Matrix Games Forums

Mangudai,

I sympathize. My commander in the Stalingrad Campaign promised to provide transport for my infantry, but he didn't count on my Aryan ingenuity: I bought TWO infantry companies instead of the one he expected. [:@]

Well, I dealt with the problem, but that's another long story. [:)]

Anyway, I learned not to trust the promises of my incompetent "superior" officers. Before starting a programmed campaign, I use the editor to check the individual scenario build and AUX points. I've also learned to buy my core defensively, e.g. even if I'm supposed to buy an armor-heavy force, I try to get at least a little infantry and arty/mortars, just in case. As a bonus, if the "useless" core units survive long enough they tend to be more experienced than what I can buy with AUX points. [:)]

Hello KG:

Will your USMC core unit list change when 8.2 is released? BTW, the list you sent me some time ago has worked out very well in two campaigns.

Ray

I learned more!
thx![:D]

One 'block' makes for a fun small scale campaign and gives you opportunities for practising combined arms. This template can be tinkered with once you develop your own preferences a bit more, and to take advantage of each nation's strengths and weaknesses. Most of all, have fun.

I'm a little confused by how this system works. Are you saying that if I don't use the full alotment of purchasing units, the AI will also use fewer units to match?
Or will the AI use the same no matter what in which case I should try to spend everything I can?

I would prefer to fight with fewer units while I learn the game system.

Also, is the game realistic enough that I will be in big trouble if I only choose tanks? Do combined arms actually have more effective fighting power than an equivalent value of tanks only?

Yepper, Mavraam.

If you want a small game, then don't buy the max allowed. The AI may still get more stuff depending on the mission and settings, but I believe that it is scaled.

Tanks alone will quickly become terrain features if you don't employ them with artillery and infantry. Think scissors-paper-rock. I think there are some tutorials that Wild Bill made to demonstrate this.

Before you even go into Single player play, click Preferences
There is a boxx with XXXXs in it that allows you to set players force points-I forget the exact label now.
Just set it to say 1200 pts (what I'm using) the AI forces are scaled to your force points- so you don't have to adjust AI points yourself.

Try 1200 or so & start a campaign, & see if that gives you the size of force you would like. You will also get support points in each mission of course but these too are scaled to your core force.

i like these smaller forces myseld-more like the orig SP games should play out quicker & it'll be easier to keep track of units & watch how they perform & improve etc.

G' Luck!

Thanks!

Last night I did first scenario in the long campaign as Germans using all the units I could buy (3800 pts?) and was COMPLETELY overwhelmed with trying to keep track of them.

Tonight, I'll start over with a more manageable size. 1200 points sounds perfect as I would say I had about 3-4 times more than I wanted.

Thanks again for your help. This game rocks, I can't believe its free!

ORIGINAL: RayM

Hello KG:

Will your USMC core unit list change when 8.2 is released? BTW, the list you sent me some time ago has worked out very well in two campaigns.

Ray

Ray, I'll be sending you an e-mail this evening. [;)]

Is it just me, or do they list worst to best units top to bottom? Because it appears they do....thus far. For example I noticed the british...i dunno mark VI(b)? light tank listed below the mark VIc, but then upon further investigation realised it (the 'b') had better armour, despite being designed/built prior to the 'c', and typically you will see panzers listed top to bottom as I through to III.

So it this just the devs dumbing it down for the time poor (which I appreciate), or am I imagining things? Like when I smoke pot.