vveedd Posted March 9, 2007 Author Share Posted March 9, 2007 Originally posted by Desert Dave: vveedd, Just a kind of friendly suggestion. QUIT! Running over to that other board And shouting all over the place! About how terrible this or that feature Is... with SC-2. How THEY should avoid making The same sort of mistakes, and etc, See what I mean? You CAN make your points, Here, there and anywhere WITHOUT constantly mentioning Or comparing with SC-2, true? Personally, I get a bit disgusted by that, Since I have put damn near 5 years Of my - one and only life Into helping make THIS game The best it can be (... small contributions, and certainly no more than MANY others here have also done over the years). Hubert has staked his own life, His very livelihood, On making, and improving this game, When, I have no doubt, He could be making a LOT more $$$ Using his considerable talent and skills In some other fashion. And so, Here's the thing. Sooner than later folks are gonna get the idea That you are being, ummm, two-faced And even... traitorous, Since very many - not merely me, Have a REAL "rooting interest" In seeing Hubert succeed, and, Do well enough that he would choose To CONTINUE improving this great game. Know what I mean? Thanks for advice Desert Dave but no, I will not quit. I love this game like you and participating in making from beginning of SC1. I will continue make suggestions until Hubert says “I am done with this game”. Even then I will try to give some suggestions in case that Hubert decides to start make Strategic Command 3. All my posts were and are with one goal – to make this game better and better. I will not accept statement “This game is good as it can be” because this is not true. We could have said that when SC2 was in 1.0 version but we haven't. Because of that now we have SC2 v.1.6 which is much better game than v.1.0. All my suggestions were with good reason and with very well arguments because I have very good world history knowledge and I am playing strategy games all my life (and this is long time, believe me ). As for comparing SC2 with other games (or should I say game?) why not? I know about what game you are talking about and I am only trying with REAL examples to help this guys that they avoid some mistakes from SC2 at start. Comparing this game with SC2 is logical choice because it looks very similar to it. Traitorous? Your paranoid logic “If you are not with us, you are against us” is just what I said – paranoid or you are, maybe, just too emotional. We are on same side. Actually, I am comparing all these games with one game - Third Reich. This game is not perfect but very close to perfection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n0kn0k Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Btw what's the other game you're talking about? You made me curious. I'm comparing SC2 with other games also. And not even always with Turn based games. There are many games and improvements possible which have examples in many different genres. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 A feisty SC Cat, I like that, Especially, Say - the Brother the one fox-hole over Is eating AK-47 jackets for lunch. Thanks for advice Desert Dave but no, I will not quit. Yep, stand-up is... old school. Quitting... ain't so bold, or cool. Think - what if? Armstrong the champ American Biker Or ennybody else afflicted With Cancer for that matter... just quit, And didn't wrestle that dirty-dog Devil of a scoundrel Down to the Ground? Though, here, that wasn't my intent. I meant - QUIT! Bad mouthing SC-2! Ah, you don't EVEN do that, eh? Well, let's select out a few samples: __________________________________ "In SC2 game (sorry for mentioning this game again) I have had very, very stupid situation. AI tried invasion on Norway without HQ unit (quick explanation: HQ unit gives supplies to units and it is only source of supply if you don’t have port or city) and invasion failed. It withdraw unit in mountain tile and stack there with supply at 0. I pay no attention to this unit and it stayed there until end of game!! This is total unrealistic and stupid situation." _________________________________________ Crimeney, there's that STUPID sh*t again! (... twice in one short 'graph, you said it) Who is stupid, in this instance? Because, You CANNOT have a "stupid situation" Without some somebody having Made it so? Can you? Think? ___________________________________ "Nevertheless, this movement rule is now my bigger concern then swapping. Is it possible to move all units first and then attack? Please don’t tell me that you have exactly the same movement rule as SC2 game: move and attack (or vice versa) but if you move unit and deselect it you can’t attack anymore with this unit." ________________________________ Please! Don't have it like that OTHER game, Which we don't gotta mention EVERY time, Since we've been done it often enough That folks must surely wonder? This feisty kinda Cat has got Third Reich on the brain? Sunshine, sturm, drang or, rain. __________________________________ "Hm, hm remember Strategic Command 2 bad amphibious concept. I asked about amphibious assaults earlier but it was too early I suppose. Now we got something but still information’s are incomplete." ___________________________ Bad? Well, This very word choice MIGHT? indicate That the Author has low opinion? Of that 3rd Reich game? I love this game like you and participating in making from beginning of SC1. I will continue make suggestions until Hubert says “I am done with this game”. Even then I will try to give some suggestions in case that Hubert decides to start make Strategic Command 3. I believe you. Yet, that is not the general issue Just now under discussion, "Bad-mouthing," in particular, is. Let's take a moment and consider: It's a given in Show Business (... many other places too, but I'll select an area I happen to know fair thee well) That ANY publicity is good publicity, Even if it be... terrible, Horrible, monstrous or bad. OTOH, Should some stray soul wander in and read Such stuff as you've said above, Rather, The WAY in which you have said it, I wonder? Would they say, hmmmm, That game MUST be WORTH buying? I wonder. Two diametrical points of view. You choose. Given the two choices (... and not the myriad many that are POSSIBLE in between, I mean) Which would most likely be the case. ...and I am playing strategy games all my life (and this is long time, believe me ). First part - check, me too. Second part - check, mate, and alas, Where went that - tweet-tweet! "Sweet Bird Of Youth," Mister Tennessee? lol Traitorous? Your paranoid logic “If you are not with us, you are against us” is just what I said – paranoid or you are, maybe, just too emotional. I SAID, should you examine more closely, That some folks MIGHT Begin to get That idea, IE, that you are, like Janus, having another Face - at the back of yer head. And naw, I ain't "paranoid" - Man, there simply CANNOT Be any reason For that... heightened awareness, I prefer to call it, IF we must use these usually ill-understood Sorts of "arm-chair" diagnoses, Can there? Given the events of the last 50 odd years In this the land I was born in, Since House UN-American Activities Committee Became posse comitatus, Anyhow. Key word being - posse. Whoso! chase and yell and sometimes Lynch. For no good reason, a'times. Maybe they ain't like - STUPID people? As for emotional... well, there You'd get some kinda vigorous argument From my wife, Who has said it once! If not 10,000 times! "You are just too too stoic, Where ever do you go?" I tell her, 5,000 times - I am just old Alley Cat Has got belly-scratched, And same as that sort of cat, Whenever wounded or "out of it," As we usta say back in the day, I'll go find a dark, quiet corner And lick my own wounds. OTOH, I CAN be "emotive," now & again, And, From what I ken gather, So can 99% of those on this very forum! We are on same side. Perhaps... better to live it out Like... a free floating Mote of Dandelion fluff, Which has - no sides. Though, Somebody here could probably demonstrate Undeniably! On some sort of scatter graph Or hi-tech slide rule Or a real swell bell-curve, EVEN that ain't true. Kidding around aside, and again, Yep, we are after one and the same thing. A better 'n better SC-2! So, I say again - it would be more, ummmm, Judicious of you Not to keep saying Over and over and over and over And over! How... stupid, bad, stupid And so on and so forth, Ad nauseum, That THIS particular game is. Now, You see what I'm gettin' at? Feisty Cat? :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Actually, I am comparing all these games with one game - Third Reich. This game is not perfect but very close to perfection. It is the Holy Grail of WWII grand strategy. But alas it defies definition as "one game." The original Third Reich had four editions. And then there was Advanced Third Reich. And now there is A World At War. Not to be forgotten, John Prados hisownself released a revision of the classic original. To point at "one game" means pointing in half a dozen directions... But I know what you mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bromley Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Originally posted by n0kn0k: Btw what's the other game you're talking about? You made me curious.Slitherine's "Commander - Europe at War". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 a one There are many games and improvements possible which have examples in many different genres. ... anna 2 To point at "one game" means pointing in half a dozen directions... Not if yer "pointing" specifically (... or, inferring, implying, well, you catch the drift) By name, At SC-2. Look, everybody, just... forget it. I am delusional. I am paranoid. I am emotive. I am Stranger In a strange land. I am overly protective of this turf I have fought all across. Whatever. Perhaps this is, As many things are, Quite like the infamous California city Of San Jose, (... to para phrase G. Stein) "There isn't any - THERE, there." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 "In SC2 game (sorry for mentioning this game again) I have had very, very stupid situation. AI tried invasion on Norway without HQ unit (quick explanation: HQ unit gives supplies to units and it is only source of supply if you don’t have port or city) and invasion failed. It withdraw unit in mountain tile and stack there with supply at 0. I pay no attention to this unit and it stayed there until end of game!! This is total unrealistic and stupid situation." To get back to this again, while it may be stupid, it's not unrealistic. Adolph in his wisdom left troops out on the Channel Islands for the duration. Wanted the "prestige" of occupying UK territory, even though they were strategically worthless. So make your own rational of why he'd leave troops in the mountains. Heavy water, or maybe there was the world's biggest ski jump there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bromley Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I'll answer for vveedd and say that the Channel Islands were much smaller scale than he's talking about. A quick google shows about 30,000 men (which was more than I'd guessed there were). So either you "zoom" the game in, in which case more supply centres would show and they'd be in supply in the Channel Islands, or you don't and they're too small to show. Personally, I have sympathy for what vveedd is saying. I just don't see it as a big enough problem for Hubert to devote time to. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 One example among many. Just the first that came to mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vveedd Posted March 9, 2007 Author Share Posted March 9, 2007 Desert Dave In all my posts you have quoted I was right and only said my opinion. If you are offended with words stupid or unrealistic I am sorry but this is my opinion. Quote about supply rule problem: I was, maybe, wrong about number of soldiers in Corps or Army but my opinion is still that this is stupid situation. Imagine - 30,000 enemy soldier lives at top of mountain on enemy soil for 3-4 years WITHOUT any supply and do nothing. Even if this is possible, after all this time they will be hardly ready for fight. You can hardly call them soldiers after that. Quote about bad amphibious concept in SC2: I will not say anything more about bad amphibious assault concept in SC2 again. You all know how this concept was bad in v.1.0 Quote about bad movement in SC2: My opinion – if you accidentally clicked somewhere when your unit was moved you can’t undo move (with undo option on OFF, of course) or attack. 3R game is very, very old, it is working in DOS and don’t have this. Panzer General 2 game also. This is, clearly, step back in this feature. Same goes for no swapping option. Maybe, stupid is too strong word but how you will call feature where you must have free 3 tiles (hexes,) at least, and you need 2 turns to do the simple swap move? At the end I must mentioned that English is not my primary language so, maybe, I use wrong words for something from time to time but I will repeat once again: I have done that and still doing this only because I love this game and because I want to make this game better. pzgndr – you are right. There are 4 edition of 3R but, to me, even first one was absolutely great and thank you again for making A3R mod. P.S. I will not say name of other game because I respect and appreciate Hubert’s job in SC1 and SC2 game. Sorry guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Originally posted by vveedd: Imagine - 30,000 enemy soldier lives at top of mountain on enemy soil for 3-4 years WITHOUT any supply and do nothing. Even if this is possible, after all this time they will be hardly ready for fight. You can hardly call them soldiers after that. Well, they're not ready for a fight. They just sit there. What's the problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 I'll answer for vveedd... Well, Bromley, The Man - manages to speak up, Whatever the lingua franca, For - himself, pretty doggone good, Should you ask me. A Feisty SC kinda Cat All right :cool: And that's how you survive In the "Spenserian" war-gaming world, For sure! No shortage of stout, Near... devout, opinions Here! LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 In all my posts you have quoted I was right and only said my opinion. If you are offended with words stupid or unrealistic I am sorry but this is my opinion. "Unrealistic" is, IMHO, how Often the World can be. "Stupid" (... when referring to a living, breathing Human in being) I REALLY don't like Cuz that's how "smart" folks Used to refer to my "mentally challenged" Uncle. Heard it, Didn't like it, Did my best to kick *ss, No matter the relative size Of the bully involved, and, then, Went on to home And found that dark, quiet corner, Beat up some - but glad inside I had stuck up for him. So, Referring back to an earlier comment, I suppose you COULD say That I am indeed, a'times, "Emotional." My apologies for making all of this MORE Than what it might have been, Were I more... "judicious" In word choice, my ownself. [ March 09, 2007, 08:34 AM: Message edited by: Desert Dave ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adolfi Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 if they are without weed, i am sure they find the way south Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Originally posted by Lars: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by vveedd: Imagine - 30,000 enemy soldier lives at top of mountain on enemy soil for 3-4 years WITHOUT any supply and do nothing. Even if this is possible, after all this time they will be hardly ready for fight. You can hardly call them soldiers after that. Well, they're not ready for a fight. They just sit there. What's the problem? </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vveedd Posted March 9, 2007 Author Share Posted March 9, 2007 Originally posted by adolfi: if they are without weed, i am sure they find the way south I agree, without me and current supply rule in which they have movement points = 0. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n0kn0k Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Originally posted by Bromley: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by n0kn0k: Btw what's the other game you're talking about? You made me curious.Slitherine's "Commander - Europe at War". </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Originally posted by Desert Dave: AM talking about Precisely those situations where You have a stray unit Just... sitting there. What use? (... didn't we do this already, kinda deja vu all over again? ) Yep, we done this before. But I'll stand by what I said. Who cares? It has no impact really. And I read Supply 0 as "no supply for military operations", not "we're all going to die". Vveed is just upset the game doesn't work the way he wants it to work. Do you really want to get into the argument of whether a unit should disappear after 4 turns? Or should it be 6? Modified for rough, swamp, mountain, desert, plain, steppe, French vineyards, etc. What a Pandora's Box. There's better things for Hubert to do with his time, quite honestly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bromley Posted March 9, 2007 Share Posted March 9, 2007 Originally posted by Desert Dave: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr /> I'll answer for vveedd... Well, Bromley, The Man - manages to speak up,</font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vveedd Posted March 10, 2007 Author Share Posted March 10, 2007 Desert Dave, Lars You guys just don’t get it. This game should have been better and still can be better if we continue to offer good suggestions to Hubert. Maybe all my suggestions were not so good but, at least, I tried. Just have a look at pzgndr Advanced Third Reich scenario for SC2. For start look how map is made. This is how map should have been in all original SC2 scenarios IMO. This map is great step forward after SC1 map. If you compare current SC2 map with SC1 map you can say step forward in graphics and design but not in gameplay (tiles feature excluded). The easiest way is to say “This game is good as it can be”. Of course, this is only my opinion, your right is to disagree. It is a free cyberspace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Desert Dave, Lars You guys just don’t get it. LOL, Well, I won't speak for Lars As he is MORE than able To state his own case, And needs no help from me Or that peripatetic Bromley, Or anyone else for that matter, yep, He is apparently - inner directed. (... see below) I must admit... there are THOUSANDS Of things that I don't "get," ah, Perhaps it is that I am... stupid? Since some folks suppose there IS Such a thing? IE: WRT Humans, and not O/W. Which is ridiculous if not absurd, But, That's how they like to look at the world, With mule-blinders on, so to speak. However, here It is abundantly UN-clear Just... what it is that I don't - get? Maybe the next few quotes will Provide the clues? This game should have been better... ANYTHING "could have been" something Other than what it was. Should have been Is a whole 'nother smoke, Jamoke. Better? - sure, there's an ideal! No thing is EVER... perfect. Except for... the London Werewolf's hair, That is. That it often is not perfect, Or anything at'all - was not - whose "Fault" is that? CANNOT be Hubert, As you would surely hesitate To venture that HE Could've failed everyone so awfully, True? So, As several others have also implied, Earlier and only recently, It must be! The Play Testers. :eek: Now! We are narrowing it down, at last! Bill and I have been there the longest, So it must be us. Yet... wait! You revere Bill's work (... as we will soon see) So... it must be - me! I am not only paranoid And Emotive! I AM... stupid. :cool: Like my Mom's Brother, my Uncle, Who was the gentlest, Kindest Human I have ever met In ALL these VERY long years Of my one and only life. Wish I could live up to that, But, Alas... haven't yet, mea culpa. ... and still can be better if we continue to offer good suggestions to Hubert. Hmmm, I do believe that's what IS occuring Right this very moment, Ain't it? Just have a look at pzgndr Advanced Third Reich scenario for SC2. I have. He first sent it to me 6 months ago. He is the best map-maker on the board, Bar none. IMHO. For start look how map is made. YOU! Who ADORE that Third Reich game, Can notice - can you not? That it does NOT have the SAME scale. Bill's is... ~ TWICE as large, Has... ~ TWICE as many units! Imagine that. This is how map should have been in all original SC2 scenarios IMO. No it shouldn't. IMHO. ~50/60 miles per tile is, Like the Baby Bear's porridge, Just right! For a WW-2 GS game. Who, I wonder, was crying The Kansas City Blues (... over at that OTHER forum, which we won't mention HERE, eh? Though we WILL mention SC-2 over there, and, accidentally or no - due to Tower of Babel difficulties, not so favorably) About how LONG the game would take To play, Should such & so be implemented, I forget what that such & so was, But, Actually - don't give a damn What the hell it was. Can you imagine how long it would take To play - PBEM, or HeadhunterVSHeadhunter If the map was... ~25 miles per tile? With ~ twice as many units? And besides, you also revere Third Reich the board-game In all 3 or 4 of it's manifestations, So why? would you want ALL scenarios To be twice as large as that game anyway? The easiest way is to say “This game is good as it can be”. Find the quote vveedd, Where ANYBODY ever said such a thing, And post it here in this thread. I myself have never seen it Stated - no way, no how. Maybe you can find it - good luck on that! Of course, this is only my opinion, your right is to disagree. Well, It ain't enny "right" That is granted by some Authority. It is inherent in the human condition. See, As Riesen has detailed for us In his X-cellent book: "The Lonely Crowd," We have mostly become a group/tribe/clan Of... followers. (... more exactly, "outer-directed" instead of "inner-directed," OR... as Abe Maslow would have it - notso capable of "self-actualization"... now all of that is inside baseball - to me, so I leave it at this: folks seems to CRAVE some sort of guidance from - "above," or sans that, here below, often, from some Bad Cat thinks he knows it all, see what I mean here? As them "good Germans" did... as oppposed to, deliberately, and even - to the bitter dead end, saying what they REALLY think, and feel, WITHOUT ANY cues or prompting from ANYBODY else, and etc) Better for whole dying World Should we be more akin To them what lived in American Frontier, 19th Century. And then! Commence to consider ourselves As capable of... damn near ANYTHING, 'Stead of accepting What is shoved down our throats, And thence, what else? Just... do it. :cool: It is a free cyberspace. Read the fine print, Brother. Have a good long look around. THAT statement is very nearly False - now. Give it another 10 years. It won't ONLY be The FBI/Interpol or Geometrically increasing "Derivatives" Of same devious devise, Or, the MegaCorps Who are spying on you. Leaving cookie crumbs All over the shrinking table space, It'll be... everyone Who doesn't believe, Nope, Not... for... ONE... freaking SECOND, That they are... stupid. THOSE are the ones we actually gotta Watch out for. IMHO. Alright, enough of this, I am done with it. (... off-screen, faint-ly now... "yay, hooray!" LOL! ) [ March 10, 2007, 08:30 AM: Message edited by: Desert Dave ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Desert Dave; Let me see if I understand this. You are angry because Biowizard sent threats to Rambo and now want to blame it on vveedd? vveed: Are you biwizard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Bill's is... ~ TWICE as large, Has... ~ TWICE as many units! Just a correction here regarding my mod. The force pool is essentially the same as A3R with the same number of units. The map scale is doubled to account for no stacking in SC2. Carry on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Desert Dave; Let me see if I understand this. You are angry... What're you K-worth? Active member of RNC these days? (... IE, Republican National Committee whoso j'accuse! ANYBODY who disagrees with their, ummm, authoritarian agenda, as being angry or traitor or some damn fool thang ) Enuff of that guff stuff! I ain't enny Crudely fashioned Voo-Doo Doll You ken stick Ball-hat-pins in. Just a correction here regarding my mod. The force pool is essentially the same as A3R with the same number of units. The map scale is doubled to account for no stacking in SC2. Carry on. Pardon me, (... I guess I was comparing To # of units in SC-2?) Sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gravyface1 Posted March 10, 2007 Share Posted March 10, 2007 Ok I gotta ask: what is with Desert Dave and his "interesting" use of line breaks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts