Jump to content
Battlefront is now Slitherine ×

Still Carrier vs Air Interception flaw left in 1.06 patch.


zappsweden

Recommended Posts

One of the best changes in the newest patch was the interception bug/flaw. No longer could you do a classic Human vs AI maneuver a la "Red Alert" by simulate an attack to lure your opponent into attacking a defensive area (mountain, city). In this game this could be done with the previous interception rules.

from the version changes file:

"

- fixed the interception losses bug, entrenchment and defensive bonuses no longer affect

losses

"

My comments:

The new changes only concerns Air vs Air not in carrier vs Air. This means that the game will still have some magic tricks and rules of thumb that are unlogical and gamey. I have tested using ports and cities as "defensive attacking positions" and tried carrier vs air interception battles and got these results.

1. Attack (with carrier) enemy ground units from a sea port so that his air attacks your carrier in Port

2. Attack (with air) enemy ships from a city so that his carriers intercepts your air in city.

The game gets unnecessary complex because of this and the players who have fought lots of battles have a great advantage knowing such invisible rules.

[ February 12, 2003, 08:26 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zapp --- Must be nice to have the time & desire to test the software & corner cases. Ever consider getting job testing firmware/software? You can become a contractor in the states & make $30/hour

Hubert --- Dude, how about some free games for all the people the report the defects? How about making a U.S. Civil War game!!!

[ February 11, 2003, 09:44 PM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

Zapp --- Must be nice to have the time & desire to test the software & corner cases. Ever consider getting job testing firmware/software? You can become a contractor in the states & make $30/hour

Hubert --- Dude, how about some free games for all the people the report the defects? How about making a U.S. Civil War game!!!

Rambo, I am a programmer and also a tester but I have not found a job in the game industry yet. Today, the ppl with experience in the gaming industry (released titles) seem to get the jobs. :(

[ February 12, 2003, 08:28 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Zappsweden, I'm very impressed with the time you have taken on many occasions to identify some of the remaining items left in the game and do appreciate it. I've taken note of this one as well and will definitly fix it if another patch is released, although honestly at the moment this is still not likely. Either way, for the time being it was probably a good idea to make this issue general knowledge to put everyone on the same page.

Thanks!

Hubert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jon_j_rambo:

Hubert --- Dude, how about some free games for all the people the report the defects? How about making a U.S. Civil War game!!! [/QB]

Free games.... hmmm...., but a Civil war might be interesting to do, although I would have to read up on my Civil War history quite a bit. Which side won again? ;)

Hubert

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A few years back at a gaming convention, I played a strategic civil war game where you got production points based on areas controlled, plus additives for blockade runners, trade, and such. You would also get manpower from the areas and combine with the production points to make new units of cav, inf, art, naval, coastal forts, etc. The game was very interesting and you had to maintain forces in captured areas to keep them from go back to the other side. It was hard to mount a Union offensive when you had so many troops manning supply centers in Kentucky, Tennesse and other captured areas. Leaders could get killed off during campaigns and in battle.

The developer ran the game on a large map with computer for figuring production and such. I have not seen the game since.

I and many Civil war history buffs would love to see a strategic game on the period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hubert

There was an outstanding Windows 3.1 strategic level Civil War game, American Civil War, From Sumter to Appomattox put out about seven or eight years ago by Interactive Magic you might want to check out if you aren't already familiar with it.

It used a hex map encompassing the eastern Half of the U. S., starting a little west of the Mississippi [Arkansas, Mississippi and part of Texas] extending east into the Atlantic. North to South it went from Pennsylvania to mid Fla. Ships moved from the Atlantic to the Gulf via a truncated sourth Florida.

Generals had varying qualities and abilities. The historical McClellan, for example, is a great organizer in the game and good at training troops, but something of a pansy in committing himself to an offensive. Leaders could be either Historical, Random, or Parially Random.

Naval factor included ironclads & wooden frigates and amphibious operations using transports. Rivers are divided into shallow and navigable, which can only be utilized by riverine units which also include ironclad and wooden and river transports with New Orleans being the only port capable of producing both ocean and river craft.

Economy mechanics and manpower levels are incorporated. Assorted weapon types are also a consideration though there's no research.

Armies consist of infantry, artillery and cavalry and function better with all three as opposed to only one or two elements.

I'm describing this thing and you probably designed it. smile.gif

Like most older games it doesn't run well on Pentium IV windows XPs.

[ February 14, 2003, 03:06 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jersey John

Having recently figured out why American Civil War wasn't running correctly (a VERY stupid mistake I had been making), I reinstalled it. It is a very good game, and I would recomend it to anyone interested in the era. If anyone knows where to get the most "recent" patch (from about 1997) please let me know. Even without the newest patch though it's a fine game, and runs fine on my older ~200 meghertz machine under Windows 95 2nd Edition (the same machine runs Strategic Command just fine also: Thank you Hubert!). Apparantly there are some atvantages to being an old fogie stick-in-the-mud like me (even my slang is out of date).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your going to talk Civil War...get the Ken Burns CD-set. I got in for a present from my Brother-In-Law, I play it in the background while playing SC.

Sid Meier's Gettysburg is awesome.

My all-time favorite oldie war-game: Civil War

Hubert --- Make it baby.

[ February 19, 2003, 10:57 PM: Message edited by: jon_j_rambo ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jeff Sutro

Courtesy of JP Wagner from another Forum.

http://www.adanaccommandstudies.com/IntroACW.html

The installation is a little tricky, two files are shown and you need to install both for the game to work. The site provides it in two screen formats, 1000x -- and 800x --. It should run in 250 colors but higher resolutions also seem okay. This version was updated a few months back, Nov. 2002 and the site talks about a brand new version of the game to be released in a few months for $22.00.

You're an old fogey too? As far as the slang goes, it changes about every ten minutes these days along with the technology. smile.gif

General Rambo

Absolutely on both counts. That screchy fiddle music in the series is really great and that old footage of the 1938 Gettysburg Reunion -- man, fantastic! Sid Meir also has a Battle of Waterloo game that uses his Gettysburg system and another on Antietam.

If you're into Battle Fields and haven't seen them yet you should swing east and hit Gettysburg and Antietam. They're within a reasonable drive of each other.

You can never understand Antietam till you've seen the field itself; you could hide entire divisions in some of those ravines. McClellan must have seen men in gray coming out of them all day long -- no wonder he didn't commit his reserves even with Lee's battle plan in his pocket.

Gettysburg needs a few consecutive days, like the battle itself, to really see everything. If you spend one day walking along the Union lines looking at Lee's positions and the next walking along the Confederate lines looking at Meade's positions you'll understand in a minute why Lee didn't understand the situation. When you're standing on Little Round Top looking down at Devil's Den to the left and those fields to the right, especially if nobody else is around and you look really carefully -- well, the story's of ghost formations stop sounding so crazy!

[ February 19, 2003, 11:43 PM: Message edited by: JerseyJohn ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...