|
I'm working on a DC Blitzkrieg graphics mod for the non-nato counters, and I have a question for you guys: See how the Polish unit's card has reversed? It bumps it off the counter borders for some reason. It does the same thing for German units when they are going west into France. Is there any way to tell the game not to reverse the facing of the unit art? e: This is what the Polish infantry png looks like for example  e: Dev answered an email, still need to figure out this editor Viktor Reijkersz posted:You have to load your scenario of choice and go into the editor. Dirt Worshipper fucked around with this message at 08:59 on Mar 13, 2015 |
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 08:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 09:49 |
|
|
Zaodai posted:I doubt that is true by percentages rather than flat number of cases. But to each their own. Maybe I'm just not hardcore enough to understand the grog game market. I am pretty sure it is true. Look if this was some recent start up you might have a point but they have been in business for over 10 years now, I've personally bought at least 10 titles off of them, and their clientele are old white men who are the single whiniest, most immature groups of people especially when it comes to their money that have ever existed on the earth. I have never heard of a single instance of someone's info been stolen. Hearsay I know so take it for what it is worth. Of course I am old enough that I have both freely given out my credit card info over a telephone and have had it stolen before (separate instances and the latter was completely my fault I fell for a paypal scam) so unless you actually find some evidence to the contrary I'm going to keep claiming they are safe to buy from.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 14:06
|
|
|
dtkozl posted:I am pretty sure it is true. Look if this was some recent start up you might have a point but they have been in business for over 10 years now, I've personally bought at least 10 titles off of them, and their clientele are old white men who are the single whiniest, most immature groups of people especially when it comes to their money that have ever existed on the earth. I have never heard of a single instance of someone's info been stolen. Hearsay I know so take it for what it is worth. I'm not trying to convince anyone not to buy from them. I'm sure we're all adults here, capable of making our own decisions. Having worked in information security for a (small) bank in the past has made me overly paranoid, and I was already fairly paranoid to start with. The fact that you don't know anyone who's ended up with fraudulent transactions yet doesn't do much to change my mind, due to both how unreceptive the grog community is of criticism (you're already calling me ridiculous for even doubting them!) and how relatively small the market is. Admittedly, most of my problem is just that I do not have confidence in them. I do the same thing with other non-gaming third party sellers. If they accept paypal, I'll consider buying from them. If they don't, they're probably out of luck. Is Paypal infallible? No, of course not. But I have every confidence that between Paypal and my bank, if something were to happen, I'd get all my money back, and that a decent part of their multi-billion dollar enterprise is being put into security. I personally choose not to give them my money. I have no problems with anybody who does elect to give them their own money. Clearly they're not a scam company, so they're not just going to run off with your poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Finally Commander the Great War is updated on Steam to 1.6.2! Feast your eyes on a changelog featuring revolutionary things like UNDO and battleships renamed to dreadnoughts: http://steamcommunity.com/games/312350/announcements/detail/234524438322450520
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:I'm not trying to convince anyone not to buy from them. I'm sure we're all adults here, capable of making our own decisions. Having worked in information security for a (small) bank in the past has made me overly paranoid, and I was already fairly paranoid to start with. The fact that you don't know anyone who's ended up with fraudulent transactions yet doesn't do much to change my mind, due to both how unreceptive the grog community is of criticism (you're already calling me ridiculous for even doubting them!) and how relatively small the market is. Admittedly, most of my problem is just that I do not have confidence in them. I do the same thing with other non-gaming third party sellers. If they accept paypal, I'll consider buying from them. If they don't, they're probably out of luck. Is Paypal infallible? No, of course not. But I have every confidence that between Paypal and my bank, if something were to happen, I'd get all my money back, and that a decent part of their multi-billion dollar enterprise is being put into security. Fair enough.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 19:47
|
|
|
You know what's great about Decisive Campaigns multiplayer? When people forget that ZOC gets recalculated at the start of each side's phase during the turn.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
Riso posted:Finally Commander the Great War is updated on Steam to 1.6.2! Man, they're super-excited about the changed names of both dreadnoughts and light cruisers. Also, - Garrison & Infantry benefit from Entrenchment upgrade. Wait, did they not before? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
Alchenar posted:You know what's great about Decisive Campaigns multiplayer? ZoC makes my eyes glaze over in every game. I managed to complete all of UoC without really getting ZoC beyond 'it takes all of your moves up if you move into an enemy hex at the start of your turn'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2015 23:52
|
|
|
Hmmm I wonder if that comment has something to do with the parachute infantry I dropped behind french lines in the DC multiplayer game.. I was sure it was a good idea. (maybe)
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 01:53
|
|
|
Random totally non-related DC tip: Units that are overly stacked together in one place take significantly more damage from all sources.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 04:32
|
|
|
Zaodai posted:I'm not trying to convince anyone not to buy from them. I'm sure we're all adults here, capable of making our own decisions. Having worked in information security for a (small) bank in the past has made me overly paranoid, and I was already fairly paranoid to start with. The fact that you don't know anyone who's ended up with fraudulent transactions yet doesn't do much to change my mind, due to both how unreceptive the grog community is of criticism (you're already calling me ridiculous for even doubting them!) and how relatively small the market is. Admittedly, most of my problem is just that I do not have confidence in them. I do the same thing with other non-gaming third party sellers. If they accept paypal, I'll consider buying from them. If they don't, they're probably out of luck. Is Paypal infallible? No, of course not. But I have every confidence that between Paypal and my bank, if something were to happen, I'd get all my money back, and that a decent part of their multi-billion dollar enterprise is being put into security. If you worked for a bank, you should know that you are pretty much covered if something happens. There might be an inconvenience and forms to fill out, but that's pretty much it. You can use your credit card online and stop fretting like a maniac. It's not a free for all where the burden is all on you and if someoen nabs it, your house is hosed. Come on man. Do you store your money in a mattress, too? Are you aware that many fraudulent purchases are reversed by your card issuer with a simple phone call of "it wasn't me doing this"?
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 11:17
|
|
|
Cool posts about cool games.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 11:31
|
|
|
Out of some type of sado-masochism I'm interested in having a 3-player grand campaign of AGEOD Revolution Under Siege. I still haven't figured how the engine works, really, but I figure it'd be a good way to learn! Except it sounds kind of convoluted...quote:Play By Email (PBEM)
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
They're all like that, as far as I can tell. Alea Jacta Est was, anyways.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 19:00
|
|
|
Vahakyla posted:If you worked for a bank, you should know that you are pretty much covered if something happens. There might be an inconvenience and forms to fill out, but that's pretty much it. I'm done arguing about this, it's pointless and a derail. Feel free to think whatever you want about me. I no longer care.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 19:04
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Out of some type of sado-masochism I'm interested in having a 3-player grand campaign of AGEOD Revolution Under Siege. I still haven't figured how the engine works, really, but I figure it'd be a good way to learn! Except it sounds kind of convoluted... I'm in I'd like to be the whites. Siberia I guess but I'll be southern if someone really wants the siberian forces. (also it is your turn) dtkozl fucked around with this message at 23:29 on Mar 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 23:26
|
|
|
I'd also be happy to play a side if you need a third person, Reds or Whites, no preference.
|
|
#
?
Mar 14, 2015 23:29
|
|
|
Anyone else on a WW1 kick might want to keep an eye on Battle of Empires. It's not terrible in my opinion and only £10. The visuals and atmosphere are pretty good, especially the terrain destruction, and it models a lot of small details. It's based on the Men of War engine so it's the same weird mix of old-school RTS and insane micromanagement. Like to transfer shells to a gun you have to walk an individual soldier over to the ammo crate, open his backpack, load it with shells, walk him over to the gun, open his backpack again, and transfer them over. And none of these orders can be queued so you have to babysit the whole thing. There's a lot of stuff to deal with but if you slow the game speed way down it feels pretty legitimately groggy. The biggest flaw at the moment is the grouping of your units - they're not fixed in groups, so you actually have to order individual guys around rather than just dealing with things at a squad level. It's still early access so here's hoping.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 17:05
|
|
|
fuf posted:
fuf posted:The biggest flaw at the moment is something that is not that
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
It's the same flaw really: forcing the player to deal with individual soldiers rather than at a higher level of abstraction. But it's also the fact that the game models all that low-level detail that makes it a borderline grog game imo. They just need to automate some of it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 17:32
|
|
|
fuf posted:It's the same flaw really: forcing the player to deal with individual soldiers rather than at a higher level of abstraction. But it's also the fact that the game models all that low-level detail that makes it a borderline grog game imo. They just need to automate some of it. If it uses the Men of War engine, then you should be able to select a squad and give it orders. Selecting a single unit removes them from their attached squad, but selecting the squad and detached unit groups them together again. Men of War's always been about micromanagement though, so it's really par for the course 
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 19:08
|
|
|
My 3rd playthrough of WITP:AE scenario 10 just hit one hell of a snag. The latest engine/scenario updates changed quite a bit, but I'm at the point where no matter what I do, I'm reasonably sure there's nothing I can do about this. Spoilering it, just because it's a nasty surprise but made the game real interesting. Second chunk is parts of the combat report, with the effect. Truk is a 60k capacity island, 7 port 5 AF base. 110k troops, 550 fighters, 700 bombers, 60 auxiliary recon'd. I thought this might have been some sort of fluke recon, but it wasn't. I took Kavieng and sent 200 liberators to try to suppress the base, and ran in to Franks. In 8/43 or so. 100 Liberators died, 15 runway damage, and 40 planes destroyed on the ground. So I decided the only way I could deal with this, since I can't even get to like say Guam (which is likely the same story in terms of planes) without being in range of Truk, was to take all the Marshall's and Gilberts, all the way up to Ponape. I then took my 15 BB's, and set out from Ponape, and planned to stop 6 hexes from Truk, and have the BB's (two TF's) make a full speed bombardment run and then hit them with 400+ liberators and 400+ bombers from my carriers. I figured that since it's 1/44, and I have like 800+ fighters available for CAP, plus AA, I could risk it. Did I mention this is on 'hard'? Not 'very hard"? Yeah, no. My cap got caught not airborne, in either phases. I lost basically 50+% of my carriers.. having lost none before. Annoying paste of the combat report follows: Weather in hex: Moderate rain Raid detected at 119 NM, estimated altitude 7,000 feet. Estimated time to target is 41 minutes Japanese aircraft A6M5c Zero x 95 G4M2 Betty x 18 J2M5 Jack x 31 N1K2-J George x 5 Ki-84a Frank x 30 Allied aircraft FM-1 Wildcat x 107 F6F-3 Hellcat x 540 Japanese aircraft losses A6M5c Zero: 1 destroyed G4M2 Betty: 5 destroyed Allied aircraft losses F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed Raid detected at 120 NM, estimated altitude 12,000 feet. Estimated time to target is 33 minutes Japanese aircraft A6M5c Zero x 17 B7A2 Grace x 31 D4Y2 Judy x 277 J2M5 Jack x 18 N1K2-J George x 6 Ki-84a Frank x 52 Allied aircraft FM-1 Wildcat x 103 F6F-3 Hellcat x 522 Japanese aircraft losses A6M5c Zero: 1 destroyed B7A2 Grace: 5 destroyed, 12 damaged B7A2 Grace: 2 destroyed by flak D4Y2 Judy: 13 destroyed, 8 damaged D4Y2 Judy: 1 destroyed by flak Ki-84a Frank: 2 destroyed Allied aircraft losses F6F-3 Hellcat: 5 destroyed Allied Ships CVL Independence CA Quincy, Bomb hits 4, on fire CVE St. Lo, Bomb hits 10, heavy fires, heavy damage CVE Sangamon, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage CVE Corregidor, Bomb hits 2, on fire CVE Chenango, Bomb hits 9, heavy fires, heavy damage CVE Manila Bay, Bomb hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage CA Northampton, Bomb hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage CL Helena, Bomb hits 1 CVE Suwannee, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage CVE Anzio, Bomb hits 8, heavy fires, heavy damage CVE Santee, Bomb hits 1, on fire CVE Natoma Bay, Bomb hits 9, heavy fires, heavy damage CV Hornet CVL Monterey CL St. Louis, Bomb hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage DD Lang CVE Liscome Bay, Bomb hits 8, heavy fires, heavy damage DD Maury DD O'Bannon, Bomb hits 1, on fire CA San Francisco, Bomb hits 1 DD Morris, Bomb hits 1 CV Wasp CV Bunker Hill CA Chicago, Bomb hits 2 DD Benham, Bomb hits 1, on fire CA Louisville, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage Japanese aircraft B5N1 Kate x 164 J2M5 Jack x 3 Allied aircraft FM-1 Wildcat x 89 F6F-3 Hellcat x 449 Japanese aircraft losses B5N1 Kate: 100 destroyed, 16 damaged B5N1 Kate: 9 destroyed by flak J2M5 Jack: 1 destroyed Allied aircraft losses F6F-3 Hellcat: 1 destroyed Allied Ships CV Bunker Hill CVL Belleau Wood CVL Monterey CVE Santee, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage CVE Corregidor, Torpedo hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage CA San Francisco DD Morris CVL Cowpens CVL Independence CVE Anzio, heavy fires, heavy damage CVE Sangamon, Torpedo hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage CL St. Louis, heavy fires, heavy damage CVL Cabot CV Wasp, Torpedo hits 1 CVE Liscome Bay, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk CA Chicago, Torpedo hits 1, on fire CL Helena, on fire CV Hornet, Torpedo hits 1 DD Craven (some ineffectual poo poo) Raid detected at 120 NM, estimated altitude 11,000 feet. Estimated time to target is 33 minutes Japanese aircraft A6M5c Zero x 61 B7A2 Grace x 13 D4Y2 Judy x 211 J2M5 Jack x 25 N1K2-J George x 4 Ki-84a Frank x 65 Allied aircraft F6F-3 Hellcat x 407 Japanese aircraft losses A6M5c Zero: 4 destroyed B7A2 Grace: 1 destroyed, 6 damaged B7A2 Grace: 2 destroyed by flak D4Y2 Judy: 31 destroyed, 47 damaged D4Y2 Judy: 5 destroyed by flak J2M5 Jack: 1 destroyed N1K2-J George: 1 destroyed Ki-84a Frank: 3 destroyed Allied aircraft losses F6F-3 Hellcat: 8 destroyed Allied Ships CVL Princeton, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1 CVL Belleau Wood, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage CVL Monterey CV Bunker Hill, Bomb hits 1, on fire CV Saratoga, Bomb hits 6, on fire, heavy damage CV Essex, Bomb hits 6, heavy fires, heavy damage CV Yorktown, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires CV Lexington, Bomb hits 3, Torpedo hits 1 CV Demolisher, Bomb hits 3, on fire, heavy damage CV Avenger, Bomb hits 3, heavy fires CV Enterprise, Bomb hits 8, heavy fires, heavy damage CV Hornet, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires CV Wasp, Bomb hits 7, heavy fires, heavy damage CVL Independence CLAA Reno DD Harrison, Bomb hits 1 CL Boise, Bomb hits 2, on fire CL Honolulu CVL Cowpens, Torpedo hits 1 CLAA Oakland, Bomb hits 3, on fire DD Claxton, Bomb hits 1, on fire DD Bush DD Thatcher, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage DD Fletcher
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 22:04
|
|
|
dtkozl posted:I'm in I'd like to be the whites. Siberia I guess but I'll be southern if someone really wants the siberian forces. Alikchi posted:I'd also be happy to play a side if you need a third person, Reds or Whites, no preference. I'd be happy with this. Please note I really am noob and bad with AGEOD so I'd like to have some input on which side in this campaign is the simplest (Siberia?). Though I can also play the Reds for a comedy LP where Czech forces take Moscow 
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:If it uses the Men of War engine, then you should be able to select a squad and give it orders. Selecting a single unit removes them from their attached squad, but selecting the squad and detached unit groups them together again. Yeah you can give group orders but a "squad" is just whichever group of guys you happen to drag a box around, like in an old RTS. They aren't organised into any kind of normal military structure, which makes things a lot harder.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 23:04
|
|
|
I'm a big fan of MoW so this looks right up my street. If it adds all the features in then £10 is a steal. Has anyone played it yet for a low down of how it plays?
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 23:12
|
|
|
fuf posted:Yeah you can give group orders but a "squad" is just whichever group of guys you happen to drag a box around, like in an old RTS. They aren't organised into any kind of normal military structure, which makes things a lot harder. When you call them in they come in a squad that makes sense. You can also shift+click to select specific units to group together. I believe Shift + # also creates control groups, rather than the standard ctrl + #, with a selection.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 23:19
|
|
|
Command Ops 2 comes out Monday from Lock'n'Load. The engine is free and comes with 2 tutorial maps. The older scenarios (you know, the ones you already bought for CO1 for $100) are $50. The UI improvement I would shell out for would be a better indicator of troop losses during battle. Hell, even little Paradox style numbers floating off units would be good, just to give you some idea of the flow of a battle.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 23:48
|
|
|
Jobbo_Fett posted:When you call them in they come in a squad that makes sense. You can also shift+click to select specific units to group together. I believe Shift + # also creates control groups, rather than the standard ctrl + #, with a selection. Yeah I know but again this is the old-school RTS way of doing things instead of just dealing with already-formed units with handy NATO symbols like in Combat Mission and most other grog games. Like if I'm placing an MG I'd much rather deal with a whole MG team with supporting riflemen etc. than having to give endless "hey rifleman #3452, come and stand six feet to the left of this MG" orders.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2015 23:58
|
|
|
V for Vegas posted:Command Ops 2 comes out Monday from Lock'n'Load. The engine is free and comes with 2 tutorial maps. The older scenarios (you know, the ones you already bought for CO1 for $100) are $50. As far as I know their plan going forward is that whenever they release a new major version of the engine you need to rebuy all the scenario packs. gently caress that, even the CO2 changes don't look significant enough that I'd pay all that money for scenarios that I already own. It is an ok deal for anyone who doesn't already own the older games though.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 00:21
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:I'd be happy with this. Please note I really am noob and bad with AGEOD so I'd like to have some input on which side in this campaign is the simplest (Siberia?). Though I can also play the Reds for a comedy LP where Czech forces take Moscow Hmm well I have not played a full game of RUS but I am confident with AGEOD. Alikchi was good at rome so he at least knows ageod. I dunno who should be what, but I'm happy to be the reds if you don't feel confident with them. I think the southern whites are probably the easiest to be since they have less area to cover, but siberia isn't too bad. You at least get a lot of room to run away.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 05:08
|
|
|
Has anyone tried/seen this game, Spirit of War, on Steam? It looks like a beer-and-pretzels take on WW1
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 05:12
|
|
|
Pervis posted:My 3rd playthrough of WITP:AE scenario 10 just hit one hell of a snag. The latest engine/scenario updates changed quite a bit, but I'm at the point where no matter what I do, I'm reasonably sure there's nothing I can do about this. "Leaky CAP" is probably hardcoded at this point. Are thise reports mashed together from separate reports or do you really have a bunch of CVEs up with CVLs and CVs? They are kinda garbage for frontline fighting and I'm pretty sure america gets some hefty organisation penalties for overstacking on carriers in general (even in early '44). If you can land-CAP Truk, then it might be better to just cut it off and let it sit eating supplies, that or night bombardments with cruisers and fast battleships...? Kinda tricky.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 07:08
|
|
|
I think his problem is that on hard major AI bases get auto supplied, so he can't just bypass Truk. Wait till '45 then nuke it If you haven't already I'd try high altitude night bombing, that should give even franks a hard time intercepting. I'm not sure if it's modelled but you might also wait for the dark of the moon, in theory only radar equipped night fighters should be able to do anything in pitch black. E: Also, your carriers are in way too big TFs. I forget the exact rules, they are in the manual, but you shouldn't overstack aircraft in a TF, or you get coordination penalties. I've never seen it happen myself, but presumably if you stack 10 carriers in a single TF, you get such extreme penalties your planes have a decent chance of not evening taking off. I would say you have way too many carriers and not nearly enough escorts too, where are all your CLAAs and fast BBs? Pharnakes fucked around with this message at 10:51 on Mar 16, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 10:39
|
|
|
Obfuscation posted:As far as I know their plan going forward is that whenever they release a new major version of the engine you need to rebuy all the scenario packs. gently caress that, even the CO2 changes don't look significant enough that I'd pay all that money for scenarios that I already own. It is an ok deal for anyone who doesn't already own the older games though. Downloaded the engine and played around with the Return to St Vith scenario. The new icons on the units are great so you don't have to keep cycling through your Fn keys to see the different states of your troops. But the new engine isn't that optimised at the moment and stutters a lot. A shame because the lightning response of the first CO was one of its strengths. Hopefully they tighten it up and release some of those Pacific war maps that have been floating around.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 11:48
|
|
|
Pharnakes posted:I think his problem is that on hard major AI bases get auto supplied, so he can't just bypass Truk. Wait till '45 then nuke it Yeah, from memory, you don't want more than 300 aircraft in a single TF in 1944. Double check the manual, but you are suffering massive penalties to getting aircraft airborne. Also don't put CVEs with fast carriers!
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 16:19
|
|
|
pthighs posted:Yeah, from memory, you don't want more than 300 aircraft in a single TF in 1944. Double check the manual, but you are suffering massive penalties to getting aircraft airborne. Airstrikes and CAP are pooled per hex, so those probably represent 2-3 TFs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 16:51
|
|
|
Oh yeah! I guess it comes down to how many TFs he has.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2015 18:58
|
|
|
It's June 1942, Port Moresby is being bombed regularly by Nells and Betties heavily escorted by Zeroes from Rabaul. The Saratoga is still 2 weeks away from arriving in Noumea, and the Enterprise another 2 more weeks after that. The Japanese have landed what looks like a division in Gili-Gili and have twice managed to sneak in 2 cruiser SAGs to shell Port Moresby. LBA operating off of Townsville can interdict any supply runs to Gili-Gili, but I don't think they can't reach nor spot the CAs while they sail around the tip of New Guinea. PM has about a week of supplies left, maybe, and while I have enough sealift to ship over more supplies to there, I cannot guard them with anything better than Airacobras on LRCAP. What should I do? I can shift some USN CAs from Noumea to Australia to augment escorts for a supply run to PM, but otherwise I really don't have any carriers and don't think I can wait. On the upshot I haven't seen the Shokaku/Zuikaku either yet (assume Midway happened)
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 07:45
|
|
|
Is it really so bad if Port Moresby falls? Locate B-17s in NE Australia in advance, then do to PM from Australia what the Japanese are doing from Rabaul. The Japanese might take PM, but they won't be able to use it. You can crater the runway and interdict any supply convoys by sea; PM's port is so small that even if a convoy gets in, you can bomb it in port while it's unloading. Mind you, this is all conjecture, not from experience.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 14:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 09:49 |
|
|
In my experience, the Japanese can always take Port Moresby in '42 if they really try to, but the allies can always take it back by early '43. It's not usually that big a problem to let it fall, you just need a big stockpile of supplies in Australia, and then when your level bombers get better and more numerous you can just level the place and use it for target practice / aircrew training.
|
|
#
?
Mar 19, 2015 14:46
|
|
