ChrisND Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Country names (and names of just about anything) have always been editable; it's edited via the localization text file. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n0kn0k Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 You could already edit the names of just about anything Units, countries, tech names, and much more. I made a sci-fi mod once, changed everything around. Couldn't even see it was SC2 anymore Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 lol - thanks - I haven't figured it out yet I guess... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jollyguy Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Been absent from the games awhile…enjoying my summer game break! But I do linger, and have to echo Terif’s comments about material changes to the Fall Weiss map from that earlier screenshot of France. At the moment the game is basically balanced, so significant modifications will result in significant game play effects. My primary input though is not that changes shouldn’t be made, as changes keep the game fresh, just that balance needs to be kept in mind while doing so. If there’s a crease of gaminess available people will jump all over it. Those of us from the SC 1 days remember the carrier bug among others, which once discovered was utilized as widely as a politician promising tax cuts in an election year. I.e., if Sea Lion is more of a risk as stated, and an Axis method is developed to capitalize on this, it will spread like wildfire and we’ll have some frustrated Allied players and multiple games ending in 1940 or 1941. And on the flip side, making France easier to invade will draw Axis forces from the Russian front, with attendant long term results. So, just make sure to play test this well and imaginatively. I guess it’s like the Dutch boy and dike. Each time he tried to plug a hole a new one appeared. After six patches SC 2 pretty much had all the holes plugged, but a major re-shuffling of the deck means more holes will be bound to appear unless a lot of thought is put into game balance. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SeaMonkey Posted June 27, 2007 Share Posted June 27, 2007 Right on Bob. This balance is very precarious, just subtle changes will throw it off and there will have to be more adjustment, trial and error. I know this community is up to the task. I have been again infused with enthusiasm of the relative level playing field that exists in SC2. Actually it is a very unique condition for wargames as usually one side has an advantage, which we witnessed in SC1. But, the "winds of change" never cease blowing and sometimes a step back is necessary for a leap forwards. :cool: Damn it! Just when I had the perfect Axis strategy (cookie-cutter) figured out. Oh well ...back to the drawing board! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
targul Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 i am only hoping they dont destroy the rather perfect AI at this point. It is extremely historical and well balanced. Of course there are a few tweeks to make it better but with a new map and all it could destroy that balance. I will buy it regardless since the programmer/designer is faithful to us we need to be faithful to him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n0kn0k Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 You won't be disappointed, that's for sure. I've seen the AI do some amazingly scary stuff today. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Mike Posted June 28, 2007 Share Posted June 28, 2007 another question for the grogs of the patch/mod - will there be the ability for surface units to raid convoy routes? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arado234 Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 I second Stalin's Organist on surface raiding convoy routes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jollyguy Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 I third surface combatants raiding convoys. This may cause balance problems around Norway if the Germans retake, but it is totally realistic. There's no way Norwegian ore goes unmolested with all those RN surface units in the vicinity. Bob Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 That is the problem, Norway could easily be kept at 0 the whole time by the Allies. Although were not the Norway minerals sent by train to Sweden and then shipped? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borsook Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 Originally posted by Jollyguy: I third surface combatants raiding convoys. This may cause balance problems around Norway if the Germans retake, but it is totally realistic. There's no way Norwegian ore goes unmolested with all those RN surface units in the vicinity. Bob Well, historically speaking, they shouldn't keep in the vicinity for fear of getting in the combat with KM while in range of their bombers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hyazinth von Strachwitz Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 @ Blashy: yes... at least a big part. And it`s difficult to reflect this in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The K Man Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 I think convoy routes should be hidden for the opposing player. Why not be able to change the convoy line. (In reality, convoys didn't always follow the same routes, week after week.) If the opposing player finds it, the following turn, then he raids, otherwise the convoy gets safely through. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 That was somewhat like that before, you could only see the lanes on the convoy map and it just created frustration from players. The routes never changed that much, they were always in the same general area. Considering the map size I'm ok with them not changing. The Allies can now upgrade the minor bombers with LR so they can end up pretty much covering all the routes with 2-3 LR bombers. If the enemy goes for a sub strategy. I think you'll see more sub strategies with the upcoming changes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
targul Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 One of the kewlest things in CEAW is the way convoys work. The are actually subject to all ships but realistically only subs get to attack in open sea. Adds another whole deminision to the game. This game has the unique dive ability which really makes the sub better though. Making bombers able to attack the routes means subs will probably be valueless in this game though. Unless you really reduce there costs having planes bombing in addition to the Navy will be overwhelming for them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blashy Posted June 29, 2007 Share Posted June 29, 2007 The new sub features in the expansion pack will surely bring about more sea action. I don't know what is the dive ability in that game but the one being worked on for WaW ... . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Timskorn Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Yargh, when's the release date for WaW?!?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
borsook Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Originally posted by targul: Making bombers able to attack the routes means subs will probably be valueless in this game though. Unless you really reduce there costs having planes bombing in addition to the Navy will be overwhelming for them. [/QB]I wouldn't be so sure. HOI2 allows, obviously, one to bomb convoys with bombers, but still if one wants to cut the supply lines subs are better for few reasons - planes are more influenced by weather, can be intercepted by enemy fighters, have lower range, and usually are needed for other more important tasks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minty Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Has Yoda not been invited to test play this before release? considering he's responsible for coming up with some of the most explotative strategies which have led to some of the patches on SC2 it would make sense. I'll pay another $5 for if it says , as tested by Terif! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
targul Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 We all know whoever tests it in the end it will require 6 patchs before it is really close. We will fuss and argure how one thing was better in the old version then the new. We will complain the AI is not adequate. We will never be happy and say it is done. But if we were would we be happy? Doubtful because wargames can and will always need another tweak and each of us has our own opinion of good vs bad idea. For me if the AI plays hisortically and provides me a fun and good game I will be satisfied. Dont get me wrong I wont be happy but satisfied. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 targul, I think you will like the changes and additions to SC2 Weapons and Warfare. For one the AI is much better as I have corrected many generic AI defaults as well as improved upon some of the existing framework. Additionaly the new script additions/flexibility has allowed for much more depth to the AI planning and game play. Essentially this version should play noticably much better straight out of the box than any previous version of Strategic Command as it is probably the only release that I have spent more time developing/tweaking the AI than I have working on the new features. Additionally the AI game has received a whole new set of AI ONLY scripts that not only improve game play, i.e. historical events occuring depending on the current game situation, but they also add much more atmosphere to the game... long story short I think there will be quite a few surprises here that AI players will really enjoy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hubert Cater Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Just another update on an additional scenario that will be available for Strategic Command 2 Weapons and Warfare. The new Poland 1939 scenario covers the initial German invasion of Poland followed by the Soviet invasion from the East. The scenario was designed by Bill Runacre and Matthew Nesser and plays for approximately 30 turns. It is another very well researched campaign that offers terrific game play for those interested in covering the invasion of Poland from a more detailed level of the battlefield Here are a few screenshots: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arado234 Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 To combat the allies blockading norway whynot bring back the effect planes have on ships like in sc1?This would make the allies think twice.Afterall isnt that a big part of what gemany needed to invade england(air supremacy to stop the royal navy). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John DiFool the 2nd Posted June 30, 2007 Share Posted June 30, 2007 Quick question: will this version be more customizable? At the least will we have the ability to fully edit and/or add units? Have a config file to allow modification of certain values usually hidden in the .exe? And so on? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts