What's your Strategy?
https://forums.matrixgames.com:443/
ORIGINAL: fbs
I don't think we should add AI requests here, oldman45; changes to AI behavior are incredibly difficult to program, and these become major projects by themselves.
ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
Actually now that we've put the AI scripts into the editor - changing them is incredibly easy - if you know how! But no "programming" required regardless.
[:)]
ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey
Higher Resolutions.Would definitly improve "gameplay" expierence on fullscreen for people who have widescreen and for people who don't a perfect square aspect ratio.
ORIGINAL: herwin
ORIGINAL: Herrbear
ORIGINAL: RevRick
And I want to see what would have happened if Marshall had used his brains instead of his Army green gonads, and made absolutely sure that the war warning message reached Oahu on Dec.6th.., IOW - No bloody surprise. I know what happened in the real surprise.
I just finished reading The Pearl Harbor Myth by George Victor. His contention was that not sending the warning message was deliberate. The US did not want them to know so that the first overt act was to be by Japan and bring the country into the war against Germany.
Given that the attack left the US Government in a strategic quandary--Germany did not declare war for about three days and Germany, not Japan was the enemy they wanted to be fighting--I have my doubts. Note that the Asiatic Fleet was already redeploying to Singapore and the carriers were on a war footing, so the unpreparedness in Pearl Harbor was a matter of leadership at the top (Short and Kimmel).
ORIGINAL: jwilkerson
ORIGINAL: fbs
I don't think we should add AI requests here, oldman45; changes to AI behavior are incredibly difficult to program, and these become major projects by themselves.
Actually now that we've put the AI scripts into the editor - changing them is incredibly easy - if you know how! But no "programming" required regardless.
[:)]
ORIGINAL: Cribtop
I would like to see Naval Attack missions focus a bit more on transports and a lot less on DDs. If the strike mis-identifies the DD as a CL/CA that's fine, but too often planes waste their ordinance on fast DDs that they know to be DDs while ignoring fat transports. I think the tacticians of the period understood that targeting the transports was better than the DDs when attacking invasion or re-supply TFs.
I'd also like to see IJN SCTFs stop wasting torpedoes with Long Lance attacks greater than say 10,000 yds in daytime surface actions.
ORIGINAL: Iridium
ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey
Higher Resolutions.Would definitly improve "gameplay" expierence on fullscreen for people who have widescreen and for people who don't a perfect square aspect ratio.
I too would love to see wide screen support with resolutions up to 1920 x 1080 being supported but I don't really see it happening. I recall someone stating that it would be a major rewrite of code requiring quite possibly more man hours than worthwhile.[:(]
ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey
ORIGINAL: Iridium
ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey
Higher Resolutions.Would definitly improve "gameplay" expierence on fullscreen for people who have widescreen and for people who don't a perfect square aspect ratio.
I too would love to see wide screen support with resolutions up to 1920 x 1080 being supported but I don't really see it happening. I recall someone stating that it would be a major rewrite of code requiring quite possibly more man hours than worthwhile.[:(]
-It's 2009, go online and try and find a brand new screen that's supports 1024x768 native...I didn't think so.
-We are paying the abnormally high price of $80-$100 a pop.If they are getting that much per sale, saying it isn't worth while isn't much of an excuse.
-It's a great game, and it's worth every penny, but they are leaving a good portion of their fanbase in the cold here.[:(]
ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey
I don't understand how it is so much part of code.All we want is to be able to play our excellent game in fullscreen without having it look distorted, or with big ugly black bars on the side of the screen.
ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey
I don't understand how it is so much part of code.All we want is to be able to play our excellent game in fullscreen without having it look distorted, or with big ugly black bars on the side of the screen.
Look at this:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/e ... dards2.svg
2 by 3 is basicly screwing everyone that doesn't a 4:3 aspect ratio.They can do better than that.I'm not saying have every single resolution out there, just enough that's enjoyable.My screen is 1440x900.Even at 1280x768, it atleast takes most of my screen, so much at even the small black bars at the top and bottom of the screen are very tolerable and in-game become unnoticable.With 1024x768, I have 2 big black bars on the side of screen in my face.
ORIGINAL: jolly_pillager
Please, PLEASE STOP the (so called) AI from changing my fighter units to 100% LRCAP randomly and then having my Ops losses spike from fatigue [8|]
ORIGINAL: jolly_pillager
More Fog of War on the Surface Combat Animations....make the entire ship side art not appear until the ship is spotted. Use the WRONG ship side art. Use the wrong names.
Ditto air attack animations...it does little good to have the combat report lie when I can SEE the name or class of the ship during the animation.
ORIGINAL: pompack
ORIGINAL: V22 Osprey
I don't understand how it is so much part of code.All we want is to be able to play our excellent game in fullscreen without having it look distorted, or with big ugly black bars on the side of the screen.
Well, until you get your CS degree, just accept their word for it: It's really, really embedded in the code and can't be changed without a level of effort roughly compatible with creating AE itself [8|]
EDIT: now if you want to discuss how it should NOT have been done that way, you will have a lot of people agree with you. However, that is just the way Gary does things. And because Gary has created about 98% of the games that I love I happily accept it as just the way Gary works
ORIGINAL: Herrbear
ORIGINAL: Cribtop
I would like to see Naval Attack missions focus a bit more on transports and a lot less on DDs. If the strike mis-identifies the DD as a CL/CA that's fine, but too often planes waste their ordinance on fast DDs that they know to be DDs while ignoring fat transports. I think the tacticians of the period understood that targeting the transports was better than the DDs when attacking invasion or re-supply TFs.
I'd also like to see IJN SCTFs stop wasting torpedoes with Long Lance attacks greater than say 10,000 yds in daytime surface actions.
While they may be wasting torpedoes, that range is not unreasonable. In Japanese Destroyer Captain, author, Capt. Tameichi Hara writes "In manuevers we usually fired torpedoes at a range of about 2000 meters. In actual warfare, the average distance was probably 4000 to 5000 meters..."
