BGForums

I now Playing the Middle East Campaigen Scenario with the Iran. I have a Alliance with Syria. Many Countrys are defeated and my Reputation is absolutly Bad. The World Market Approving ist under 10% and i not longer a Member of the WM.

The World Market haved Warned my... and so i think that after the "Victory" (question; Can i win with Allied Countrys a Campaign Scenario?) will the World Market attack me. Can happen that?

(I played with Turkey the Middle East Scenario and the WM has many Troops in a offensive Formation along the Turkish-Greek Border. so i thinking that the World Market can be agressive.)

It was originaly intended to have the WM attack people it got relly ticked off with, but this didn't make it into the final cut...

So no, the WM will not attack...

_________________
All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

Sir Edmund Burke

If you win the unification vote between you and your ally, you will win the campaign scenario. The next scenario they will have been absorbed by you. Be careful, the last time I tried that solution, I had to conquer my smaller ally very quickly because the popular vote started to tilt to him.

_________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” -Winston Churchill

Really? I have placed massive Military along the Border, south from Baku, in awaiting a attack of the WM... and the Hope to Conquer the Caucasus.

By the way, i can Fire Scud Missiles aginst WM Terretory, but not aginast WM Military Installations.

To test this, fired a Nuclear Missile in the Desert of Sudan, and the WM cut off all releations and banned me from the WM-Membership.



The Victory Goals in the Campaign Scenario are "Complete", i not sure or i must Conquer all Countrys or only the Enemys. (Allies?)

Exactily, you nuked the WM and they did nothing other than kick you out, which is what they do if you nuke anybody.

And those troops to the south are wasted, trust me on this the WM will not attack you militarily, they will boycot you, thats it.

I think the whole scud thing is bug or something like that, once the WM was made so it didn't strke back, I think it was intended that the devs would stop all strikes against the WM, guess it didn't quite work out...

_________________
All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

Sir Edmund Burke

Well, the problem is, IF they make it so you cant attack WM territory you'd have huge areas of the oceans/seas/etc that no combat can take place in.

This would especially be a problem with the AI which tends to put alot of its overflow navy into WM waters.
These naval units would be safe from harm.Even worse, they'd be able to attack out of the WM safety zone, which would be a major problem.

_________________
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM

Though actually World Market 'water' and WM land are treated differently (though there were some old bugs fixed in update 4 & 5 due to exceptions in this area). WM water is truly 'neutral' no-man's land, WM land is owned by the WM.

The original design had the WM attacking as a bit of a 'fun' way to lose - for example, you would be overwhelmed with WM units until you were crushed. It was not intended that the WM abide by the 'no cheating AI' rule, they would have been a special case with unliminted resources.

While a cute idea, it didn't really add much to gameplay, other than maybe a challenge to players like tkobo who would like to take on an opponent with unlimited resources

The problem with attacking the WM in a 'fair fight' is that (except for the world level) our scenario maps have borders - most of the WM is off-map, and if you start winning against them you'll hit the (artificial) map edge. The game was not designed for fighting beyond scenario borders.

So, the bottom line is that the WM is not there to attack anybody.

-- George.

I think you under estimate just how much of your player base want to now,or will in the near future want to fight just such a WM.

The WM could be defeated by attrition.Inflict enough casualties on the world market and it will have a change of heart about how it sees you

It could send out diplo offers of peace if you kill enough of them.

Of course, even with the AI in control of the WM forces, it would probably win in most maps due to pure numbers.

But even losing such a war would be VERY VERY fun.

_________________
This post approved by Tkobo:Official Rabble Rouser of the United Yahoos
Chuckle TM

And I always liked the idea that the WM would send military units to regions it liked that were collapsing under attacks...

So it didn't launch a huge attack but sort of proped up the failing region...

_________________
All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing.

Sir Edmund Burke

Actually the WM does a pretty danged good UN impersonation. It won't intervene directly in actual conflict. It sends equipment and sometimes observers, but almost never in enough numbers to actually change the outcome. When it does sell goods, units or tech, it tends to charge pretty hefty prices for these (sorta like, "We'll help, but only if we can make a rip-snorting profit off of you doing it!" read this as Oil for Food program). When it does try to punish a maverick nation, it's methods usually (in my case) end up A. making the nation stronger or at least more self sufficient B. Pissing them off and making them more hostile and agressive. (well if I can't BUY metal ore from the world....maybe I'll just cross this border and TAKE the metal ore I need.)

In no way, shape or fashion is this a complaint. Merely an observation about how the game imitates life. I agree that it would be very interesting and entertaining to try and fend off the whole world with a smaller region. Especially if the WM was using a full range of stuff. Stategic bombing, shore bombardment and amphib assaults etc etc. You would "win" if you made them nuke you!

_________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” -Winston Churchill

Yes, it did turn out that the WM uses those same basic tools - boycotts, minor assistance, etc. The idea of an "interventionist" WM, while interesting, did have various issues (ie, where do all those units come from? etc)

And yes, it would be fun to fight against an "unlimited resources" opponent and see how long you could last, but if you want a similar experience just try to take over China from Mongolia

-- George.

lol ! Well George, I'm guessing that any international force with actual intentions of spilling blood would be pretty heavy on American troops. But for a pure gameplay purposes, I would say start with the closest surrounding territories, pull units those regions would have on hand to start a similar scenario, then work outward. I'm not too serious about this, really it would require a totally new engine...or at least a pretty total rebuild. Heck If I want this kind of action I'll take poland and declare war on everyone before starting time. (Poland, Austria, someone in central europe so I will have to fight on every front.) I experienced it with germany awhile back, thing is Germany won. and yeah Mongolia punching China in the nose sounds similar.

_________________
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.” -Winston Churchill

I wasted so many tomahawks on the WM when I first got the game. Only thing I got out of it was my units gaining experience. The funny thing was I blew everything the WM had on the map away. So actually I did have a war with the WM and won course it was one sided.

_________________
In war destroy everything even the livestock.