Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SPWaW AAR/DAR >> RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/20/2006 11:47:23 PM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
what U think AZ or Alby???




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 61
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/20/2006 11:50:03 PM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
Absolutely whoreable fight with C&C on cause the tanks wanted to keep moving ahead to objectives and wouldn't swing back to support infantry!!




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 62
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/20/2006 11:51:41 PM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
and WHATS NEXT




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 63
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/20/2006 11:52:42 PM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
A whopping 500 foints to fix !!




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 64
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/20/2006 11:54:28 PM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
Not getting to fix 7 tanks is gonna suck in Luzon




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Riun T -- 9/20/2006 11:56:12 PM >

(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 65
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/20/2006 11:58:05 PM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
and WOW 191 SUPPORT PURCHASE POINTS WHOPPY




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 66
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:13:26 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4853
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Riun T

Heres my complete first battle with US army HQ,,,, sorry u jumped to so many conclusions VA and MY c&c in on SO who can't really read flashes posts??



what do you mean, cant read Flashs posts?

_____________________________



(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 67
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:16:45 AM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
I think VA thought I was ONLY using US army units and not the minors,, and C&C on there boys!

(in reply to Alby)
Post #: 68
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:20:14 AM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
And Alby u should try this with enhanced with us too you spakken licker

(in reply to Alby)
Post #: 69
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:20:45 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4853
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline
C and C on is tough.




_____________________________



(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 70
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:26:26 AM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
ANd this is just the first fight!!! wonder if VA is done writing up the charges for AZ and forgotten about ME,??? HE sure gets himself on an insane man's tangent??!! and why even post when he just edits???

(in reply to Alby)
Post #: 71
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:28:17 AM   
vahauser


Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
Alby,

Riun T is correct.  I did not read FlashFyre's initial conditions correctly.  I make an unintentional mistake and did not turn C&C ON. 

As of today, Riun T's observation is the only one against me on this thread that is accurate and true. 

I will correct this oversight immediately and I apologize for the unintentional oversight. 

I appreciate Riun T pointing out my mistake without hatred and malice.

(Sigh... And just now I read his follow-up post which is taunting and baiting... But still not hateful or malicious... That's something, I guess.)

< Message edited by vahauser -- 9/21/2006 12:34:13 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 72
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:28:51 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4853
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Riun T

And Alby u should try this with enhanced with us too you spakken licker

you are not using Enhanced??!!



_____________________________



(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 73
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:37:27 AM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
standard 8.4 buddy and those spotting settings flash gives are brutal in the jungle without it being night even,, u should give it a try,, one battle and I'm already sayin "HARSH" especially since its been a while with playin with C&C and I also ran outta orders points and only got half the # of barrages off than with no C&C and have forgot how directionally limiting "straight line to objectives" without doing all the waypoints and giving the AI some units to run.

(in reply to Alby)
Post #: 74
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:43:49 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4853
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline
hehehehe
hmm I remember 8.4 had a spotting error, it was tweaked too high.
thats why 8.403 came out..





_____________________________



(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 75
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:49:57 AM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
TRY IT ON YOURS buddy please I wanna see how it flies in your creation,, MOD

(in reply to Alby)
Post #: 76
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:50:08 AM   
vahauser


Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
Alby,

FlashFyre did not specify standard 8.4 or Enhanced FV.

This was only ONE of the details left out of FlashFyre's initial conditions.

DO NOT MISUNDERSTAND ME. My demonstration game IS NOT to prove anything against FlashFyre. Okay? I'll say again.

My demonstration game IS NOT to prove anything against FlashFyre.

I hope other people who read this thread will understand that.

MY INTENT with my demonstration game was to show that FlashFyre's initial conditions are incomplete.

FLASHFYRE HIMSELF KNEW THAT. FlashFyre was preparing for a trip and only threw out some basic ideas because that is all he had time for. I UNDERSTAND THAT. I GET IT.

FlashFyre even said that there were probably other details that needed to be addressed. And there are. I am on FlashFyre's side here. I am not opposing FlashFyre here.

My demonstration game was intended to point out what FlashFyre himself said. I agree with FlashFyre. I am on FlashFyre's side here. My demonstration game was intended to address "other details" that FlashFyre himself said were out there. He didn't have time to address them. I UNDERSTAND THAT. I am on FlashFyre's side.

But where FlashFyre DID NOT have the time to address those details, I DO have the time. And that is why I created this thread in the first place.

I created this thread to address those details that FlashFyre did not have time to address before he left for India.


_____________________________


(in reply to Alby)
Post #: 77
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:58:39 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4853
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Alby,

FlashFyre did not specify standard 8.4 or Enhanced FV.

This was only ONE of the details left out of FlashFyre's initial conditions.


Enhanced or Vanilla .....
I just say try Enhanced because flashfyre and I worked on it for a year..LOL


_____________________________



(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 78
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 12:59:43 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4853
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Riun T

TRY IT ON YOURS buddy please I wanna see how it flies in your creation,, MOD

I seldom have the patience to play the AI
Plus hate the pacific...LOL

I will try something perhaps.

< Message edited by Alby -- 9/21/2006 1:14:13 AM >


_____________________________



(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 79
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 1:10:32 AM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
Well I'm still going to play this whole thing threw and post each battle like we've been doing and am glad you took no offence to my pointing out the C&C mistake,cause there was none ment.
Hope u want to continue your campaign battles further for all us to observe, [I don't think I'll comment directly to u anymore thou cause u seem to think that your forums name"VAHAUSER" could manage to facilitate liabl or slander and I don't want your forum name that u hold oppressing the FORUM name RIUN T with  power to prosecute with?????} now your just getting silly,,, he never called u a hebrew or a nigroid and anything he said can only be directed at our avitars or user names sport,, its part of the fine print at the REGISTRATION of this forum,,,, so easy on threatining AZ and play the camp.

< Message edited by Riun T -- 9/21/2006 1:20:09 AM >

(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 80
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 1:52:48 AM   
azraelck

 

Posts: 581
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline
Vauhauser...


Riun, do not defend me to him. No need in anyone else being drug into it.

Va, you still failed to use a minor nation's units, a fact which you blatantly ignored; as well as you also blatantly ignored my asking what the visibility was. Two points besides the C&C being off, which you also failed to do; but then I never noticed it either. At the same time, you accused Riun T of doing what you did... and turned out he was using Canadian units while you used Soviets.

I also noted you edited a post or two. I knew you were going to do that.

_____________________________

"Wait... Holden was a cat. Suddenly it makes sense."

(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 81
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 2:46:26 AM   
vahauser


Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
FlashFyre wrote:

"A true Challenge Campaign, against the AI, without involving other players, would require the use of the following settings:

AI Advantage - ON
AI Level - 200
Reduced Squads - ON
Reduced Ammo - ON
Weapon Breakdowns - ON
Vehicle Breakdowns - ON
Mines - ON
Command & Control - ON
Use the Hardx2 setting for all battles
Select one of the 6 major nations for your HQ, but then only buy allied equipment (if British, only buy Indian, for example)
Set Spotting to 70% for Player 1, 100% for Player 2
Use Historic Ratings as designed

There may be some other settings that would make the Challenge more challenging to veteran players, but these are most of the important ones."


I will address FlashFyre’s statement item by item.

"A true Challenge Campaign, against the AI, without involving other players, would require the use of the following settings:”

The key phrase here is “WITHOUT INVOLVING OTHER PLAYERS”. FlashFyre realizes that as soon as you involve other players, then you open up a whole different level of problems and issues. FlashFyre is saying that he does not necessarily recommend these initial conditions if two or more players are going to try this campaign.


“AI Advantage – ON”

No problem.


“AI Level – 200”

The issue here is that by setting the AI level to 200 from the very beginning, the game will be as hard as it is ever going to get. By this I mean that the game will not get progressively more challenging as the campaign goes on. Players will quickly get used to fighting against AI 200 forces and will develop tactics to deal with it. I personally prefer a progressive increase in the AI Level because that way players get “shocked” over the course of the campaign. (An example would be 1939 = AI50, 1940 = AI75, 1941=AI100, 1942 = AI125, 1943 = AI150, 1944 = AI175, 1945 = AI200.) But I can deal with AI 200 from the beginning, so this is only an issue and not a problem.


“Reduced Squads – ON”

This is a problem and not an issue. The problem is that Reduced Squads ON actually hurts the AI more than it does the players. How so? First, human players typically buy lots of unit types that are not affected by reduced squads, but the AI typically buys LOTS of “infantry type” units. So, proportionally, the AI suffers a greater percentage reduction in combat effectiveness than the human player. Second, the human player can actually make reduced squads work in his favor because the human player can re-assign units to different HQs, he can more efficiently load his transport units (the AI never loads more than one unit per transport), etc. Even if you don’t believe reduced squads hurts the AI more than the human player, it should be clear that reduced squads does not FAVOR the AI. The AI certainly does not gain an advantage with Reduced Squads ON. Reduced Squads should be OFF to (at the very least) give the AI a level playing field against the human player.


“Reduced Ammo – ON”

This is a problem and not an issue. The problem is that reduced ammo always (100% of the time) hurts the AI more than the human player. The AI relies on its airpower and artillery to do the most damage to the human player. But reduced ammo directly hurts the one aspect that the AI most needs. And the human player knows how to use ammo trucks and ammo dumps, but the AI does not. Reduced Ammo ON actually gives the human player a big advantage, which is NOT what FlashFyre intended. Limited Ammo should be ON and Reduced Ammo should be OFF.


“Weapon Breakdowns – ON”

No problem.


“Vehicle Breakdowns – ON”

No problem.


“Mines – ON”

The problem here is that allowing the human player to use mines and barbed wire and dragon’s teeth gives the human player a HUGE advantage over the AI. I recommend leaving Mines ON so that the AI can use them, but that the human player may NEVER use mines, barbed wire, or dragon’s teeth.


“Command & Control – ON”

No problem.


“Use the Hard (x2) setting for all battles.”

No problem.


“Set Spotting to 70% for Player 1, 100% for Player 2”

No problem.


“Use Historic Ratings as designed.”

Even though I am opposed to these ratings on many different levels (mostly opposed to their being called “historical”, since they are not, when they should actually be called something like “standard”). But as a simple (though not the best in my opinion) mechanism to create a base-line starting point for all participants, I can reluctantly go along with this (but never forgetting my fundamental opposition to the ratings being called “historical”). Also - see Problem C below


“Select one of the 6 major nations for your HQ, but then only buy allied equipment (if British, only buy Indian, for example)”

LOTS of problems here. I don’t know if I can even list all them all.
Remember where FlashFyre said these initial conditions were for campaigns NOT INVOLVING OTHER PLAYERS? Well this is one of the BIG reasons why he said that.
Problem A – Two of the six major nations don’t HAVE allies (Japan and the USSR). So do you exclude them from the list? Do you do something else with them? This is a problem.
Problem B – What does FlashFyre mean when he says “only buy allied equipment”? Does he mean that you can mix and match all sorts of nations that were allied to the nation selected?
Does he mean that if you choose a major nation that had minor allies, that you must only choose one of the nations that was historically equipped and supplied by that major nation? (For instance, Britain equipped and supplied India, Canada, ANZAC, Poland, etc.; USA equipped and supplied Philippines, Free French, China, etc.; Germany equipped and supplied Romania, Hungary, Finland, etc.).
Does he mean something else entirely? This is a problem.
Problem C – Can a player playing this campaign gain an advantage by choosing one nation instead of another? By this I mean that if the participants don’t agree to play the same nation (and the same allies), then are the participants on a fair and level playing field? For instance, if you choose US Army (shorter campaign) and I choose Britain (longer campaign), are both participants on a fair and level playing field? Also, since the “historical” ratings are different for the various nations, if the participants are allowed to choose different nations and allies, then is this a fair and level playing field? This is a problem.

Other Issues and Problems not covered by FlashFyre’s initial conditions:
1. True Troop ON/Rarity ON? True Troop OFF/Rarity ON? True Troop ON/Rarity OFF? True Troop OFF/Rarity OFF?
2. Initial points for core. 2500? 3000? 3500? Something else?
3. Core composition. Limits to artillery? Armor? Something else?
4. Reinforcements. Allowed? Not allowed? Something else?
5. Standard 8.4? Enhanced FV? Something else?
6. Other conditions I haven’t listed here?


< Message edited by vahauser -- 9/21/2006 3:05:50 AM >


_____________________________


(in reply to azraelck)
Post #: 82
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 3:01:30 AM   
vahauser


Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
azraelck,

I am unsure of the Terms of Service on this board regarding deliberate, malicious, and hateful attacks against another forum member.

I am going to look into it and then see if I can get you banned for TOS violations.  That will not repair the damage you have caused.  But perhaps it will prevent further damage in the future.

_____________________________


(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 83
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 3:34:16 AM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vahauser

FlashFyre wrote:

"A true Challenge Campaign, against the AI, without involving other players, would require the use of the following settings:

AI Advantage - ON
AI Level - 200
Reduced Squads - ON
Reduced Ammo - ON
Weapon Breakdowns - ON
Vehicle Breakdowns - ON
Mines - ON
Command & Control - ON
Use the Hardx2 setting for all battles
Select one of the 6 major nations for your HQ, but then only buy allied equipment (if British, only buy Indian, for example) Set Spotting to 70% for Player 1, 100% for Player 2
Use Historic Ratings as designed

There may be some other settings that would make the Challenge more challenging to veteran players, but these are most of the important ones."


I will address FlashFyre’s statement item by item.

"A true Challenge Campaign, against the AI, without involving other players, would require the use of the following settings:”

The key phrase here is “WITHOUT INVOLVING OTHER PLAYERS”. FlashFyre realizes that as soon as you involve other players, then you open up a whole different level of problems and issues. FlashFyre is saying that he does not necessarily recommend these initial conditions if two or more players are going to try this campaign.


“AI Advantage – ON”

No problem.


“AI Level – 200”

The issue here is that by setting the AI level to 200 from the very beginning, the game will be as hard as it is ever going to get. By this I mean that the game will not get progressively more challenging as the campaign goes on. Players will quickly get used to fighting against AI 200 forces and will develop tactics to deal with it. I personally prefer a progressive increase in the AI Level because that way players get “shocked” over the course of the campaign. (An example would be 1939 = AI50, 1940 = AI75, 1941=AI100, 1942 = AI125, 1943 = AI150, 1944 = AI175, 1945 = AI200.) But I can deal with AI 200 from the beginning, so this is only an issue and not a problem.


“Reduced Squads – ON”

This is a problem and not an issue. The problem is that Reduced Squads ON actually hurts the AI more than it does the players. How so? First, human players typically buy lots of unit types that are not affected by reduced squads, but the AI typically buys LOTS of “infantry type” units. {AI gets almost all of its units AS fresh support right after their HQ and doesn't have change HQ's and lose formationspreminantly reducing its core so doesn't field anymore solid or unsolid reductions in squads than us??} So, proportionally, the AI suffers a greater percentage reduction in combat effectiveness than the human player. Second, the human player can actually make reduced squads work in his favor because the human player can re-assign units to different HQs, he can more efficiently load his transport units (the AI never loads more than one unit per transport), etc. Even if you don’t believe reduced squads hurts the AI more than the human player, it should be clear that reduced squads does not FAVOR the AI. The AI certainly does not gain an advantage with Reduced Squads ON. Reduced Squads should be OFF to (at the very least) give the AI a level playing field against the human player.


“Reduced Ammo – ON”

This is a problem and not an issue. The problem is that reduced ammo always (100% of the time) hurts the AI more than the human player. The AI relies on its airpower and artillery to do the most damage to the human player. But reduced ammo directly hurts the one aspect that the AI most needs. And the human player knows how to use ammo trucks and ammo dumps, but the AI does not. Reduced Ammo ON actually gives the human player a big advantage, which is NOT what FlashFyre intended. Limited Ammo should be ON and Reduced Ammo should be OFF.{ITs whatever their smart enough to want to cart around the field with, limit for me then limit for them.}

“Weapon Breakdowns – ON”

No problem.


“Vehicle Breakdowns – ON”

No problem.


“Mines – ON”

The problem here is that allowing the human player to use mines and barbed wire and dragon’s teeth gives the human player a HUGE advantage over the AI. I recommend leaving Mines ON so that the AI can use them, but that the human player may NEVER use mines, barbed wire, or dragon’s teeth.If long established fortifications where historically present like beach or harbour facilities/maginot line then why not??

“Command & Control – ON”

No problem.


“Use the Hard (x2) setting for all battles.”

No problem.


“Set Spotting to 70% for Player 1, 100% for Player 2”

No problem.


“Use Historic Ratings as designed.”

Even though I am opposed to these ratings on many different levels (mostly opposed to their being called “historical”, since they are not, when they should actually be called something like “standard”). But as a simple (though not the best in my opinion) mechanism to create a base-line starting point for all participants, I can reluctantly go along with this (but never forgetting my fundamental opposition to the ratings being called “historical”). Also - see Problem C below


“Select one of the 6 major nations for your HQ, but then only buy allied equipment (if British, only buy Indian, for example)”

LOTS of problems here. I don’t know if I can even list all them all.
Remember where FlashFyre said these initial conditions were for campaigns NOT INVOLVING OTHER PLAYERS? Well this is one of the BIG reasons why he said that.
Problem A – Two of the six major nations don’t HAVE allies (Japan and the USSR). So do you exclude them from the list? Do you do something else with them? This is a problem.
Problem B – What does FlashFyre mean when he says “only buy allied equipment”? Does he mean that you can mix and match all sorts of nations that were allied to the nation selected?
Does he mean that if you choose a major nation that had minor allies, that you must only choose one of the nations that was historically equipped and supplied by that major nation? (For instance, Britain equipped and supplied India, Canada, ANZAC, Poland, etc.; USA equipped and supplied Philippines, Free French, China, etc.; Germany equipped and supplied Romania, Hungary, Finland, etc.).Does he mean something else entirely? This is a problem.{ we can go with this and consider japan,germany,and italy/and any other MINOR to what I'm playin as allies also could include early russian with the late war italians and sortta follow history?? I am!!}
Problem C – Can a player playing this campaign gain an advantage by choosing one nation instead of another? By this I mean that if the participants don’t agree to play the same nation (and the same allies), then are the participants on a fair and level playing field? For instance, if you choose US Army (shorter campaign) and I choose Britain (longer campaign), are both participants on a fair and level playing field? Also, since the “historical” ratings are different for the various nations, if the participants are allowed to choose different nations and allies, then is this a fair and level playing field? This is a problem.

Other Issues and Problems not covered by FlashFyre’s initial conditions:
1. True Troop ON/Rarity ON? True Troop OFF/Rarity ON? True Troop ON/Rarity OFF? True Troop OFF/Rarity OFF?
2. Initial points for core. 2500? 3000? 3500? Something else?
3. Core composition. Limits to artillery? Armor? Something else?
4. Reinforcements. Allowed? Not allowed? Something else?
5. Standard 8.4? Enhanced FV? Something else?
6. Other conditions I haven’t listed here?

Point 5,,, yes to reinforcements and no limits to ARRTY or anything,, just see how far we can get with the battles fought as randomly as there genorated till we finish the campaign or die tryin point one,mines true troop on/rarity on.


< Message edited by Riun T -- 9/21/2006 3:52:57 AM >

(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 84
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 3:53:31 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4853
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vahauser


“AI Advantage – ON”

“AI Level – 200”

“Reduced Squads – ON”

“Reduced Ammo – ON”

“Weapon Breakdowns – ON”

“Vehicle Breakdowns – ON”

“Mines – ON”

The problem here is that allowing the human player to use mines and barbed wire and dragon’s teeth gives the human player a HUGE advantage over the AI. I recommend leaving Mines ON so that the AI can use them, but that the human player may NEVER use mines, barbed wire, or dragon’s teeth.

“Command & Control – ON”

“Use the Hard (x2) setting for all battles.”

“Set Spotting to 70% for Player 1, 100% for Player 2”

“Use Historic Ratings as designed.”


I would agree with all these setting and I basically use the same settings, except I dont play with C and C on much at all.


“Select one of the 6 major nations for your HQ, but then only buy allied equipment (if British, only buy Indian, for example)”
Problem A – Two of the six major nations don’t HAVE allies (Japan and the USSR).

For USSR "allies"
start your campaign in May of 43 and Use Polish LWP troops.
or in AUG of 44 you can use Russian armed Romanian troops.


1. True Troop ON/Rarity ON? True Troop OFF/Rarity ON? True Troop ON/Rarity OFF? True Troop OFF/Rarity OFF?

True troop on/Rarity off is best for the AI I think.


2. Initial points for core. 2500? 3000? 3500? Something else?

I start with 2500, for no particular reason.

3. Core composition. Limits to artillery? Armor? Something else?

I try to buy a good mix of equipment, and not just buy all the "best" stuff, or all the heaviest arty. In fact in Enhanced FV, there are now numerous large formations that are perfect for core forces, and can be used in conjunction with other units and formations.
German "Kampfgruppe", Soviet "Guards Armored Group", Italian "Bergilisi Gruppos"
USA "Combat Team" and/or "Task force"


4. Reinforcements. Allowed? Not allowed? Something else?

I never call for reinforcements when playing the AI

5. Standard 8.4? Enhanced FV? Something else?

Enhanced FV of course!!!



Alby





Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Alby -- 9/21/2006 5:22:14 AM >


_____________________________



(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 85
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 4:04:37 AM   
azraelck

 

Posts: 581
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline
You can call for reinforcements? When was that added?

_____________________________

"Wait... Holden was a cat. Suddenly it makes sense."

(in reply to Alby)
Post #: 86
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 4:15:08 AM   
vahauser


Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline
Alby and Riun T,

Now you see why FlashFyre said this campaign was best for single players and not involving other players. 

Each of the three of us has a different way of playing and different preferences.

Is there any way that we could all agree on how to set up the campaign together?



_____________________________


(in reply to azraelck)
Post #: 87
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 4:26:26 AM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: vahauser

Alby and Riun T,

Now you see why FlashFyre said this campaign was best for single players and not involving other players. 

Each of the three of us has a different way of playing and different preferences.

Is there any way that we could all agree on how to set up the campaign together?


you go with what you want buddy and I considered since we're all posting here it must be together EH?
ALL the little details are'nt as important as the STORY and the PICTURES

< Message edited by Riun T -- 9/21/2006 4:29:09 AM >

(in reply to vahauser)
Post #: 88
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 4:32:16 AM   
Riun T

 

Posts: 1848
Joined: 7/31/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: azraelck

You can call for reinforcements? When was that added?

I just thought that that would allow us to play it out as long as possible,and maybe give us the elimination of ALLLLLL their forces

(in reply to azraelck)
Post #: 89
RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign - 9/21/2006 4:53:29 AM   
azraelck

 

Posts: 581
Joined: 1/16/2006
Status: offline
Nah, that's for when your first 4 companies of infantry and 4 squadrons of calvary are wiped out by the ineffective, useless machine guns. So you can bring up 4 more squadrons to charge the MGs and take them out!

_____________________________

"Wait... Holden was a cat. Suddenly it makes sense."

(in reply to Riun T)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SPWaW AAR/DAR >> RE: FlashFyre Demonstration Long Campaign Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.168