Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3
#561263 - 06/19/01 03:07 PM Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Tracer[formerly of CS] Offline
Senior Member
Tracer[formerly of CS]  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Hi Steve,
Well i approached the medusa's as you suggested -re: I have 1 pilot left.
The *major* problem now is that when i load-out my plane with A/A to deal with the 2/3 SU-37's the success rate -naturaly- various in shooting them down.
So say i take 2medium and 6ASRAAM, my wingman carries the exact same load ok.
Now if i manage to shoot down the 2/3 SU-37's then my wingman will engage the medusa's with his A/A load and be shot down while i take out the Medusa he's attacking!(instead of using his gun's first -which is what i want)

If on the other hand i *miss* 1 or both the SU-37's this often turn's into a stalemate with me turning inside the SU-37 while my wingman engage's one of them and either shoot's it down, or he dies himself through either engaging the SU or the Medusa!!

The Medusa's then head inland and BOOM it's all over.

If i tell my wingman to engage the SU's (i am at takeoff 18miles away from them *alway's* ) then by the time he get's off the ground and engage's them they are 8-9 mile's away and **Attacking** us! (i'm trying to get him to use *all* his A/A ordnance so that he will use his damn guns!!!)

It's a seriously fine line...that has not been breached not through want of trying (12 times last night -i may add!)

Also the Medusa engage you at 2miles from the rear of them *way* out of range from your A/A gun's....yes i have tried jinking lining up again etc the best i have *always* done is shoot down one (taking some damage) then engaging the other only for it's sidekick (remember there are two that fly in pair's?) to shoot me down in second's.....

There is no skill involved in this. Just absolute sheer luck!

A rundown so far:
1)your wingman and you manage to shoot down the 2/3 SU-37's within the average 18mile range before it turn's into a stalemate/or loss because of the SU's superior turning advantage(yes i use the airbrake for "thrust vectoring" the nose up ) and the Medusa's win anyway!
2)Take *to little* A/A ordnace (in the hope it works in shooting down the SU-37's AND then your wingman will use gun's against the FIRST Medusa(very *risky* ploy that hasn't worked)

If your wingman could use gun's at first then i might have a chance!
It all hinges on him using all his A/A ordnance first...but the problem is he accelerates after the medusa to use his ASRAAM's? Then get's shot down from approx 2miles waiting for his *unlocked* A/A weapon's to hit(which they don't!) before firing anymore that he may have left......sigh.

Only one fluky moment out of about 18 attempt's did my wingman engage finaly with gun's and shoot down one medusa before he ejected and blew up. I shot down one medusa before hitting the last one(it took no damage but forced me to eject) Then i hoped that the other 2 MII Typhoon's on medusa CAP -they would have been my pilot's plane's if i had any!- controlled by the CPU would finish the last medusa off?

NO CHANCE they went in with their A/A and were picked of within second's by this **1** lone medusa

This is a serious problem that is affecting gameplay for anyone that has 1 pilot left?

It's not like i can do anything to affect the situation? If i could load out my wingman and myself seperately *then* i could win! As i would tell him to engage the medusa's with only his gun's as ordnance!
I on the other hand, would be loaded to the hilt with A/A to take out the SU's then switch to gun's to engage the medusa's!

As it is it this is ended my campaign for me and my interest

I've pretty exhausted my continual play-die,repeat,play-die........................this isn't fun anymore Steve
The mechanic's of the game are defeating me.
Their should have been an alternative way to defeat these three medusa's with basicaly *just myself* My wingman is useless!!

All-in-all a complete bummer!
A "god" cheat is about the only way i will see the end with one pilot? but it's *not* the way it should be is it?

Tracer




------------------
"Flying is the second hardest thing known to man.........the first is landing!"

Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#561264 - 06/19/01 04:29 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


As more people reach this final stage of the game, I suspect we'll see a lot more of these posts.

My take on this is (based on EFT's current design)...

When you reach the 'final save' stage, this is in fact the actual end of the game. At this point you should quit the current campaign and start a fresh campaign... That's if you still have the motivation to do it all over again knowing what the outcome will be

Ahh well, only a few days now until Operation Flash Point is released, this should keep me busy until IL2/Silent Hunter/LOMAC are released.

------------------
\:\)

Hengist.

Hengist's MiG Alley Site.
http://www.hengist.co.uk/MiGAlley

#561265 - 06/19/01 06:37 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Well... I managed to shoot down the medusas on my 5th attempt, but it takes patience ..lots of it. I use crvs at approx 2 miles. I now find that if I rerun the mission from the last save I win every time.

So take heart .. you'll get there eventually, then you'll wonder why you found it hard!

I must say however that I find this 'arbitrary' end to the campaign on day 4 VERY frustrating . Alas the scripting of events appears grossly overdone and intrusive.. almost to the extent that the underlying dynamic campaign engine might as well not be there.

Im looking forward to the add-on getting things back to the TAW type environment where a proper campaign can be fought, culminating with the 'liberation' of iceland.
The current setup is essentially not dynamic at all due to over scripting of the events.

Then again.. other people will love it the way it is.. you can't please everyone!

#561266 - 06/19/01 06:46 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Tracer[formerly of CS] Offline
Senior Member
Tracer[formerly of CS]  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Steve, i just completed the above mission and after 20 attempts!
Then i'm hit with this Motherland thing....now thinking of the CRV-7's with the Medusa's? i loaded up with 80 of them!!

Now what the hell is going on here Steve?
I hit it (i can assure you) with the full 80 -give or take a few- CRV-7's from way out it's rear gun range. What the **** it's still flying!!!!
So i empty my complete gun's into it! then eventually bail out through mega damage keeping my gun's trained on it.

It **still** flies........man,oh,man,oh,man...this is unbelievable

To top it all, i *can't* carry anymore CRV-7's, because i have to keep sufficient A/A weapon's for it's damn escort's it drops from it's wing's (8 of them) Read the above scenario and you'll understand why....

This reminds me of when Half-Life "lost the plot" at the end, and we ended up on an alien planet -totally screwed up and thrown away the script or what?

This is seriously getting painful Steve....i can't imagine this having had lot's of play-testing with 1 pilot.........??

This obviously wasn't taken into account in my books and anybody else's when they get to this point as *Hengist* say's


A *lite sim = fun*(or supposed to?) why make this soooo bloody hard for someone who has triumphed by playing the game right through from day 2 with just one pilot -not reloading or anything- only to be punished left-right and center with continual reloads **because i have one pilot** and it's not because my weapon's missed, oh no! It's because someone made the motherland plane excruciatingly mind numbingly hard to take down with -can you believe it ---A/G weapons! Not good ol' Meteor's/ASRAAMs but CRV-7's.................what is this all about????

I'm trying to like this *and* finish it!

There is only so much a man can take....

Tracer



------------------
"Flying is the second hardest thing known to man.........the first is landing!"

#561267 - 06/19/01 07:31 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


LOL!!!!!!!!


May the force be with you my friend...along with a good dose of patience

-.-

#561268 - 06/19/01 07:39 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 974
Blond_Knight Offline
Member
Blond_Knight  Offline
Member

Joined: Aug 2000
Posts: 974
I dont know if Im sad, or relieved that I dont plan on playing the game until the forth day.

------------------
See-Decide-Attack-Reverse

#561269 - 06/20/01 03:42 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,573
Psycho Offline
Member
Psycho  Offline
Member

Joined: Oct 1999
Posts: 1,573
NY, USA
Quote:
Originally posted by Tracer[formerly of CS]:
Steve, i just completed the above mission and after 20 attempts!
Then i'm hit with this Motherland thing....now thinking of the CRV-7's with the Medusa's? i loaded up with 80 of them!!

Now what the hell is going on here Steve?
I hit it (i can assure you) with the full 80 -give or take a few- CRV-7's from way out it's rear gun range. What the **** it's still flying!!!!
So i empty my complete gun's into it! then eventually bail out through mega damage keeping my gun's trained on it.

It **still** flies........man,oh,man,oh,man...this is unbelievable



Did you try the BFG with Quad Damage??

#561270 - 06/20/01 08:39 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Tracer,

Have you tried it on level one?

It is possible with one pilot, but it'll be very very hard - the reason is that there needs to be a challenge for someone who has 3 or 6 pilots left....

You can do it, but here is a question - is it valid for a dynamic campaign to evolve in to a no win situation because of the cumulative effect of the events that have come before it? - I would say yes - the hard part from the players point of view is knowing when this has happened and therefore prevent them from fighting for a lost cause.

Cheers,

Steve

#561271 - 06/20/01 09:01 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Hunt:
You can do it, but here is a question - is it valid for a dynamic campaign to evolve in to a no win situation because of the cumulative effect of the events that have come before it? - I would say yes - the hard part from the players point of view is knowing when this has happened and therefore prevent them from fighting for a lost cause.


As far as I'm concerned, yes, although admittedly it won't be as good for gameplay reasons.

That would be realistic in terms of a war, rather than the campaign saying, "right, this guy's doing quite well, so lets chuck a medusa his way" - that, as far as I'm concerned is a scripted event that changes the campaign.

If we're not winning the war, we should be able to tell. I think the reason it's hard to know what's happened is because it isn't easy to see what's happened in the game.

Lets face it, we have to wait for the war reports to see what's going on, and even then, we just get the number of tanks and aircraft on each side and a map of who's got what sectors.

If we had those available at the click of the button all the time, IMO it would be a lot better.

In TAW we always had graphs, maps etc and details of all things going on - that gave us control over the war.

Cheers,
Manteau

#561272 - 06/20/01 09:01 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Hunt:


You can do it, but here is a question - is it valid for a dynamic campaign to evolve in to a no win situation because of the cumulative effect of the events that have come before it? - I would say yes - the hard part from the players point of view is knowing when this has happened and therefore prevent them from fighting for a lost cause.

Cheers,

Steve


Hi Steve, nice to hear from you again, I still having a lot of fun with Typhoon (Except any thing to do with Brimstones, they are hopeless), but I have not reached the final levels of the game yet.

I just wanted to say that, yes in a dynamic campaign it must be possible for it to evolve into a no win situation, otherwise where is the challenge, but from reading this thread it seem that you have invoked an end game monster the "Medusa".

Basically creating a win or loose mission, if I understand this thread right, you can beat the hell out of the Russians but still loose if the medusas get through.

This I think is very suitable for some types of first person shooters, but I am not sure about it in a flight sim.

Since it is already known that you need at least a couple of pilots to kill these Medusa, a lot of people will have to restart their campaigns, in order to have enough pilots at the end.

So what am I saying : yes a Dynamic campaign must be able to evolve into a no win situation, but the no win situation should not be scripted or else there is a chance to do brilliantly vs dynamic campaign and still loose vs script. Which must be extremely disapointing.

TT




[This message has been edited by Turbo_tiger (edited 06-20-2001).]

#561273 - 06/20/01 09:04 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Well said Turbo_tiger, I agree!

Cheers,
Manteau

#561274 - 06/20/01 09:48 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Think you misunderstand slightly - the Medusa mission isn't a scripted 'no win' mission, it's a scripted finally to the game which you can either win or lose depending on the state of the island, number of pilots and player skill.

I can see why some players don't like this system and I think your points are perfectly valid (one reason to open things up) - but the alternative, and one which we were also critisied for, is to have at some abitiary point a 'war is won' messages appears and the game ends with a bit of a 'oh - have I - that's nice'.

We wanted Typhoon to end with a real ding dong of a battle between you and some focal point. This is a more traditional ending to a game, but I always thought that more serious simmers wouldn't like it (you can't please all the people.... etc etc.)

Hey ho...

Steve

#561275 - 06/20/01 10:02 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Fair enough Steve, I admit that does make sense, even if I don't like it myself.

I'll pipe down a bit

Cheers,
Manteau

#561276 - 06/20/01 10:11 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Uroboros Offline
Member
Uroboros  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Brooklyn, NY
Thanx for clearing that up Steve. Every campaign has an ending which defines whether you win or lose, in Typhoon's case the Medusa scenerio is it.

If this was a real life war and Russia choose to pull this scenerio on you (as a last ditch effort); your chances of defeating them would depend on your resources. Sounds like the game is exactly the same. Guess I'll know when I get to it

Still looking forward to you opening up the campaign though.

#561277 - 06/20/01 12:25 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Hunt:

I can see why some players don't like this system and I think your points are perfectly valid (one reason to open things up) - but the alternative, and one which we were also critisied for, is to have at some abitiary point a 'war is won' messages appears and the game ends with a bit of a 'oh - have I - that's nice'.

We wanted Typhoon to end with a real ding dong of a battle between you and some focal point. This is a more traditional ending to a game, but I always thought that more serious simmers wouldn't like it (you can't please all the people.... etc etc.)

Hey ho...

Steve


Hi Steve, you are right about your 'war is won' 'oh - have I - that's nice' argument, that is a very lame ending, especially if it you comes out of the blue.

But in a truly dynamic campaign with no scripted events, except maybe to get the war going initially, there are various possible outcomes
  • The Russians run ICEFOR right of Iceland : you loose
  • You run the Russians of Iceland : you win
  • The war continues forth and back indefinitely.


You could also set up a list of clearly defined objectives, and if they are met you win, then 'war is won' wouldn't be quite so lame.

I dont consider the "medusa" mission a "no win" mission, but rather a "win or loose" mission, where the outcome of the campaign hinges on your success in this one mission.

I am really looking forward to your "opened up campaign" as this will give the game so much more replayability.

TT

#561278 - 06/20/01 12:48 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 137
Yorkshire Tea Offline
Member
Yorkshire Tea  Offline
Member

Joined: Jul 2000
Posts: 137
Leeds, W.Yorks, UK
In a truely dynamic campaign then surely you should occasionally get "one mission - win/loose" situations.

For example, in an air war hitting the enemies frontline bases and eradicating his airforce on the ground before it has a chance to do anything. However shouldn't those missions be "dynamically generated", e.g. the Strategic AI (and the player) should know that the loss of necessary forces forces them to either:

a) Throw in the towel or (more scarily)
b) Reach for the unpredicatble response.

For example TOAW II scenarios can use event triggers with a percentage of occurance. Applied to Typhoon this might be something along the lines of:

Destruction of S-37 fleet = 70% chance of capitulation, 20% chance deploy chemical medusas, 10% Hit Rekjavik with something very unpleasant. Could such variable triggers be added to Typhoons' more scripted strategic AI? Are they already implemented in some way? If they could be implemented then I'm sure people could come up with interesting and varied campaigns.

I also understand that use of such events could frustrate some gamers and make for some very short campaigns.

Sorry to mention it, but I think Falcon4's design attitude got it right. Build a wargame and then bolt a simulator to that. If they'd added more random elements to F4 campaign - e.g. pop up insertions by DPRK commando units etc. then mmmmmmmm...

For me, in the current Typhoon game, the S-37 Intercept and Interdiction missions make "sense" and a good game turning point (in a very sick sort of way). You can almost hear them (the AI generals) thinking, 50+ S-37 down for so few Typhoon losses? Right, we've lost - lets nuke em. Good ending, just too predictable.

#561279 - 06/20/01 01:04 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7
Badboy Offline
Junior Member
Badboy  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 7
UK
Hi TT

Quote:
Originally posted by Turbo_tiger:
You could also set up a list of clearly defined objectives, and if they are met you win, then 'war is won' wouldn't be quite so lame.



Good thoughts, and if I understand it correctly, setting win/lose criteria is one of the things you will be able to do when/if the campaign is opened up.

Badboy

#561280 - 06/20/01 10:59 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 669
Hitman IF Offline
Member
Hitman IF  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2001
Posts: 669
Aberdeen, Scotland
I can see your thinking Steve when you put in the final end of game big battle. However, I think that perhaps as EFT is intended as a lite sim it would be far better to have the Medusa's as the final mission. It is at least possible for about 50pc of pilots.
Hopefully we can have this sorted when the campaign is opened up. One idea I just thought of - wouldn't it be a great feature for a game like EFT to have new campaigns released every few months or something. That would sure be a boost to it's long term appeal. Hey, perhaps this could be in the next Rage Warrington sim!
Sorry, I'll stop going on now. Long live Typhoon.

------------------
---SVBS squad is playing Typhoon now at http://www.svbs.co.uk !---


---SVBS squad is playing Lock On, ADF/TAW and Typhoon now at http://www.svbs.co.uk !---
#561281 - 06/21/01 01:50 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Hunt:
but the alternative, and one which we were also critisied for, is to have at some abitiary point a 'war is won' messages appears and the game ends with a bit of a 'oh - have I - that's nice'.
Steve


Why have a message that says 'You have won', when you can create a conditional branch that cuts to an appropriate video seen (e.g. remnants of the defeated forces withdrawing, scenes of fireworks, medals and handshakes for the victor... etc).

I know that this is expensive, but isn't there anything that already exists that could be used?


------------------
\:\)

Hengist.

Hengist's MiG Alley Site.
http://www.hengist.co.uk/MiGAlley

#561282 - 06/22/01 07:53 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Hi,

My point here wasn't if at the end we played a video or printed a message on the screen, my point was that when the win conditions are met the game would just end - problem is that you as a player would probably not be involved in that final winning event.

So, for eaxmple, you might be planning a mission when an AI pilot blows up the last Russian tank on the island and the war is won. But from your point of view it just ends wihtout you being involved at a seemingly arbitary time.

That's how EF used to feel to me - hence my 'war is won - oh - is it?' line.

No finally to the game with the player involved.

Cheers,

Steve

#561283 - 06/22/01 08:21 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Hunt:

So, for eaxmple, you might be planning a mission when an AI pilot blows up the last Russian tank on the island and the war is won. But from your point of view it just ends wihtout you being involved at a seemingly arbitary time.

That's how EF used to feel to me - hence my 'war is won - oh - is it?' line.

No finally to the game with the player involved.

Cheers,

Steve


You are quite right, but as it is now, Im sorry to say is worse than that.
There are several reasons why I think so, first of all we now all know how its going to end, and that has actually spoiled the game for me, it has given med the feeling that all I have to do to win is to survive with as many pilots as possible until these final scripted missions.

And secondly (and probably the most important) the is absolutely no scope for replayablility in EFT, because all the major events are known already
  • Kill Trawlers
  • Kill Sub
  • Kill Aracnoplanes
  • Kill Hovercraft
  • Kill Spy drones
  • Escort SR-71
  • Escort Airforce One
  • You get the picture

Whereas EF2000 may end with war is won, there is still so much more to come back for, because you feel that you control the war.

With regard to how the ending could be done, I suggest that the dynamic campaign reduces the number of AI allied flown missions, as the end is approached, finally leaving the player deciding if an AI missions is needed, I am sure that you can come up with a good set of triggers where the AI should start reducing involvement.

TT

P.S. Please fix those Brimstones

#561284 - 06/22/01 10:41 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


With regard to my suggested ending, to spice things a little up, there could be a trigger where the Russians throw all they have left (what ever that may be according to how the campaign has played out) at ICEFOR, where the only scripted element is to force the player to deal with it. Either alone or if the player chooses with additional AI controlled flights.

This way you make sure the game end with this great battle, and the beauty of it is that it can go either way, but even if ICEFOR looses this battle, they dont loose the war. But will have to continue fighting the already weak Russians.

Just an idea.

TT

#561285 - 06/23/01 09:11 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Tracer, I agree with you. With a whole lot of frustrrrrrrrrrrration I finished it off with 2 pilots after the third had died in hospital 3 hours before last save. No way the meanwhile experienced wingman could be controlled to act clever.

Steve, I agree partially with you if I picture myself in your shoes for a moment. But it's totally unsatisfying to need 15+ takes on the medusa's to finish a war you fought hard in and generally in a victorious way !

There's no such luxury in a real war. There are no second (let alone 15+) chances !
I felt I had LOST big time (after my first attempt), and I can not imagine the casual simmers Rage/Did are aiming at like that loosing feeling either.

What does one want from a game in the end: to be the victorious hero, right ??
Typhoon does not make that happen.

#561286 - 06/23/01 01:35 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Tracer[formerly of CS] Offline
Senior Member
Tracer[formerly of CS]  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
sixpack *thank you* for the much needed back-up!
The problem with this game is that a lot of player's will *keep* their 6 pilot's alive(or at least 3)
I thought i would go down the "traditional" simmers route and take each mission as it comes..? If a pilot lives/dies then so be it! *NO* reloads.
Unfortunately by doing so i appear to have screwed up EFT/Steve's gameplan???

The game as it stand's -with one pilot- is utter boring and ridiculously lacking fun!
There is no desire to try and complete it with one pilot after umpteen failed attempts -as you have found out?

Also i have found that by restarting a new campaign that you can practically win it from day one!
Since the campaign is *scripted* and the same events repeat themselves... by taking extra ASRAAM's and GBU's for eg you can sink the Russian sub Yeltsin with *one* GBU.. the EBC new's said that i sank the yeltsin with *Penguin* missiles!..yeah right!! using GBU's you can sink the container ship's also(they carry tanks).
When the cruise missiles are launched i found myself -along with my wingman- downing at least 6-8 each! by taking more ASRAAM's

Also by flying approx 2 miles from the rear of the landing craft and at the same speed and loading yourself with about 18 Brimstone's -2 hit's per craft are needed- you can again stop them from landing(of course i attack *ALL* sea vessels *not* what is told in my mission brief(ie sink 3...

The result is that nothing has landed....whereby my first attempt i was swamped because i followed the misleading mission briefs of *only* destroying what i was supposed to!

It appears then that the campaign is flawed?
Many people have reported that they are on day 2etc and the Russians have done nothing??
Steve's reply is to restart the campaign -it may be a bug....I think that playing it a second time, you blow away the Russians and therefore the campaign is effectively finished! The game -because of it's scripted state- has no "fall-back-on-incase-of" mode...whereby if the player succeeds in defeating an attack then the AI would mount another surprise attack from a different part of the island.

Instead *ALL* attack's happen (certainly in my two attempts) from the same point of the Island -hardly dynamic!!

The only dynamic part i have saw about this game is the land forces....stop the initial scripted attack and the game engine is stuffed!

My personal opinion is that the island is *far too small* and god know's what will be gained by the sale of the add-on? Unless they increase the amount of forces landing/attacking.........................?

Tracer


------------------
"Flying is the second hardest thing known to man.........the first is landing!"

[This message has been edited by Tracer[formerly of CS] (edited 06-23-2001).]

#561287 - 06/24/01 03:56 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Told'ya So...

Paintball Tourneys aside, there is ONE thing that makes a wargame work.

_Controllable Ground Forces_ in a theatre with depth.

Not simply of operational maneuver area but with a constancy of logistical reinjection of (A/B/C/D followon) forces.

This alone makes Iceland an unfortunate choice because if you look at a map, there are about three major routes N-to-S and a ringroad 'round the island and once you control those at a couple key chokes (infantry and attached ATGM/Mortars), there is no point to running down an enemy into direct combat because he _cannot get in_ significant resupply without being killed.
Over and Over and OVER again, enroute across thousands of miles of ocean.

OTOH, if you put the conflict in Western Europe under a true WWIII, _1980_, baseline, then you have so many roads (though many will be clogged) and such large variations in terrain that, against a GSFG type threat backed by WARPAC slaughter divisions, you can no longer assume a victory against threats to whole a 300nm /pincer/ movement is nothing and for which there may be a 5:1 or better local numeric advantagement.

Look at Desert Storm and then imagine fighting for half the total distance with twice the total forces. 200km a day is not unreasonable.

At this point you have two things going for you:

1. If you don't use smart probe-to-rear-area and collapsing killsac _ground unit_ tactics, you're gonna LOSE. It's a given, not a maybe and any -support- mission you fly for them is simply to open up holes or hold flanking security for their movements into advantaged contact. THAT is 'real job satisfaction' because you can see the ebb and flow of the Red Tide and pick weak spots to thrust into with your (air to) ground attack reducing the direct attrition or even /delaying it/ altogether, as a function of the depth of salient generated and ground retaken.

2. You /know/ the Futuristic Smart Weapons that are apt to be available if 'Top Secret' because they are a matter of historical record, not Babylon 5 postulancy. My favourites are the NAW A-10 and the Assault Breaker ordnance plan. Systems which include LAD, Pave Mover, Paveway IV, WASP and so on.


The keys are:
A- To make each national force 'different' so that they fight in a style as depicted by Clancy himself. Brits being bulldog, lockstep, tenacious in holding a constant center-to-flank 'line'. The Germans being fond of pulling the threat in before dogpiling it and giving chase back beyond the leapoff point in aggressive counterattack. And the USAR (as depicted in OMG) being into 'Air Land Battle' where their forces are clustered into attack stars with imbedded gas/SPH/infantry/tanks in Task Forces capable of independent operations with 'linked but remote' fires.

B- To be able to remote set each unit level (up to and including entire fronts) combat posture between attack, defend and hold line integrity with modifiers for depth and until-attrition-X contact so that it will 'fight on it's own'.

C- The ability to designate, again by icon= unit strength modifier, any /target/ or force for probing, assault or 'rolling hot' pass through/pursuit attacks. Click on a company icon and then click on a retreating /WARPAC division/ and that Company will pursue until destruction or capture. No matter where it goes or how long it takes, attrition/morale modifiers permitting.

D- Arrows For Dummies. IMO, there should be a definite set of win/lose parameters. Capture Bonn, get to the Franco-German border. Get to the Channel. Kill 70% of all NATO force. With these in mind, one should KNOW how 'desparate' the situation is getting as well as where the enemy is going to have to finally go.

Further, the enemy should have to obey certain logistical 'laws' which require them to have control of certain road junctions for resupply and rate of advance.

/Within this predictability zone/ however; the threat should be free to using pin-to-maneuver and pin-to-kill tactics with WIDE pincer movements and layered-deep breakouts. So that you are constantly being hit by waves of frontal defensive reduction while totally unrelated forces moves around your sides.

Comprehending all this to a non military trained person would be well nigh impossible.

UNLESS, you have the 'flaming red arrows of doom'. These are indicators of past unit movements through a 10-72hr 'G2 prediction' curve into the future and show, within a given statistical/strategic maneuver error margin, where the enemy is LIKELY to go next.

The fronts may advance like a solid red tide but the /arrows/ show you what you have left to defend and knowing that "To get to the capital he has to control autobahns X/Y/Z and I _must_ hold Startgarten to prevent this", you can devise a defense that can eventually become a turning point.

With all the above in mind, you can:

1. Set how much of the ground war you want to personally fight from the most basic of frontal (Army/Group level) 'aggressiveness' factoring to the most detailed of force on force movements.

2. SEE the developing battle and act to stop threats by (say) allowing pass through on main force and reattacking logi columns. No Gas, No Guns, No Gusto...

3. Fight to SUPPORT ground maneuver, rather than in a void of intent. It means So Very Much to the feeling of immersion to see that tank column moving up a road or valley KNOW that if you can keep that road free of threat traffic then the column will reach it's goal and cut off the enemy at the knees.

Because next mission there will be a little pocket of Blue where there used to be Red. And where Blue is AB2000 sitting atop a road junction 60km behind the lines, Red Arrow 1 may well be Frozen In It's Tracks. For a few more hours (now try getting Blue back out...;-).

NONE of which is possible on an island where you can't swing a dead cat without getting it's fur wet with 1,000nm-in-any-direction seawater.

I do hope that if we continue our EuroWar fettish, we will move back in time to a point where the separate airframe/mission roles had meaning and the threat was 'real', not Medusa'd...

I realize this probably doesn't apply to anything with 'EF-2000' or 'Typhoon' in the title.


KP

#561288 - 06/24/01 08:25 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Quote:
Originally posted by Kurt Plummer:
Told'ya So... Paintball Tourneys aside, there is ONE thing that makes a wargame work.
_Controllable Ground Forces_ in a theatre with depth.
KP


Kurt,

This is one of those rare occasions when I agree with you. In particular I agree with the above quote snip.

The rest of your post was lost on me, I did the usual read it, then went uhh? What's he talking about?



------------------
\:\)

Hengist.

Hengist's MiG Alley Site.
http://www.hengist.co.uk/MiGAlley

#561289 - 06/24/01 12:34 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Uroboros Offline
Member
Uroboros  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Brooklyn, NY
Quote:
Originally posted by Tracer[formerly of CS]:

The only dynamic part i have saw about this game is the land forces....stop the initial scripted attack and the game engine is stuffed!

My personal opinion is that the island is *far too small* and god know's what will be gained by the sale of the add-on? Unless they increase the amount of forces landing/attacking.........................?

Tracer



That's exactly what hopefully will happen when the campaign is opened up. Hopefully we'll be able to modify the intensity of the attack, where it happens from, and perhaps whether it's a single attack or a mulitple attack (from differing parts of the island for example)

I do beleive that the campaign is dynamic, but unfortunately it's bookended by prescripted events right now. (the former we already knew about) Not that that's a entirely BAD thing, but it does screw up replayabilty at this point...and increase the frustration factor in some people.

Hopefully opening up the campign will give us a at least 3 things.

1. Variable and user defineable srat and end points

2. The abilty to modify the strength of both sides.

3. More player interaction and LESS waiting between missions

Those three things will make it a much better game and allow the player to raise or lower the intensity to his/her liking.

Having said that though, I've enjoyed a whole bunch of exciting missions playing the game just as it is right now (in between waiting of course ). When Typhoon works, when you're actually on a mission, it works great and is a lot of fun. I've had mission of great intensity that made the adrenaline rush. Got to get it so that happens most of the time.

#561290 - 06/24/01 02:32 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Tracer[formerly of CS] Offline
Senior Member
Tracer[formerly of CS]  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Quote:
Originally posted by Uroboros:
That's exactly what hopefully will happen when the campaign is opened up. Hopefully we'll be able to modify the intensity of the attack, where it happens from, and perhaps whether it's a single attack or a mulitple attack (from differing parts of the island for example)


There is only one problem with this idea, which Steve pointed out when we encountered the "2-3 Brim's per ground vehicle" scenario.
When asked why they required 2-3 for a kill, Steve said they done that because if they increased the number of ground vehicles invading the island.Then the frame rate would suffer!
So by making them harder to kill it was compensating for the reduced quantity.(therefore making the game playable on lesser machine's)

Note: I said expand on the vehicle's/aircraft in the add-on, in my quote above as i was clutching at straws?

Because the island is so small, the game would seriously slow down -what with more aircraft in the air and lot's of sea vessel's landing around the island coupled with tank's etc driving around.
You just need to take off and your about 8miles from an airbase which you can see visualy!

EFT's major problem is it's just far too small... I can't realy see an add-on making this any better *unless* they increased the size of the theatre?
EF2000 and TAW had theatres in the region of 4million square Kilometres in size.
Typhoon is something like 400miles.
Therefor it's a lot harder for a game engine to "drop" it's drawing distance since everything is so close together.......that and it's a negative landscape what with it's mountainous region's(which take up a large chunk of land) limit's any seriously large ground engagement's.

Tracer

------------------
"Flying is the second hardest thing known to man.........the first is landing!"

[This message has been edited by Tracer[formerly of CS] (edited 06-24-2001).]

#561291 - 06/24/01 07:54 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Uroboros Offline
Member
Uroboros  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Brooklyn, NY
Quote:
Originally posted by Tracer[formerly of CS]:
There is only one problem with this idea, which Steve pointed out when we encountered the "2-3 Brim's per ground vehicle" scenario.
When asked why they required 2-3 for a kill, Steve said they done that because if they increased the number of ground vehicles invading the island.Then the frame rate would suffer!
So by making them harder to kill it was compensating for the reduced quantity.(therefore making the game playable on lesser machine's)



Yes..but what kind of machine lesser machine are we talking about here? How much of a slow down are we talking about on the higher end machine most of us probably own? Considering how smooth Typhoon runs on lesser machine; might the slow down actually not be that drastic for most of us? Hell I bet it would probably run faster then some other sims we've put up with in the past.

Besides if the ability to intensify the campaign is a user definable feature then those with higher end machines could take advantage of it.

And speaking if the Brimstone feature; I don't mind if it's going to take 2 hits with one to take out a tank; just give it that range that the weapon is suppose to have

Quote:


Because the island is so small, the game would seriously slow down -what with more aircraft in the air and lot's of sea vessel's landing around the island coupled with tank's etc driving around.
You just need to take off and your about 8miles from an airbase which you can see visualy!

EFT's major problem is it's just far too small... I can't realy see an add-on making this any better *unless* they increased the size of the theatre?
EF2000 and TAW had theatres in the region of 4million square Kilometres in size.
Typhoon is something like 400miles.
Therefor it's a lot harder for a game engine to "drop" it's drawing distance since everything is so close together.......that and it's a negative landscape what with it's mountainous region's(which take up a large chunk of land) limit's any seriously large ground engagement's.

Tracer



We'll have to see exactly what Steve's take on this is. If what you say is true and would really slow the down; then we may have to forgo that (but the option still should there). I'll be happy if we get #1 and #3 of my original requests

[This message has been edited by Uroboros (edited 06-24-2001).]

#561292 - 06/24/01 11:50 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Lol Uroboros,

Quote:
Hell I bet it would probably run faster then some other sims we've put up with in the past.


Any sim will run faster than Janes F-18, no matter how fast the Janes machine is


------------------
\:\)

Hengist.

Hengist's MiG Alley Site.
http://www.hengist.co.uk/MiGAlley

#561293 - 06/25/01 04:19 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Uroboros Offline
Member
Uroboros  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Brooklyn, NY
Quote:
Originally posted by *Hengist*:
Lol Uroboros,

Any sim will run faster than Janes F-18, no matter how fast the Janes machine is




You read my mind.

#561294 - 06/25/01 06:09 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Hengist,

For most ground warfare operations, whether offensive or defensive, THE thing which a commander must concern himself with is 'contiguity vs. contact' as a function of knowing where his enemy is and reducing or bypassing him as a function of ultimate-goal reach.

While staying in-touch safe and supporting both within his own team and with any other 'joint' operators in the vicinity.

Where you've got basically a static (starting) engagment condition with premassed or at least equipment /prepositioned/ forces as in Europe, that means fighting 'nose to nose and shoulder to shoulder'.

Swinging away with that slaughterhouse sledgehammer against a crazed Kodiak in a 200km wide phonebooth along the IGB.

Nose to nose with your opponent means that you're always taking 'casual attrition' from his forward observer driven artillery, sniper-ATGM and CAS even as you have NO 'privacy' in which to blatantly marshal-mass forces in prep for a more fluid maneuver status (the mythical 'break out' condition so beloved of tank commanders) switch to offense.

Shoulder to Shoulder with your friends is the notion of the Swiss Pike Square 'made large'.

When properly executed, large infantry grouped maneuver and attack first defeated the knighted horse (=armor) by giving him no breaks in the spearpoints by which he could use the power and mass-in-motion of his charger to pass thru the layered 'front lines'. His mount would literally Not Do It.

These squares were also a first in being a 'combined arms' team with supporting soldiers having billhooks, two handed swords and other dehorse capable weapons to cut down the knight from his literal blind-sides while the interlock of pikes and long spear behind them 'impaled the velocity vector' of approach.

The same holds true today except that the landscape of battle is so large (and the rates of travel so fast) that you cannot hold with single squares but must link them.

An enemy armored force will therefore seek the shoulders /between/ 'squares' and attempt to flank-thru-and-out with his own 'supporting arms' (artie and CAS and airmobile).

The risk is of course that BOTH 'squares' will turn in place and give you a new front, on two sides, crushing you from /your/ flanks as you attempt to bypass.

But the Russians had so many troops and so many 'assault' (slaughter) divisions that they could afford, literally, to hold both enemy units by their polar=East cardinal point front AND breakout inbetween.

Leaving NATO at risk of being swamped or rolled up altogether, no matter 'which way they turned'.

The only thing you can do at that point is pull back, as a team, in pace with the enemies advance and give him no holes or gaps while you 'eventually' (you hope) outwait the maxheight of the Red Tide.

So... Imagine that your base mode of AI ground operations is 'Contiguous Contact'
Where all units are in lockstep (one of the only two good things which military doctrine instills over instinct) and the front is gradually flowing west.

And you're STILL losing because you haven't the space to wait for the ebb before 'automatic' victory is declared in favor of the Russian AI. By cities/forces taken or by specific landmark occupation.

What is a person to do (he asks in a panic stricken voice...;-)??

Click on ONE unit in that NATO frontal mass, say a German Panzer division and put that unit into _Fluid Contact_ fighting mode.

Now it's going to break contact and attempt to get between 10 and 30km worth of depth of spacing between it and any threat force.

It will make heavy use of it's organic artie, cav and aviation teams to find and fix the enemy and slow him down while /small/ units of Leopard will attempt to act as the 'killer' of the HK team and sideswipe any poor Russians that get out ahead of the general advance and are too much for the cav.

The remaining (majority) of other units will then attempt to get back to resupply points and then remass at a new mobile-force 'line' that has more to do with massed fires and mobility than actual terrain index occupational defense.

Important point being: they are _Away From Contiguous Contact_.

Of course they are going to be /screaming/ for CAS to help them 'get away clean' without their scout/cav units just getting completely annihlated.

And that is where you start assigning A-10 sorties. Not 'missions' but _sorties_. "You get so many today, what's your GFAC frequency when we get there?".

And the mission generator repeats-to-limit.

Now imagine the WARPAC AI says, as all ugly, sex starved, tankers are wont to do in sight of any hole larger than a pencil: "HO HO! A gap! LET'S 'BREAKOUT'!". And begin pouring dedicated Operational Maneuver Group units through on an as-fast-as-logi-allows reaction basis.

Wait for it. Wait for it.... NOW!

You switch CAS support to the neighboring Brit division frontal area and at the same time, hit it's unit designator and 'Assault' and the unit designator of the _logistics elements_ following on to the forces pouring into the gap on it's shoulder that you want to take down.

And without a break, those Brit units do an in-place turn left (or right, whatever) and plow into vulnerable logi-flanks of the onrushing OMG with tank teams and artie and minimal prep because your A-10's (and AH-1/64) are holding their front=now-flanks and they are thus free to pull a Patton.

/At the same time/ you set the Germans into motion and from advantaged killing grounds they butcher the 'antenna tank' lead elements and give start to a Russki Rout all the way back to the start point of line penetration 'and then some'.

Because that's what Krauts do best.

Whabam! One Dead Red OMG and not simply a /secured/ line but one which may have a salient bulge _going the other direction_.

Which is the same as creating and collapsing a killsac 'bulge' in our own lines without the risk or wait to pull back forces.

This is further worrisome to 'The Russians' (AI) because they remember the grand German pincer moves from the GPW even as they've basically blown their entire wad in that sector.

So they shift forces along still-bridged transport arteries to cover the exposed gap and that gives you yet MORE advantagement because road-march forces are easier to spot and kill in numbers and because road march forces going TO someplace are, by definition, no longer -available- someplace else.

Bothering your people.

And 'getting' ALL of the above requires _no_ great Alexandrian Martial Aptitude.

Just a mouse with say four field clickable options:

1. Contiguous Contact
By the whites of their eyes (2-5km) and always 'shoulder to shoulder' (pushed back or moved ahead) with neighboring -contiguous- behaviour set units.

2. Fluid Contact
H'yeeeer Kitty Kitty...

3. Assault
'Chaaaarge!' To destruction or capture of enemy units on a logistics/transport radius line visible on-map.

4. Disengage (20-60km spacing to resupply and nearest-road for your own "Uh Oh...." gap- closer relocation moments)

Plus a basic tutorial on how much big-dawg-in-fight vs. big-fight-in-dawg technology differential there is between WARPAC/NATO forces and specifically /unit types/.

As a function of combat assignment.

You might also include a specific 'bypass this one' ability to click on -enemy- targets.

So as to avoid engagements with mainforce elements _wherever found_ while waiting for 2nd echelon and resupply forces.

A single troop/platoon of tanks can take on a regimental formation of enemy SPH in road march 'pursuit' of their lead van for instance, but might be rather overmatched against the 70 Guards Tank Division T-72 that had rolled by 30 minutes earlier.

SO SIMPLE.

To make whole forces pin-and-wheel. Based on just hitting 'strategic screen' (shaded areas of responsibility) unit behavioral modifiers.

And yet so _player_ interactive, because your AIRPOWER is the key to making it for-real.

Or a total flop.

Where you put it, how many hot-pit sorties you do it well with and how /long/ you can hold the 'surge' of being everywhere-at-once while staying alive.

Meanwhile, back at the marketing ranch, 10 years after F3, we still cannot see that a 'flight sim' is about landings and takeoffs whether flying an A-10 or a 747 while a /combat sim/ (whatever the platform) is ultimately _a wargame_ where the control and support of OTHER (ground) forces towards a specific endgame goal is an absolute requirement to 'campaign completion' satisfaction.

Not blowing up some Medusoid Meth-mare.

Is it any wonder that the 'sim market is saturated' when we have a choice between what plainly belongs in the scifi-with-jets category and an endless rehash of Microsoft FSim-2000, 'with guns'?

Baaah, we need NEW BLOOD, from people that aren't afraid to think alinearly across force roles or restricted by security clearances from doing so.

It's time for 'sims' to become more involving than simply stick and rudder calisthenics repetition or George Lucasian brain gargle.


KP

#561295 - 06/25/01 06:45 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Uroboros Offline
Member
Uroboros  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2001
Posts: 604
Brooklyn, NY
Ouch..my brain hurts.

#561296 - 06/25/01 10:29 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Actually, I may have 'gotten ahead of myself' a bit.

The OMG is usually considered to be a composite force, predesignated from reserved units for pass thru and then rear area 'hit squad' obliteration of OUR vulnerable CS/CSS groups.

At some point that will happen, if the Soviets can open a sufficiently wide breach in enough locations.

'Getting there' is about getting the breach(es) widened out and sufficiently controlled in depth (airmobile artery junction control and artie AA approaches reserved) to exploit.

So 'followon forces' (including bridging/ engineers) are perhaps a better designate than pure logistics attack as you don't want them to expand out past the shoulders while you are dealing with the depthed profile attack by the first echelon.


KP

#561297 - 06/25/01 01:43 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


You know deep down I love Kurt's posts.

I'm sure he has a smile on his face when he writes them, just as I have a smile on my face as I read them

------------------
\:\)

Hengist.

Hengist's MiG Alley Site.
http://www.hengist.co.uk/MiGAlley

#561298 - 06/26/01 02:10 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Kurt: any comments on my posting of 6/11/2001 on the "LO:MAC pics are in" thread on the LOMAC board here on SimHQ?


[This message has been edited by Erich Schneider (edited 06-25-2001).]

#561299 - 06/26/01 07:39 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Being Dutch I have no problem reading/understanding thick English sim manuals, but what the F*** is Kurt saying ?? Is it my English or is it Kurt ?

Nonetheless, I appreciate the obvious indepth analysis. Here's six to ya, Kurt

Sixpack

#561300 - 06/27/01 02:42 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Long Live Kurt Plummer!!!!!

#561301 - 07/06/01 08:46 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Hi,

I am new here, so IF I do something wrong..don`t be too harsh..;o)

But I have been playing flightsims for awhile. Like F-22 Raptor and the others from Novalogic. Probebly know them..;o)

Then I found Typhoon, and I must say I have been playing it since.
It is very good, like you didn`t know that, but smetimes the things are weird in this game.
specialy the end. Like I have been reading in this topic..
I don`t like it a bit, because you fought hard to keep you pilots alive...and are winning the war.

Okay, I have to admit..I used reload a lot..;o)
But the end sticks..
After shooting down the Medusa planes...Thanks guys for the pointers on this.
They think of something new. Nuclear plane with helpers...
Man, give up..!!

How I am going to shoot this plane "Motherland" for goodness sake down. I fire rockets om it, the famous CRV77.
Pieces are flying off... But down..?? No, it won`t go down..
I think I am flying to close, because the pieces fly off and damadge my plane.

Can you tell me what the right speed is to get behind the plane?
And what can you do best, attack from the front..or the back ??

Because I want to end this game...or is there no end to it? ))

The rest of the gme is very well made, okay there are some weird things. But you know those.

I hope you can help me, because I really want to play this game to the finish..
Although I now only have 3 pilots left...the 4th one died in
hospital... I hate when they do that..;o)

Thanks for any help provided..

Greetings,
Peter




------------------

#561302 - 07/07/01 06:42 AM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Peter,

Korte reactie in NL: Iedereen heeft hetzelfde probleem bij Typhoons einde. Check out de oudere topics. Het barst er echt van in het forum. Het duurt me nu wat lang om het te typen, okay ? Succes !

#561303 - 07/07/01 01:03 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Tracer[formerly of CS] Offline
Senior Member
Tracer[formerly of CS]  Offline
Senior Member

Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 3,364
Peter, i have/had the same problem -as you read in my post above. One guy managed it with one pilot and 120 CRV-7 rocket's.
Try it with that many and see how you get on?
Attempt from about 2miles rear of it -it's "guns" will outrange your's so don't use them untill you have used all your 120rocket's at it. It's extremely hard 'cause if you close under 2miles you will be shot down quickly.

I tried once with the 120 rockets and gave up.(i had attempted a ludicrous 15 times or so previous) My desire is no longer there, after so many repeated attempts to try and destroy this "Force-field protected" Motherland i no longer play Typhoon. My fun factor was exhausted -a little like your's is going?
I didn't exactly envisage such a *short term* relationship with this game....

I have spent treble the time playing/building missions on Operation Flashpoint....strange how quickly new game's (Typhoon) become history eh?

Good luck

Tracer

------------------
"Flying is the second hardest thing known to man.........the first is landing!"

#561304 - 07/08/01 01:17 PM Re: Steve Hunt...it's going from bad to worse! *SPOILER*  

**DONOTDELETE**
Unregistered
Anonymous
Unregistered


Hi Tracer,

Well, I have treid and treid using 120 CRV7`s as well, like the rest of the 3 pilots I had left.

And every attemd ends the same. The Typhoon gets scredded to pieces.
I guess the Rage company doesn`t want to make flightsims any more.. I am not going to buy sims from them any more.
And I am not going to play Typhoon as much as I did. Because there is no fun in that you know how it will end eventualy.
Darn shame though from the money invested into it.

Another point I found a great mis is that there are no different weather types, or night missions.
Okay, you could say n Iceland the sun keeps on shinning, but what about snow?

In the other flightsims from Novalogic,okay old but good. You have all kinds of weather types. And I missed that here.

And then you have at least the change of winning the game. In Novalogic sims at last and of course others.

Personally I don`t think it was a very smart move to end the game like it is ending.
When you know ones the ending, there is no fun in starting all over with a new team. Because you know now how it will end, dispite the campaign building. You end up with all your pilots death. No matter how hard you fight, or how many buildings yo bomb.

So I agree with you, the fun of playing is gone, and that is ashame from such a good and well made flightsim. I think you agree on that.

And I think that Rage has cut itselfs in their fingers by making the end like it is.
No matter what you do, it ends sh**...

Bye,
Peter

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
Pride Of Jenni race win
by NoFlyBoy. 04/15/24 12:22 AM
It's Friday: grown up humor for the weekend.
by NoFlyBoy. 04/12/24 01:41 PM
OJ Simpson Dead at 76
by bones. 04/11/24 03:02 PM
They wokefied tomb raider !!
by Blade_RJ. 04/10/24 03:09 PM
Good F-35 Podcast
by RossUK. 04/08/24 09:02 AM
Gleda Estes
by Tarnsman. 04/06/24 06:22 PM
Food Safety and Bad Roommates
by KRT_Bong. 04/04/24 02:16 AM
Incredible historical ironies
by PanzerMeyer. 04/03/24 01:56 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0