Lars Posted January 5, 2007 Share Posted January 5, 2007 HQ variability is an interesting idea. And they all should be unknown. The only thing I'd add to your thoughts Edwin is that the rating should appear after the first major "loss" of unit strength or perhaps the whole unit. After all, if your incompetent leader is winning, you ain't gonna fix it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Edwin P. Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 Lars, most excellent refinement. I wonder what HC thinks of HQ variability. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt Andrew Posted January 6, 2007 Share Posted January 6, 2007 In H2H, research investments have to be balanced with game plan. It's kind of like in Axis and Allies. If someone played Britain, they could invest all 30 dollars into tech rolls. If they get lucky, roll a couple of sixes.... heavy bomber tech. Game over, Allies win. If they can't roll a six, Germany cruises to an easy victory. I see SC as a similar balance...you can't spend all your MPP in tech - you have to balance it. Finding the right balance in money spent, and which tech to invest in can be different every time. No more "cookie cutter" strategies - a welcome change! Interesting HQ variability idea. But I'm not sure I'd like what would end up being a 300+ MPP gamble. Especially for the Axis, where the couple extra HQ's are critical to success. Buy one hoping you're investing in a 7 and getting a 4... ouch. If MPP's were flying around like in SC1, it wouldn't be so much of a risk. I wouldn't like this idea as the fixed game, but perhaps as a coding option for mods. Then I'd be all for it, but I think having HC create coding language that allows for CASE/SWITCH or IF/THEN coding logic is a higher priority. Heck, we could actually start coding some of the HUNDREDS of interesting "if" and "percentage chance" options that Edwin always comes up with. (I love every one of them Edwin, they're just not doable right now with the current coding.) Still, an interesting spin to say the least. I'm probably one of the few people that would like to see HQ's be upgradable. At least with motorization - or maybe even anti air tech, but it would have to be commensurate with the unit cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaoJah Posted January 6, 2007 Author Share Posted January 6, 2007 I don't like the idea of the possibility to even MORE bad luck. The game is already too random as it is : the outcome of a game should depend on strategy and skill, not on the roll of a dice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Depends on the game. This ain't chess, dealing with luck is part of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaoJah Posted January 8, 2007 Author Share Posted January 8, 2007 Originally posted by Lars: Depends on the game. This ain't chess, dealing with luck is part of it. Pfffft... I am currently playing a HvH game, where I had to do Barbarossa with AT at 2, IW at 2 and no advanced tanks whatsoever. That means two weeks of e-mailing that are totally lost. I don't consider that as "part of the game", I consider that "why bother with the game anymore". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Hey, I'm doing a Barbarossa with less than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin I Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 I guess it depends what else you have going but I've done Barbarossa on that too. Its true you'll need a compesating advantage, numbers, economy, air, whatever but for me automatic IW3 or don't bother kills the interest in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaoJah Posted January 8, 2007 Author Share Posted January 8, 2007 It's not the IW that is the most important IMHO, it's the fact that he can basically take 4 tanks, 1 HQ and just kills everything in sight, lol. Oh, well, we'll see how bad it exactly goes, it should be a good leanring example of getting butchered, perhaps I'll learn a thing or two ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Whoa! TJ me thinks your expectations of H to H SC are somewhat skewed. I've done plenty of Barbarossas with IW 2 and AT 1 and no HT, far from a waste of time. Actually a much better challenge....so you wilt at the first appearance of adversity? Sounds exactly like the climate that pervades the civilized????? world today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaoJah Posted January 8, 2007 Author Share Posted January 8, 2007 Well, as I was saying, I'll see how the butchering goes. The good news is that since I didn't get tech hits, I had alot of money, so I could buy all tanks, all corps, almost all armies, almost all HQs. I am soooo gonne get butchered, but it will take alot of butchering, hehe. On a side note... Instead of trying a hopeless attack on Russia, is it a viable strategy to just take a few Russian cities and then stick at defending instead of pushing further ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lars Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 With a Engineer, could be. But remember, you're playing for a draw, so run the clock on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Desert Dave Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Actually a much better challenge....so you wilt at the first appearance of adversity? Sounds exactly like the climate that pervades the civilized????? world today. LOLOL! Well, Kinda quiet out here in Desert City, So may as well respond to this simplistic Comment: I suppose the only real "climactic" problem Is... global warming - which 90% ++ Of reputable Scientists the world over Agree IS occurring. Done with that. NOw, As for this "adversity" jive, Here's how I see that SM: 1) Manichean World View too pervasive, US vs THEM, and it's Black & White, WIth no shades of grey (... kinda how rambo junior likes to see it ) 2) Chauvinistic attitudes shouting loud, @ Individuals, or @ States, IE, Patriotism mis-placed, Militarism gone bonkers - even Commencing to make un-livable Outer space (... as with Mars of late) 3) SELF interest above all else, "I/we/my Country is #1 - ha-ha! Take that scoundrels! 4) Creating "adversity" Where not long before There was... NONE, for instance, To illustrate for you... imagine IF Some future "Super Power," China for example, Sent troops deep into... the heart of Texas. You think them Alamo-remembering Dudes Would stand for that? LOL! So - why on earth would ANY other Nation, Say, like 'em in Middle East Since 1947 or so, Would want anybody else's troops occupying And interfering in their country? Finally, I'd list the 7 Deadly Sins, But, I am quite confident you already know All those, yes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted January 8, 2007 Share Posted January 8, 2007 Okay DD, I'll bite! Read what you want, but to me its about decision making and carrying out that decision, good or bad, to its conclusion with a bit of conviction. How else are you going to be able to evaluate the decision for future applications if you don't at least give it a chance......now define the timeframe for "give it a chance". On GW, well let's see, I agree, and I bet that if man had been around for the other seven ice ages that have come to pass on this planet,...hmmmm.. when the current one was ending....well, What would you call that? Anyway I prefer the warmth, that's why I live in S. Texas and wouldn't have any problem moving further south. So currently I will continue to fart freely ..... and hope that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts