Since you are adding variable entry (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Commander - Europe at War Gold



Message

YohanTM2 -> Since you are adding variable entry (8/29/2007 5:27:39 PM)

Hi Guys,

Can you speed Italian entry up each time France pulls a garrison out of its Med posessions? Easy way to avoid the standard bail to build WWI lines in France.

Second, and less preferred in my view, option is France loses the production from these colonies due to unrest if troops are pulled.



Vypuero -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (8/29/2007 7:42:54 PM)

I like both ideas.  You may also then want to put the Garrison that got moved out of NAF back there.



YohanTM2 -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (8/31/2007 3:04:18 PM)

Good, this came out of a discussion I had with Major Victory



Dave Ferguson -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (8/31/2007 7:11:51 PM)

I thought the variable entry thing was only for USA and USSR. Even then i can't see what variability you could give the USA?

Dave



targul -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (8/31/2007 8:16:23 PM)

I thought USA and USSR where set dates also.  I have always seen Russia entry Jun 22, 1941.  Maybe that is the most likely date and I have gotten it each time dont know but it is the regualar date for me.



firepowerjohan -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (8/31/2007 8:44:19 PM)

Variable entry is in next patch. Currently, USSR does not join in June 1941 but October 1941. This is because in real WW2 Axis attacked USSR but if they hadn't surely the war in the east would have started later.

Axis can DoW them earlier if they want.

Invade Early:
Pros
- USSR has not built up as much units, thinner lines
- Axis will have more time before Winter and USA joining

Cons
- USSR get the DoW boost earlier (+10% war effort)
- Axis had less time on conquering Neutrals than if invading later
- USSR will get convoys earlier
- USSR will get research cap earlier



targul -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (8/31/2007 9:06:04 PM)

Yea been awhile since I see the Russian do anything so you are correct.  By Oct Moscow is usually fallen or close in the Axis march to Perm.  Not sure how a variable date will help but worth a try. 

For me what I would really like to see is someway to prevent Moscow from falling in every game.  Maybe make Moscow a fort or make entrenching worthwhile but I have never been in a game where Moscow did not fall.

Doesnt mean that the Axis wins because Moscow falls but the Moscow to Perm road is just so boring after your 10th opponent in a row has been there done that.

The Russian army seems to be able to defend Perm okay but have NO chance of defending Moscow.  They defend Perm while the Allies land in France.  This now happens in 42 like clockwork also.  German's have nothing there so they try to rush to Berlin. 

For me we need a Moscow that stands a chance and enough German's so they can place something in France to defend but then I like trying to beat history as you know.



firepowerjohan -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (8/31/2007 11:38:54 PM)

IMO, the Perm rush compared to the southern Push towards Ukraine and Caucasus has both pros and cons

Pros
- If you win then the USSR surrender will be a huge boost that mostly win the game


Cons
- Tougher terrain in north (lots of forest) means you will suffer more especially using armour units
- Once Moscow is conquered, Perm is the active capital and USSR will in fact get supply penalty in Southern USSR due to the large distance!
- If you get halted near Perm you have not gained as much as if being halted in Ukraine, especially since The 2 oil fields South of Stalingrad in the patch will mean 4x oil instead of 3x oil creating larger boost when conquering enemy oil.
- Perm can deploy units which means quick reinforcements for USSR compared to Caucasus which can be cut-off and isolated



targul -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/1/2007 1:33:02 AM)

I have no problem with Perm.  Never heard of before this game but that means nothing.  The problem lies that Moscow should not fall almost 100% of the time.  It should be a tough fight that only is won once in awhile.  But it has been lost in EVERY game I have played weather I am playing Axis or Allies.  That needs some work.

As to Perm being the only possible solution it creates a boring replay of the same scenario every game.  No one really goes south.  No reason you get the oil when you capture Perm.  No one goes north.  Lenningrad is yours when you capture Perm.  If after Moscow there was some variable it could make for better games.  Now they are all extactly the same race for Perm and Berlin.  Not much fun, no historical reasons and will become more and more boring as time goes on.

Perm is a hard fight but only because the Allies ALWAYS land in 42 in France.  Again this is so far off.  It looses any feel at all of WWII.  I know you are uninterested in that but we are supposedly playing and WWII game and free landing in 42 in France is as bad as Moscow falling in 42 every game.

We need some variety.  Moscow needs to become difficult not just another city.  There needs to be enough points available to have some semblance of a force in France not an empty land. 

I am advocating a build up for the Axis for the Altantic Wall and a build up for the Russians for Moscow.  BTW I think you may solve the whole Moscow issue with a simple Fort in that city.  To accomplish the Atlantic Wall you would only need to add a garrison to make the west wall next to the maignot line that existed.

As to Italy and Africa I really cant comment.  There is zero action there in AI and normally same vs Human so I am becoming of the opinion that it will be a waste to spend to much time trying to make it an active theater since the game is not historical anyway and the players seem to feel it is worthless to capture or defend. (Check my article and players answers in Italy the forgotten Land and Balkans and Norway.)







Vypuero -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/1/2007 2:38:03 AM)

Targul,

I think you are playing too few people - who use the same strategies.  I don't find any of what you say to be the case.  I am happy to play you and demonstrate any time.



targul -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/1/2007 9:41:46 PM)

Well, Vypuero you are probably correct I only have 10 different people I am playing at the moment but I limit myself to 10 for each game I play.  I have played maybe a dozen different folks and yes they didnt start with these tactics but I have watched the game degenerate to this as it is a clear strategy. 

Presently all but one are using this strategy but that is an old game that started the day of patch so new tactic hadnt arrived on the boards yet.



Forwarn45 -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/1/2007 11:19:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: targul

I have no problem with Perm.  Never heard of before this game but that means nothing.  The problem lies that Moscow should not fall almost 100% of the time.  It should be a tough fight that only is won once in awhile.  But it has been lost in EVERY game I have played weather I am playing Axis or Allies.  That needs some work.



I kept Moscow in my game with you, Targul. [;)] But it was pre-patch.



targul -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/2/2007 12:58:14 AM)

You did but I dont count games prepatch since nothing worked then.  Now the game is much closer but the players have already learned to not mess with external countries or anything historical and play it purely as a game.  Since that is what they wanted they certainly have it.

Problem remains that since patch no player I have played or that played me held Moscow and I am probably the worst Axis player in the world.  Usually I am pretty good as Soviet player but that has always been on games that had a historical lean not this one.  This one is purely a game which I play it as also now.  Nor have any invaded Norway, Greece or done anything in Africa.

I usually run around in Africa with whatever starts there since the opponent pulls them all out so all I have to kill is a couple garrisons but they are probably right there is absolutely no reason to be there.

I am even beginning to question attacking Denmark.  Everyone is still doing that but only reason is to be able to bring out the BB so you can get him killed in the Atlantic.  But I like being able to hide my subs there also.

I do wish they would make subs cheaper though so we would see some action in the Atlantic.  Prepatch we saw some action but that has dried up also as the players hold there subs to try and keep the God Carriers at bay while the fight France.  I havent seen a sub built in a game in so long we are all probably still using the Civil War subs. 

Oh well, game will head where it heads.  Too bad they really had a great game engine and they could have had the best both historical and balanced game in the industry.  There philosphy which is alien to me needs Sig. Weaver to hunt down the bugs.



Vypuero -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/2/2007 1:08:10 AM)

Let's see Targul:

You did but I dont count games prepatch since nothing worked then.  - The game worked fine.  In fact, the allies were weaker.

Now the game is much closer but the players have already learned to not mess with external countries or anything historical and play it purely as a game.  Since that is what they wanted they certainly have it.  - I find that generally it plays historically, once again you are wrong.

Problem remains that since patch no player I have played or that played me held Moscow and I am probably the worst Axis player in the world.  Usually I am pretty good as Soviet player but that has always been on games that had a historical lean not this one.  This one is purely a game which I play it as also now.  Nor have any invaded Norway, Greece or done anything in Africa.  - Well, not in my experience on ANY of these counts.

I usually run around in Africa with whatever starts there since the opponent pulls them all out so all I have to kill is a couple garrisons but they are probably right there is absolutely no reason to be there.  - I thought you said no one does anything in NAF?  Which is it?

I am even beginning to question attacking Denmark.  Everyone is still doing that but only reason is to be able to bring out the BB so you can get him killed in the Atlantic.  But I like being able to hide my subs there also.  - Ok, moron, don't attack Denmark.  I just took it in 1 Turn.

I do wish they would make subs cheaper though so we would see some action in the Atlantic.  Prepatch we saw some action but that has dried up also as the players hold there subs to try and keep the God Carriers at bay while the fight France.  I havent seen a sub built in a game in so long we are all probably still using the Civil War subs.  Subs work well, I always use them.

Oh well, game will head where it heads.  Too bad they really had a great game engine and they could have had the best both historical and balanced game in the industry.  There philosphy which is alien to me needs Sig. Weaver to hunt down the bugs.  - There are almost no bugs at all, wtf are you talking about?  You really are an old crybaby - Rambo is 100% spot on



YohanTM2 -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/2/2007 3:01:59 AM)

I tell you what, you both should be banned from this forum.

Vpuero, as someone who is involved with the game as a scenario designer (from what I have read) you cannot react this way. And frankly, to agree with a TROLL like Rambo makes it even worse.

Targul, I agree with some of your comments but and this is a big BUT you are down to Rambo's level or worse. With all respect, you will never like this game, you really need to pack up and move on.

I started this thread as a hope to engage in discourse to improve the game, obviously it is not happening. I am going to ask the moderator to lock the thread and eview both your comments.



targul -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/2/2007 4:09:46 AM)

I have spoken many times in all the forums with ideas to improve this game.  Eachtime I have hit the same brick wall of we are not going to do that.  They dont discuss it they simply refuse to look at changes. 

Yohan I consider you an intelligent person and will assist you.  I will leave this forum and this game.  You remain incorrect about me liking the game because I do.  But when I bought the game I wanted a WWII game and this is just a game which is going to its lowest level as time goes on.

I have said many times is a good game but I was really hoping for a WWII game that is actually what I thought it was when I read the discription.  I offered on day two to return this game for a full refund offer remains.  But since they are not refunding I shall still want what I paid for.

Vyp-- I did not say game was bugged read it.  I said philosphy is bugged.  Good to see you thought game was fine prepatch which explains why you consider it perfect now.  It is simple NAF is dead.  I run around and take the freebies but like I said the players are probably correct and not me. 

Finally to my friends and foes in this game I hope you enjoy it and I sincerely hope they improve it.  But I will no longer be responding on this board or to games.

Glad you like Rambo someone should.



Vypuero -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/2/2007 6:51:26 PM)

Someone needs to say something about the lies and misrepresentations he makes.  And as far as I could translate, he did say it was buggy, which it is not.  I have agreed with him that NAF is dead from the AI persepective - it is not in human play, which he also feels it is.  That would simply be a strategy decision, as there are perfectly viable reasons to use as well.

I have no financial interest in this game.  I am enjoying the games I play, and pushing for any improvements I feel are needed. 



YohanTM2 -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/3/2007 4:16:21 AM)

Absolutely no excuse.



Vypuero -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/3/2007 6:16:19 AM)

Nonsense, said nothing wrong.



SMK-at-work -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/3/2007 7:09:32 AM)

So sa far "the lies and and misrepresentations he makes" are one thing that yuo disagree with - that it is buggy.

Well whoopy do - is that really worth making yourself look like a troll over?

Build a bridge....that way if you're really a troll you can live under it, and if you're not then you can get over it!![:D][:D]

Both you and Targul have many good inputs into the game - it'd be a hame to have to ignore one or both of you.



IainMcNeil -> RE: Since you are adding variable entry (9/3/2007 12:12:54 PM)

Can we calm this down please. I'm not a moderator here but this is getting way out of hand. We do response to feedback and have tried to address any concerns and are working hard on the patch. Vypuero did help us a lot with scenario design and we very much appreciate it, but he is not part of the team so his views are his own, and not those of Slitherine, Matrix or Firepower.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.828125