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."
"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?
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.
"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[:D] point one,mines true troop on/rarity 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
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?
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
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."
Mines – ON (but the human player may NEVER use mines, barbed wire, or dragon’s teeth)
Command & Control – OFF for Alby and ON for VAH
Use the Hard (x2) setting for all battles.
Set Spotting to 70% for Player 1, 100% for Player 2
Historical Ratings – ON (you really have no idea how much I detest these ratings being called “historical”, since they are not)
1. Select one of the 6 major nations for your HQ, but then only buy allied equipment (if British, only buy Indian, for example) Which nation shall we play? I'm leaning towards choosing the US Army and then using Free French. How does that sound?
2. Initial points for core. 2500? 3000? 3500? Something else?
You prefer 2500 and I prefer 3000… How about a compromise of 2750?
3. Core composition. Limits to artillery? Armor? Something else? You describe the core limits you want and I will abide by your conditions (although I reserve the right to negotiate with you a little)
4. Reinforcements. Allowed? Not allowed? Something else? Reinforcements NOT allowed
5. Standard 8.4? Enhanced FV? Something else? Enhanced FV.1 agreed
We only have a few points to agree on and then we can start. This could be fun. If we do this right, then we can use this as a tactical learning tool and both improve our games.
Ooops I started one already before I saw your post.
SO HQ then switched to Poland for my forces.
Using LWP forces May 1943 (Enhanced HTH Mod)
the LWP formations are a mess in vanilla spwaw and even in Enhanced FV so I used an "alternate" mod, I am working on, where I have corrected and cleaned up the mistakes. I am making it for PBEM/Online, and Long Campaign play only.
Not good for pre made scenario stuff, removing units that are seldom used in PBEM and Long Campaign play and am adding alot more variety of units.
I even removed the FOs from the german armor cars formations and got rid of the "Elite Armor" formations yu hate so much...lol read here...
