanes fall to low HP and then he has to repair.(each fighter can only escort once a turn and only if he was not moved or used otherwhise))
-
Maybe I just have not played enough WW2 but why are all your fighters positioned in a giant ball off doom? Would it not be more effective to have them spread out to cover all of the front lines(maybe not anymore as your frontline has fallen apart, but before)?
-
Turn 28 – August 8th
n time.
When it rains it really does pour. Turkey strengthens axis relations, and Franco is about to join the war. At this point, the allied low water point mark, a smashed and nearly broken england stands alone against the might of Germany, Italy, Bulgaria, Romania and Spain.
Don't worry, you can always move to Canada. We have it nice here.
-
Just a quick mention to the fact that this game seems to be much more likely to crash or get hung up then any of the other SC games I played, maybe this can be looked into?
For one I had many cases of the game getting some "movement animation error"(or so) when moving my germany Battleship around the Russian territories by Lenningrad. It also seems to hang itself whenever I try to use tab-in/tab-out in menues.(including the 'are you sure you wish to end this turn' tab)
Non of this is gamebreaking but after doing a turn for 30 min just to have everything be errased because the game crashes when you move your battleship(not a constant thing, I could not figure out what caused it but it did happen every time I moved to that field in that turn, might be sub related) is a pain.
-
I bump up this thread again.
For a long time now I wondering:
There is a one-sided entrenchment and
there is a two-sided ("L"-shape) entrechment.
Now, when the facing is important, shouldn't then logically not also exist a three-sided ("U"-shaped) entrenchment? :confused:
It happens sometimes that a unit is surrounded on three sides (i. e. Town, city).
There are two things to entrenchment. You get the extra defense while being entranched(based on the amount of tech you have in trench warfare) no matter what direction the trench is facing. But you ALSO get an extra boon if the enemy is attacking directly over one of your trenches(25% less damage or something like that).
Or at least that is how I believe it is meant to work
The reason that 1 sides exists is if you wish to draw a trench line without it being used against you when the enemy captures it(though i barly ever use 1 side as even with 2 sides this barly ever happens to be the case). The reason 3 sides don't exists is because it be OP.
-
96.800 Tiles (484x200) = AoD
39.168 Tiles (384x102) = SC WW1 / Breakthrough
16.896 Tiles (265x064) = SC Global Conflict / Gold
16.896 Tiles (256x064) = SC 2 Blitzkrieg Global Map (= Patch 1.07)
09.768 Tiles (132x074) = AoC (i may be wrong here, calculated this on my own)
05.320 Tiles (140x038) = SC 2 Blitzkrieg
Thanks but these are the ones I knew, that is why my question was to what scale the map was. How much square kilometers(or miles if you wish... lol) is each field would be interesting to know.
-
I know the map is tileways much bigger then even the WW1 map(96k tiles compared to 30(ish)k tiles?) but I was curious what the scale was of this map.
While at it, what is the scale of the other maps(AOC and WW1 Europe)?
-
- When capturing towns in USSR as Germany I get the "crackling" sound for destroying fortresses and the pop message "(town name) destroyed" not sure if it was supposed to be that ? Looks like Axis is exterminating every single civilian in the way :eek: .
Sounds about right? ;p
But on serious note, while we are asking that, are the towns also supposed to be destroyed when the USSR takes them back? Because some of these cities get destroyed 4 times in 3 turns, ;p . (I turn here counting 1 German and 1 Russian turn together)
-
To my surprise the AI has actully improved(if a lot of a bit is difficul to say, AI just simply can handle some sitersations better then others and as such sometimes shines as brilliant and sometimes as rather confused).
I like the changes to the AI but I wanted to mention my finds on quirks of the AI as I find them.
The first being. It is very stupid when it comes to the relation to ships/ports and ground units endangering those ports.
If you have a unit directly adjecent it will remove its ship as to no have it get sunk, but if your unit is but a field away it just doesnt care.(my example is this. Finish units moved into range of Kronstad (north ofcourse) port, bombed the enemy destroyer(which should not have been there at any rate. AI removes the destroyed but also all units infront of me(to defend the city proper itself, reasonable). I move one field foward (uncontested) and find myself so lucky as to find the russian Battleship laying in port, taking it down to 5 hp from 10.(Which ofcourse is a lot.
The other find of weird AI being, it is super zealus when it comes to upgrading cities with anti-air, even upgrading compleetly surrounded viliages which are sure to fall the coming turn.
Both of these are if human is playing German, as that is what I am currently playing.
-
Pretty much the only game I have ever seen where both players decided to just leave poor Luxemburg alone. Not sure exactly why though.
-
The AAR is a bit slow to watch(it is a nice idea though, just makes me wish for a replay feature even more(here is hoping for SC3!)), but if you ever get to uploading the mod I would give it a play and give some input, baring that I can find someone to play it with.
-
I assume no one has anything against me giving my own input and advice from experience here.
As for the CP and USA, unless the USA has seen large changes in function I belive you overbear their importance in the war. From my experience, the biggest impact the USA makes is do to the NM events related to their entry in the war.(if CP moral is bad then it can cause a good number of chained events of surrenders or just generally bad things)
Their military might is not that great because every unit they build has to be bought at full price.
As such deplomacy tends to fall somewhat short in that area, at least if both players are keeping each other on their toes.
Norway is reasonable do to the low requirments of shifting %. Holland can work but if the CP is paying attention it really never should, CP can always counteract it with a single turns worth of income.
Bulgaria has seen many changes since I played a lot of my matches so I wont definitly comment on them, but I will go to say that if Austria suceeds at capturing the first capital of Serbia early on(most likely do to German HA support), it won't be worth it.
Itally should have been able to hold the line, at least against the relatively weak teched Austrians. But once their line started shaking units should have been moved to defend it, yes.
As for having destroyed the german navy. After you do that just take one turns worth(150) and put it into anty sub research(if you have not already destroyed his subs). Only upgrade your destroyers(maybe some cruisers, if you really have too much money over) and place your fleet on the blockade places.(not norways tradeline, just northerns and long blockade). Make sure Germany won't get a chance to do an effective unrestricted naval warfare attack and her moral should start sinking every turn.
(you can do some bombing and port blocking, but keep in mind that in case of Corps you often give the unit more experience then you drain, or so it used to be)
You can also use part of your entente fleet(now that you know German fleet is no danger anymore) and help an invasion over Eqypt by bombing the costal units/cities.(used to be more powerful but probably still has some use) and to "scout" and protect amphibious transports so you can land in Austria from Itally.(overall, the CP fleet being destroyed means you have a lot of options he has to plan for)
As for how the minors like Eqypt should have been used, it really comes down to experience and what your gameplan is. It is viable to do an invasion over Eqypt(Ottmans are admitetly very cowardly and withdraw from the war quickly if things go against them, much like Itally) into the Ottoman territories. I would advice it if the German march into France was no all too powerful and only few british units are needed there.
If you are really serious about Eqypt I would advice: Move candian corps, anzac, indian corps, replace the starting egypt HQ with the level 8 one, get a 2nd HQ into Egypt, get some battle ships down to Egypt and deploy all finished Russian ship/subs in southern russia.(to bomb the railway).
This is most viable if Serbia is doing fine and Germany instead decided to go hard on Russia. How you go about this is now up to you. the 2nd HQ can help in Egypt or it can be moved(including most of those corps) to Iraq where you have a good chance of catching the Ottoman offguard.(but the HA needs to be leveled up in all cases, no offenses without HA support.)
As for viable amphibious invasions, you won't be able to do one in Germany's mainland, ever.(Amphibious ships move super slow and slow down really quickly)
The only really viable Amphibious landings(other then some based on "he would never expect that" starts) are from Itally into Austria and the other way around. Germany to England(which I only saw once and requires the British fleet to be defeated) Ottoman on Cyrus(if you know his detachment has left because you saw it somewhere ells), Cyrus to Ottoman(mostly the railway province). Russia to Ottoman(the mines, the railway, and once even the Capital itself.(Instant gamewinner, never again leaving that city empty.)
As you can see most or all of them are short distance do to the nature of how these ships work, even the Russia to Ottoman move already takes a good 5 turns.
I personally am a fan of swaping units as the moral/readiness hit is not that much and you get that one attack you really need. But it really comes down to where you re attacking, in some of the more mountainous regions(Russia/Ottoman) you really have no choice but to use switching because you can't really walk back effectively.
WW2 I can't be any help because I am terrible at it.
Best order of attack:HA, warships, tanks, corps.
This is baring that the unit really is not vital, keep the fighters/heavy bombers(which are stratigic and not tactical) and airships for what they are meant to be used for. But it really ranges. Normally I wouldnt naval bomb a unit because it is ineffective, but if you believe you can kill it go for it.
Same for those bombers and airships, they have jobs they are better for.(lowering supply, or even hurting industry(which if they are not leveled up really is not effective and should not be done btw, unless you have a specific reason of why you are doing it).
But if the enmy corps is down to 2 hp or even 1 I advice to just throw whatever you have(airship and such whise) on it rather then attack it with a corps.(most of all if it is dug in and even that 1 hp will do 2 or 3 damage to yours corps)
I think that is it for me, really the name of the game is, trying out stratigies and seeing what works and what doesnt.
-
Look Bob, the Naval-Air model is probably the hardest thing for any game to get correct and the intracacies of this type of combat are always going to be undermined to a certain degree by the necessity of abstraction at this scale.
Never the less, SC's developers and scenario builders have been diligent at correcting the major issues and slowly but surely the features are coming around to a more accurate representation. Eventually they'll get this pretty close, have faith, and by all means vocalize your concerns and offer remediations.
This is how SC has gotten this far and thankfully the "team" is committed to continued evolution the game.:cool:
I really do not have a desire to start an fight here and I have no opinion on the overal debate because I don't really care, but I just wish to say that I feel like you need to either be more calm or just watch your tone if you are calm. Maybe it is just my bad luck but I feel like I have seen you go harsh on two people in the last 5 min of reading on this forum.
-
I am surprised this idea wouldn't even get a comment, no interest for a function to have games replay in speed up fassion?
-
Strategiclayabout has explained it perfectly!
Essentially, destroying enemy units in low supply is akin to winning the sort of victories that propaganda can be made of. Thus boosting morale on the home front.
I say this isnt a bad addition overall, though there are some logicly questionable things with this.
For example, I had a russian HQ and 3 corps which got cut off in Austrian territory, they dug themself in by a town and obviously still got killed over the next few turns. But just becase how stircly this moral gain is tied to moral this wouldnt give the CP player any moral boons, which was a bit silly considering they had still managed to cut off my units and "capture" them. I think this rule should be expanded to count in any units disconected to the capital in every way(ports counting as conections)
-
I've a new question. Does AA stack? If I put an AA unit on a city tile where I have added AA to the city tile will I have two shots at attackers?
Thanks.
The city AA does not actully shoot, it just adds a defence value which makes the airplane more likely to take damage/less likely to do damage while it bombs your city. As such, they do stack in that way, but the city AA will be more of a passive boon rather then aggresive.
-
You're welcome ,
It's a big part of the fun in this game and even after quite some games you'll have an epic WTF moment and discover you've got something wrong (or only half-right) all along.
That's why we all refrained from giving advices or such unless you asked for it
.Pretty much this, a lot of the game is the fun of learning the details.(though I guess I might be more pro-active with my advice just because I see a lot of people misuse Deplomacy/tanks(in the other topic).)
-
On a side note to the research change. I think that was a good change. I was never really in favor of the whole teching infantry super quickly but it was kinda a must.
On the note of the AAR, while some might disagree I would also argue that you invested too much into deplomacy.(unless it saw radical changes from when I last played) Deplomacy is really not super usefull/relevant/efficent in this game in most cases because nations which are neutral(swiss, denmark) will near always stay neutral or only join 1917/1918 when they are alrady useless, and nations which will join the war can often only be slowed/sped up by a few turns because they all have a set "time" trigger which from that turn on will increase war readiness every turn.
The only time Deplo is usefull is for Netherlands(even norward/Sweden is more investment then gain, though Norway can be done, but only a few chips). And if you go for Deplo on netherlands I would do it kinda off the side, not invest a lot of points in one turn.
Also on tanks, make sure where you are using them. they CAN be devestating(though never as much as you expect them to) but only on compleetly open field. If you are anywhere ells they are more roadblocks, the enemy will have a really tough time to kill it with infantry no matter what. They are also supper vunerable to heavy gun fire so try to keep them out of range of those
-
- You can only invest 1 chit in infantry at any time.
What? I have not played any of the newer versions of 1914(but about to) but this did not used to be, are you sure?
-
That would be something. It is difficult to put things together in the balkans because you might have some units to spare but no commanders to spare. Then the units are almost useless because of supply problems.
While I wont be speaking strongly one way or another I do wish to mention though that it should not be overdone with the ideas of letting HQ's control other allied troops. There is a sense of stratigic depth in having the correct HQ's for the correct tasks.(It forces you to keep your armies in order, rather then just randomly send out groups of 3 corps in directions and cause mass havok)
If you are lacking the required HQ's I assume your enemy is doing something correctly in tying your HQ's down somewhere, just a thought.
-
My question is. Why the NM boon if enemy unit is in low supply? I don't really understand the logical reasoning. I get the idea of NM for destroying a unit(like ships) but why bind it to supply?
-
From personal experience I would say it is too expansive and not useful. Itally will join the war rather early in the game and it is unlikely that you will be able to delay that but any more then 3 or 4 turns at most, at which point the money is better spend getting some german corps there if you insist to invest so much into itally.
.
On the AI
in Strategic Command - Assault on Communism
Posted
Another note on the AI,(though to part this is probably caused by the horible state the Russian army is in atm) after having captured Lenningrad and slowly pushing the AI in the eastern forests it seems to have decided to move no less then 5 HQs directly adjecent to each other for no reason, it just hoggs so many HQ in that rather unimportant area.(you would assume he would use them in Stalingrad, where he had two)
But again, that is prob more of a specific oddity caused by the sitersation.
On a more legid problem. The AI is WAY to aggresive with its airplanes. Going so far as to bomb(or trying to) with each of its fighter units.
Which is not only ineffective, but also super annoying because i keep having to watch my AI enemy bomb my units(and them getting hit more often then me) with 20ish different plane units(including statigic bombers).
Not saying it should never do this as there are some indepth reasons for why to just bomb with all you have, but it seems to do this every turn, which I immagen is a huge drain on his economy.