Kemco Games

[smaug_the_dragon]

I posted this on gamefaqs, but that board seems pretty dead.

Those three countries bearing down were murder. I knew it was over by turn 7 no matter what I did. i started over and changed plans; I sent your basic armor and infantry to hold off the ground forces of the other three armies, but I sent my strike force to the Russian capitol. This was two B1-bs with AGM missles, two A-10s with AGMs, and one helo with two basic infantry units.

My B1s take out the towed artillary on the capitol. My A-10s take out the SPh mobile artillary unit. Once this unit is removed, I have a clear path to the capitol. I land the helo, take the capitol. I haven't finished this game yet, but what I will do is take out Israel the same way. That is one army I don't want getting too big. Those Merkavas are a handfull.

[DanielRuoss]

To answer the poll question.... YES! And I loved every second of it! It's a strategy game and I came up with a strategy that worked! Boo-Hoo for the computer. I know it doesn't feel for me when it pulls one over my eyes. I haven't used transport helos w/ infantry (A good idea!). I just used assault helos. Lots of them! I usually build a strong, tight defense close the capital while building up a force of at least 6 assault helos. It works best with the Americans because of the range of their air-to-surface missiles. Don't even bother with the French! I take a round-about route to their capital, blast away the defender and land a chopper. I use the other assualt helos to weaken or destroy the biggest threat to the now helpless helo on the capital. Sometimes it's taken 2 turns but the strategy has worked for me everytime so far. You just have to have the numbers to overwhelm the capital defenders. As long as one of those assault helos survives the turn on the ground the game is yours.

[SemperFi2382]

I agree that it is a strategy (a very valid one in fact), however I was more pointing out the fact that it reeks too much of an RTS style win by rushing. In a Free For All and I'm up against 3 other AIs, I try to employ this tactic to lessen the load on my front and to gain a quick and dirty head start resource wise.

1 on 1 though (and rare cases on certain maps 1 v 2), I find that this strategy just isn't a fair (and in some cases a wise) tactic.

My other point is that the AI in some respects "should" allocate more defenses for it's Capitol seeing how the Capitols are the main objective.
_________________

"The Object is not to die for your country, but to make the other poor bastard die for his." - General Patton

[DanielRuoss]

Another observation..... If you use assault helos or transport helos without recon you can end up landing on top of newly constructed computer units which will wipe you out quickly. Usually these units end up moving toward the front line on the next turn but the computer can (and usually does) build more. So I would say that the computer at least has this one method of capital protection. Another thing that almost happened to me (especially on smaller maps) is that while I'm heading towards the capital the computer quickly advances on my capital and breaks through my meager defense. It then becomes quite an interesting race to see who can capture their respective enemy's capital first. I've also had enemy fighters intercept transport units. Weakening or taking out one unit is sometimes enough to take the thunder out of my attack. So while at first glance this tactic may seem cheap, it has to be executed smartly and carefully in order to work.

[SemperFi2382]

[Guest]

Ive done something similar,I sent in two transports full of tanks,and trucks with infantry in them,i also sent in paratroopers in two fully loaded Transpoart planes.I came in from like a bay and took him out.It pwned.

[EJC]

I have used this strategy many times, but usually only when desperate or if I feel the AI or a human opponent is being a cheap little prat. It's perfectly viable as a strategy, but frankly rushing your enemy and stomping their capital is kind of dull. I like a little hard fight to get to my objective, but in other cases I like to treat my forces as real people - i.e., I don't want to lose them needlessly. So I usually do my best to crush my enemies without losing too many soldiers, and this tactic combined with other "drawing off" tactics is a good way to do this.

For instance as the Americans in the Kalimtan Jungles free-play scenario, I was playing it on hard difficulty. I allowed Green (UK) and Red (Japan) to have at each other while I quietly built up and destroyed any nosy recon or IFV units that got too close. Once I had constructed a "Missile Cell", I used my ATACMS as defensive units while my B-1s moved out in formation with a KC-135, two F-18 Recon jets, and two F-22 Raptors, with an Osprey loaded with Spec Ops. I would hook around the coastal region of the UK forces and slam them with AGM-89s until a hole was created, and then I landed my Spec. Ops and moved them in for the capture. I used a similar tactic with the Japanese as I captured their rear facilities on the island to their right. In the end I won in 35 turns, destroyed 384 sub units, but only lost 22 of my own, and lost no units in total. I bashed my way with primary weapons to the base, and used the heli-drop tactic to finish them off.

[Guest]

I may be tipping my hand, revealing I am old school here, but ...

Just as in the board game of Chess, the "White" team can checkmate the opposing king in four moves. The "Hail Mary" play seems to be a potential great strategy.

I will employ this tonight when for the 3rd attempt to win the Italian map as the Norte Americanos (med diff). I wish I could locate the Israeli factory that builds those Merkava's and break it down to rubble.

JGofCypress

[Blowed up REAL good!]

I consider it cheap/unreal/BS.
As someone said, there are NO rules in war .....but what is the point in winning, if you know in your heart that you used a sloppy trick?
In real war, with real humans, then I believe 100% that ANYthing goes, but this is not that.

HOWEVER.....
You need a way to...
- offset the game cheating (my only serious example is that even though the 3 enemy groups are supposedly independent, they all 3 seem to always attack me, and not each other.)
- end an attack the enemy can't possibly survive, but will unrealistically drag out for ages.
- end an attack you know you will win, but don't have the time/patience to deal with.
- something else I haven't thought of.

The concept is trash though. NO military on earth (none with a brain anyhow) would "role over" because you took over their capital city. The capital is full of beaurocrats that make rules about things they know nothing about.....and that is especially true of war.
So if anything, the Generals would applaud the new freedom they have to "get the job done" without idiot intervention.

On another note, it seems every game, of every type, has a master weapon/technique/glitch, that once learned, ruins the game by making it too easy. I think I'd consider this early/unrealistic attack success to be the glitch "magic" for this game.

[JVGFanatic]

I'm sorry for snipping like this but...

ruins the game by making it too easy

This is all too common a thing to say when there is an exploit in a game. While glitches and bugs can, in fact, ruin a game, exploits are a matter of personal choice. A gamer almost always has the ability to make a game harder by limiting the power-ups (continues, heal potions, whatever...) that one consumes. This gamer is not ruining the game because he is playing the way he likes to play. Conversely, a player that takes advantage of a Dai Senryaku VII's exploit is playing the game the way they want to and thus, their game isn't ruined.

Elder Scrolls:Morrowind has more exploits than most commercial games I've seen. This is the beauty of the game though, the more open ended they make something, the more exploits a gamer can most likely take advantage of. This hardly ruins the experience, instead it actually enhances the experience. The more ways there are to enjoy a game, the better the game IMO even if I'm not fully taking advantage of all those ways.

It's obviously my opinion that exploits such as this one do not in any way ruin the game and in fact, enhances it. What could have ruined the game is if the AI opponent produced Cyber Ninja's in its army. I agree that many (not all) games have exploits. Gamers who use these exploits against other gamers DO ruin the experience and it is those gamers that are to blame, not the exploit. I can say though that if my gaming buddy used this exploit on me I'd have to laugh my ass off at it.

As a side note: Space Station Silicon Valley (N64) has a glitch. It's impossible to beat the game 100% cause one of the statues you need to collect is in an impossible location. Too bad cause there's a hidden game that gets unlocked when you get to 100%. Good thing they put a code in to unlock that game >_
Which brings us to another point...

It's been a long time since we've had (mostly) bug-free console games. This is probably mostly due to the complexity of the games but I wonder if there aren't other things to blame...

Even simple visual things like some of the labels in Daisenryaku VII, or the fact that China has some towed artillery that is one thing towed but another thing deployed >_
(okay, so I said that last bit just to strike up another conversation...I don't really believe about 10% of what I wrote in that last paragraph but it suffices to make a point I think).

[Iron Giant]

Hmmm.

I'm not so sure this is a "cheat" now.

1. Does it work on medium and hard difficulty?

2. I've seen enemy capitals that are surrounded by mountains. I can't make this tactic work there.

3. Some countries have no transport helicopters, only transport planes which don't lend themselves to this tactic.

A tactic that only works against some enemys, using some countries, on a low difficulty level doesn't feel like a cheat to me.

[SemperFi2382]

[DanielRuoss]

I've had the computer try this on me in return. At times they've attempted to land an assault helo on my capital. Thankfully I always keep somekind of protection around my capital. If it's so cheap for a human to do why is it ok for the computer? The bottom line is that while I used this technique often when I first bought the game it became redundant after a time. I use it sparingly now because I've found other strategies to win. It is more enjoyable to defeat the enemy on the field of battle than to capital hop all day. Like Semper Fi said it is sometimes necessary and the only way to prevail. Try playing the 'Battle of Aomori' map and tell me you don't use a capital strike force and I'll call you a liar. It's impossible not to use this strategy because you need to be able to relieve the pressure of fighting 3 allied armies at the same time.

[SemperFi2382]

[DanielRuoss]

As I've said previously, the computer does defend it's capital depending on the map. On certain maps they've kept quite a number of units around the capital and they are always building units that stay around for at least one turn.