Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!van-bc!ubc-cs!alberta!arcsun.arc.ab.ca!calgary!cpsc!sharp From: sharp@cpsc.ucalgary.ca (Maurice Sharp) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.games Subject: Re: review on Halls of Montezuma Message-ID: <1990Jun1.004507.21180@calgary.uucp> Date: 1 Jun 90 00:45:07 GMT References: <1990May31.155308.18847@calgary.uucp> Sender: news@calgary.uucp (Network News Manager) Reply-To: sharp@cs-sun-fsd.UUCP (Maurice Sharp) Organization: U. of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada Lines: 58 In article wk0t+@andrew.cmu.edu (Wai Sung Kok) writes: >try this on the Mexico scenario, use your HQ to bring one of your As I pointed out, this is a problem of divisional objectives, not of movement control. Also, HOM 1.2 (PB 1.2) has new movement routines that work a lot better (and a lot faster :-) ). >it is correct to say that the corp commmander does not control the >movement of the unit, but there will be time >when corp commander will want to give specific movement instruction , >like going across desert instead of A corps commander has no such control of the small units. It is up to sub commanders in the chain to determine HOW to take an objective, it is up to a corps commander to tell them what objective to take and how important it is to take/hold an objective. >on the point about using Tac air on follow up unit, please read up on >the US Army Airland Battle 2000 concept, >current Nato thinking is to use both Artillery and air support to strike >the secondary unit, and you can't do this >in HoM, and please don't say that they don't do this in WWII, a wargame >should let you try different doctrint. >as for why you want to do this ( wasting artillery on secondary unit ), >the goal is to weaken them before they >reach the front, also to delay their arrival to the front, thereby >giving you a better chance for a breakthrough. Perhaps it would be neat to use some tac air on the rear units. Of course, the fact that the engaged units have no air cover and no artillery will help the enemy to blow them away more easily. But if you would like to see air support used that way, talk to SSG. They are quite good about talking to customers and adapting to their needs. > [stuff about different degrees of movement control deleted] It would corrupt the spirit of the game and the tactical level. It is like Squad Leader making you move whole companies, except in special circumstances. It does not fit the mechanics of the game. >anyway, if you like the game , fine. As for me, I will try something else. I agree. I do not agree that you slammed the game without a fair shot. I do not mind postings about bad games, but I also want to know why it is bad, and the slant of the poster. You did not give much of an idea of your slant in your original posting. You also might have prevented some people from buying the game. And with so few strategic game companies around, that is a bad thing. maurice Maurice Sharp MSc. Student University of Calgary Computer Science Department 2500 University Drive N.W. sharp@cpsc.UCalgary.CA Calgary, Alberta, T2N 1N4 ...!alberta!calgary!sharp