Fockewulf Posted January 12, 2009 Share Posted January 12, 2009 I don't think it is correct for the American player/A.I. to be able to "warp in" his ships to Pearl Harbor when it is under Japanese control. I have total control of Pearl, yet the A.I. is constantly sending ships by the "shortcut". This allows a free attack and then the ability to run away unopposed. I have a Picket line of ships off the east coast of Hawaii but the American ships appear behind me.:mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 And even worst, they get to move immediately! You can pretty much kiss one of your Caps goodbye. This has been discussed here before, and nothing happened then either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fockewulf Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 Sorry, I looked, but did not find this mentioned in the other posts. I would think that Hubert could rework the code in the next patch so as to disable the shortcut if Hawaii is under Axis control. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xwormwood Posted January 13, 2009 Share Posted January 13, 2009 Take a look at point 3 and 4, dear friend: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1110818&postcount=9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fockewulf Posted January 13, 2009 Author Share Posted January 13, 2009 Xwormwood, I do apologize, I missed it some how. Must be lack of sleep from playing this game till 2a.m. every night. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin I Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Furthermore, as myself and others have noted, Scripts allow reinforcement with land troops where it would not be possible. the examples I have come across are reinforcement of US held islands when Japanese have > 10 warships nearby and the US has none. A troop transport would not make it!! In a few cases its legitimate if the forces are raised locally, mostly they are not. I think its easy to improve. Script should be something like reinforcement has 30% chance per turn if event triggers are right UNLESS IJN warships within X tiles outnumber US warships within X tiles by > 2-fold AND are > 2 in number. The numbers do not matter, and its not perfect, but effectively it lets you blockade which is a legitimate military tactic. Otherwise, reinforcement appears to be by teleportation. I know the US has advanced technology, but its not THAT good ;-) This becomes important, to invade Hawaii you should isolate it. You cannot stop home guard being recruited but other external should be stoppable. If we really want to get sophisticated could count carriers and land-based air in range vs air. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottsmm Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 "Beam me down scotty" doesn't have anything to do with me right Colin? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin I Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Scott, Unless you can indeed beam yourself down, no ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John DiFool the 2nd Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Yeah, Colin, that is a consequence of Hubert's design philosophies, for good or bad. Then again a very recently released naval wargame which attempted to model such things so far hasn't quite done it for me. Sure, I'd love sea supply/sea reinforcement to be modeled accurately-in general I very much dislike "teleporting" goods & troops (if not whole units) which magically appear in an island 3,000 miles away from the home country, but it does make for a rather streamlined gaming experience. The playability vs. realism debate may never be resolved to anyone's satisfaction. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin I Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 John, Agreed it is design philosophy, but as I suggested, surely the script just has to be a bit more subtle and take account or a few more contingencies to improve the matter. Sure, it will not be perfect but it does not add complexity for the player. In the example I give you just have to play the game according to WWII logic, basically if I control the sea then enemy will not be able to ship reinforcements though my forces. Its not perfect (I would rather sink reinforcements, and they perhaps should be diverted elsewhere) but its better. In H v H games I'd far prefer a lot more stuff on the build stack and off script so I can decide if paratroopers show up near Singapore, for example.. They must have been trained and shipped from Japan. Some things, such as formation of Pro-Japanese forces in Burma need to be script OR specified placement (you can only place in Burma so you cannot place them unless you hold Burma, though I admit having them pop up every turn to be placed could get irritating but perhaps a script could handle this - only add to Build stack if Burma held by Japan). I do understand AI cannot coordinate this stuff as well and does need scripts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scottsmm Posted January 14, 2009 Share Posted January 14, 2009 Colin, What if I can beam myself down... haha. Wish I actually could do that it would be pretty awesome, and definately come in handy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gorgin Posted January 15, 2009 Share Posted January 15, 2009 Well, you could always use the Campaign Edtor to remove the Transfer Arrows, then there would be no more "warping" them in, Scotty !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stitch Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Interesting info Gorgin, thanks! Does any one have the reason(s) that they were put there in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill101 Posted January 16, 2009 Share Posted January 16, 2009 Hi Stitch The reason for putting in the arrows was to save players time. Having the loops there means that the US doesn't have to manually sail large numbers of naval units from the west coast of the USA to Hawaii. As a result, you have more time to actually play the game! Bill Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubby Posted January 17, 2009 Share Posted January 17, 2009 I was trying to find something in the Manual on these "Transfer Arrows" , but I couldn't find anything. Do they mean something other than pointing the direction to Hawaii??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cubby Posted January 18, 2009 Share Posted January 18, 2009 Never mind. I figured it out. Duh!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts