Remove ads

Command: Modern Air & Naval Operations: Let's Play and Expansions

Reader mode
Last edited:
logiccosmic said:
SSDD. Yes. I want poaw causes Fallout 3. Or maybe, how many fleets can poaw trash before losing his SSGN?

He can put it on the screen door.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I prefer the idea of Rogue Admiral.

Poaw has a single rogue carrier battlegroup. Arrayed against him is a joint US/NATO-Russian-Chinese fleet.

Let's watch his doomed last stand for world peace (by declaring war against the entire world).
 
MJ12 Commando said:
I prefer the idea of Rogue Admiral.

Poaw has a single rogue carrier battlegroup. Arrayed against him is a joint US/NATO-Russian-Chinese fleet.

Let's watch his doomed last stand for world peace (by declaring war against the entire world).
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Well you can't say he isn't trying for world peace.

Real Hard.
 
A shame the land forces thing is still so *placeholder*

German-French joint excercise in France, poaw commands the German forces.
 
So how impossible is it to edit the database/databases used by this program?

'Cause I for one would love to see Grand Admiral Poaw Custer fight Project Insight.
 
If you want to really play like poaw, do the following:

-Go the Doctrine/RoE menu.
-Set "Engage non-hostile targets" to "Yes", set "Engage opportunity targets" to "Yes", and set the ambiguity option to "Ignore ambiguity".
-Watch as the sight of anything causes your crew to launch every weapon they can at it.
 
ghost792 said:
No DB editor, I take it? That's too bad. That was the best feature of Harpoon 2 & 3.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Nope, no DB editor. A big part of the onus for creating CMANO was the Harpoon DB-wars. I don't really understand the details of it, but Apocal knows what happened and I think it's posted somewhere...

http://grogheads.com/forums/index.p...5mlm17repfrfm0&topic=4065.msg189828#msg189828 <------Here is where one dev talks about why they locked it. A couple posts down, you have a pretty weak counter argument in favor of an unlocked DB. "Buggy DBs are an opportunity."

Ridiculously Average Guy said:
More and more, I find myself doubting the realism of this game.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

I'm deliberately doing things to break it, to show how adding weapons/sensors works and the limitations of it. My actual scenario will include precisely 0 of this. But you're right in so much as a significant portion of the "realism" is up to the scenario designer, note the scenario I just played. It was almost believable right up until it turned into a Baen novel at the end.

Hassam said:
@poaw How hard is it to learn how to play this game for people who are not very familiar with modern military equipment?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Uhh, I wouldn't even know. I can do reasonably well (seriously, people are much much worse at this game than me) because I was vaguely familiar with the concepts and came into it with a significant amount of knowledge on the platforms and capabilities before I started and I know someone who is ridiculously familiar with the subject matter to answer my questions.

Ask Coiler instead.
 
Hassam said:
How hard is it to learn how to play this game for people who are not very familiar with modern military equipment?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Well, I had a small amount of familiarity with modern equipment.

In terms of basics, I found it pretty easy, actually. Watching a few videos, reading on the official boards, and playing the tutorials got me ready. Moving units around and having them attack is something I got quickly, and so I was able to get into the game well. So I can play simple scenarios with a few units after only a little time.

Now mastering more advanced play is considerably more difficult, but still doable. You'll need some trial and error, but that's what the scenario editor is for.
 
poaw said:
Nope, no DB editor. A big part of the onus for creating CMANO was the Harpoon DB-wars. I don't really understand the details of it, but Apocal knows what happened and I think it's posted somewhere...

http://grogheads.com/forums/index.p...5mlm17repfrfm0&topic=4065.msg189828#msg189828 <------Here is where one dev talks about why they locked it. A couple posts down, you have a pretty weak counter argument in favor of an unlocked DB. "Buggy DBs are an opportunity."
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's true that the complexity of altering the H2/H3 database can cause issues. The biggest problem is how quickly you accumulate duplicate weapons/sensors/loadouts/platforms/etc. that are functionally the same, but have different DB reference numbers. This can lead to some nasty cascade effects with ships not having the right munitions in the magazines, planes missing weapons, etc.

That said, it should be programmatically feasible to have a DB manager that would allow the end user to easily swap out the main DB for a custom one and then switch back later. They'd also need to have some way of making the main DB read only, while still allowing a copy of it to be edited.

The problem with not allowing end user DB editing is that there is no way for the user to fix mistakes in the DB (H2 was plagued by them) or to experiment with platforms that aren't in the official database. It's very interesting to see what impact proposed or fictional platforms have.
 
ghost792 said:
The problem with not allowing end user DB editing is that there is no way for the user to fix mistakes in the DB (H2 was plagued by them) or to experiment with platforms that aren't in the official database. It's very interesting to see what impact proposed or fictional platforms have.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The devs are on the ball as far as database issues are concerned. They are ridiculously responsive to, reasonable, requests. The only reason I haven't requested anything is that they have almost everything covered in almost every configuration that has or would be used. They are willing to speculate, within reason, as well so things like the J-20, Zumwalt, and Queen Elizabeth are covered.

They update the DB so often I don't even both trying to stay up to date. I just grab the patch every time they have a gold release. If I tried staying on top of it I have to update every few days along with worrying about whether enough people had the update to test my scenarios.
 
ghost792 said:
It's true that the complexity of altering the H2/H3 database can cause issues. The biggest problem is how quickly you accumulate duplicate weapons/sensors/loadouts/platforms/etc. that are functionally the same, but have different DB reference numbers. This can lead to some nasty cascade effects with ships not having the right munitions in the magazines, planes missing weapons, etc.

That said, it should be programmatically feasible to have a DB manager that would allow the end user to easily swap out the main DB for a custom one and then switch back later. They'd also need to have some way of making the main DB read only, while still allowing a copy of it to be edited.

The problem with not allowing end user DB editing is that there is no way for the user to fix mistakes in the DB (H2 was plagued by them) or to experiment with platforms that aren't in the official database. It's very interesting to see what impact proposed or fictional platforms have.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
All this sounds like they should take a page out of Civ5, make custom DBs a diff on the core DB and link saves/scenarios to DBs by GUID, version number and/or checksum.
 
Last edited:
I have to admit this game is hilariously fun. I think I need to learn how to use the editor however, I'd really like to wargame out some of my oolddddddddd Harpoon scenarios.
 
This is fantastic. Good work Admiral *salutes you as I'm being dragged away for supporting your madness*
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top