• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
baylox said:
Hungary ends up being a puppet of Germany if they go along with this, which is why they didn't historically. Becoming a puppet is like half-loosing the game, after all (in my opinion).

The event doesn't make Hungary a German puppet but it does make Hungary a member of the Axis. I don't know if you meant a puppet in HOI2 terms or a de facto puppet in historical terms.
 
The information is all there. You just need to look for it in the event files :rolleyes:
 
Well, I have played and very much enjoyed "CORE" up to the point of experiencing any number of silly and outright repulsive bugs/"features"/warts/whatever in the game.

I keep in mind that is only a game and I appreciate whatever CORE has done to breath fresh life into HOI.

However, I will probably abandon it for the precise reasons that some people seem to be talking around. The general drift of the game appears to be victim of the "play as we want you to" line of thinking.

As a gameplayer, is hard not to view the stance of CORE development as inflexible, close-minded and haughty. Some other adjectives may be appropriate, but inappropriate as a posting...this isn't a rant.

I, for one, am not going to expend much more time or effort on CORE. In contrast to its moniker, "CORE" remains captive to a Non-Cooperative-Open-Resource clique.

I mean no offense and again I am grateful for the hours (in truth, man-days) I enjoyed CORE as a diversion. It is only a game and I suggest that it not be taken too seriously.

For those who wish to continue spending time on this creation...Good Luck to You!

Some feedback on something else to play would be appreciated.
 
dblwide said:
Some feedback on something else to play would be appreciated.
I'd suggest the Jagged Alliance 2 v1.13 mod. The modding team for that game is quite a bit more open-minded, and strongly encourages any contributions by the community. No one is turned away, least of all because they might not conform to some arbitrary playing style.
 
ShadoWarrior said:
I'd suggest the Jagged Alliance 2 v1.13 mod. The modding team for that game is quite a bit more open-minded, and strongly encourages any contributions by the community. No one is turned away, least of all because they might not conform to some arbitrary playing style.


Thanks! Actually I am a long-time player of JA2...for more years than I care to admit. It is true that JA2 seems to have a wider and much more egalitarian base and focus.

The JA2 crowd certainly don't have what I would characterize as a "Love It or Leave It" attitude that I found stateside in the '60s and in what is now rife in the "CORE" group for this new century. (The phrase "Love It or Leave It" was common in the USA back then...I *am* that old and the Vietnam era is like yesterday to me.)

Anyhow, I think psychologists call the CORE attitude as "Group Think".

I did take pains to point out that I am in the the "Leave It" crowd...which is the majority. I also know I am in good company. I am certain that many, however, were not not as vocal about the problems they find and simply go away...Leaving It...without a word.

Those voiceless persons who have left must be smarter than I am. They knew that feedback, ideas, whatnot would only fall on deaf ears or, worse yet, get only some meaningless retort without merit. (A careful and fair reading of treads come often to the base "Because I say so, that's why!" response from the CORE folks.)

It is hard not to begin ranting.

I wonder why HOI didn't cultivate a cadre of champions like JA2 did? I find that both games HOI and JA2 have very close traits apart from HOI's lack of legitimate ombudsmanship. It is a pity. JA2 and HOI are both "Old Friends" of mine. I hate to see an Old Friend like HOI turn out as it has.

I really would like to revisit HOI again some day...but not under the present circumstances. Life is too short to put up with effete snobbishness...even in games.
 
dblwide,

Great attitude, appreciate your thoughts. AFAIK we've never got any prior feedback from you. It appears you've used fully 1/3 of your 6 posts on this board to trash us personally. I really appreciate that. In fact, if you were representative of the community I would have quit this a long time ago. It's not like we get paid to take your crap.

mm
 
The point here is that, for the gameplay, CORE is meant to be historically plausible. That means that you can and can't do certain things and the reasons why is that sometimes decision makers back then (as now) just couldn't make certain decisions, their hands were tied. This is also modelled. I do realize that there are places where this can be frustrating if you were expecting full freedom in everything - but if so, then CORE really isn't for you and you're better off playing something else.

CORE isn't narrow, the possibilities are legion, but you have to plan ahead and make some decisions from the start and stick by those decisions. We don't cater to everyone, because we've decided this is how we want the mod to be. Now, if you accept that game philosophy you'll find that we are very accepting of ideas, but we will not change the basic design philosophy just because it doesn't suit you personally.
 
dec152000 said:
dblwide,

Great attitude, appreciate your thoughts. AFAIK we've never got any prior feedback from you. It appears you've used fully 1/3 of your 6 posts on this board to trash us personally. I really appreciate that. In fact, if you were representative of the community I would have quit this a long time ago. It's not like we get paid to take your crap.

mm

If you do wish to view this as an ad hominem argument, then be free to do so.

Both this comment from you...and that from "Balox" later...only reinforce what I say.

Needless to say, I doubt you personally are capable of seeing it that way.
 
Wow, I really cant believe some people.

The attitude that a mod "group" must listen to and implement every idea from users is unrealistic, unfair and selfish. Perhaps if you stated what you have a problem with in the game they could address it, so far all you've done is state your opinion on the CORE team.

AFAIK CORE is a small group, I think a certain poster has an unrealistic idea of whats invloved in putting a mod together, especially for a game like HOI.

Frankly I dont complain about any mod I play for any game, if I dont like it then I uninstall it. But to come on here and say this: "Well, I have played and very much enjoyed "CORE" up to the point of experiencing any number of silly and outright repulsive bugs/"features"/warts/whatever in the game." is totally childish.

What exactly are the repulsive bugs/warts?

There is a big difference between constructive criticism and complaining. The CORE team does this on their own time for free (they have real lives too you know). They have a certain idea/path they want it to follow, if you dont agree with it fine, but it doesnt mean you should start being rude and totally unappreciative of the work they do for players like you and me. I dont mind waiting for this mod, HOI is game I will always play, so if I get bored I'll shelve it for a few months or a year. To expect things to be done in a few weeks is very unrealistic. It takes game companies months to put patches out, and they get paid to do it (sorta).

Anyway, I just had to add my $0.02, that post really ticked me off.

Sheesh!
 
baylox said:
We are willing to listen, dblwide, so please tell us what you have previously (before this thread) reported to us as errors, imbalances, design decisions etc that we have ignored or dismissed rudely.
It's curious that you should ask, considering that you've been the worst offender as far as rudely dismissing the suggestions of others.

For example, forcing "independent air arm" nations that choose to not develop strategic bomber tech to wait an extra 2 years before they can escort their equally-vulnerable medium bombers, giving the excuse that in WW2 no nation with an independent air arm had actually chosen to ignore strategic bombing as the justification for why the CORE tech tree is as it is. The posting(s) explaining why your tech tree should be adjusted were rudely dismissed by you and you also engaged in an ad hominem attack on the poster (which another poster called you on). I can cite other examples, in case you need your memory refreshed further.
 
ShadoWarrior said:
The posting(s) explaining why your tech tree should be adjusted were rudely dismissed by you and you also engaged in an ad hominem attack on the poster (which another poster called you on). I can cite other examples, in case you need your memory refreshed further.


I'm going to have to go dig that thread up, but I really don't remember baylox being that far out of line. Sometimes the answer is no, you know. Besides, escorts for medium bombers are a nonissue. You can accomplish more-or-less the same thing by stacking the tac bombers with fighters.

And if I'd known this thread was going to unleash such a tsunami of negativity, I don't know if I'd have started it.
 
ShadoWarrior said:
It's curious that you should ask, considering that you've been the worst offender as far as rudely dismissing the suggestions of others.

For example, forcing "independent air arm" nations that choose to not develop strategic bomber tech to wait an extra 2 years before they can escort their equally-vulnerable medium bombers, giving the excuse that in WW2 no nation with an independent air arm had actually chosen to ignore strategic bombing as the justification for why the CORE tech tree is as it is. The posting(s) explaining why your tech tree should be adjusted were rudely dismissed by you and you also engaged in an ad hominem attack on the poster (which another poster called you on). I can cite other examples, in case you need your memory refreshed further.
I admit that I was rude in my response, or rather in my third or fourth response when you kept mentioning the same thing (in not exactly friendly tones, I might add - more or less calling me a jerk because I didn't like your idea and kept defending my own - so we're both equally bad there) and I kept saying that it wouldn't change. And I still stand by that.
You generally have a very "bad" attitude when posting and when you write that way you can expect to be responded to in the same way (but instead you get offended - how do you think I feel when reading your posts?). Remember, I even PMed you about it (to keep it off from the forum)? In that particular thread you tested my patience to and beyond my limit and I responded as I did. If you write in a respectful manner I can guarantee you will be responded to in the same manner (which is not saying that I'll agree, but the tone will be as such).

As for the tech tree, I don't think you're remembering correctly. My stance is that if you're on the Independent Air Arm and chosen the Strategic Bombing focus then you get access to escorts earlier than the other three branches because with those focuses (foci?) the 'need' for developing escorts isn't as strong (as illustrated by Britain's actions - actually allowing it in 1944 I'd say is ahistorical since they NEVER developed an escort doctrine, much less an escort fighter).
 
I personally think the air doctrines/escort tech works fine and is pretty historical IMO.

The US didnt start seriously escorting its bombers (as in all the way to the target and back) untill late in the war. Britian never did go this far because they concentrated on night bombing.
 
baylox said:
you kept mentioning the same thing (in not exactly friendly tones, I might add - more or less calling me a jerk because I didn't like your idea and kept defending my own - so we're both equally bad there)
I did no such thing. Trust me that if I wanted to call you a jerk, I'd not mince words about it. You may have perceived the post(s) that way because whenever anyone has the temerity to question your logic you get exceedingly defensive and righteous. Most people back off and let you have your way. I didn't, and that riled you up.

baylox said:
You generally have a very "bad" attitude when posting
You have no right to judge anyone else's writing style, especially given your own.

baylox said:
Remember, I even PMed you about it
You PM'd me about a completely different thread (land doctrines, where Dec152000 and I were having a civil discourse in spite of our disagreement), and your PM was so rude and insulting that I deleted it after only reading the first half.

baylox said:
If you write in a respectful manner I can guarantee you will be responded to in the same manner (which is not saying that I'll agree, but the tone will be as such).
I'm quite capable of writing respectfully. But respect is a two-way street and you made it very clear early on by your replies (and your disgusting PM) that you have no respect for anyone who disagrees with you and is willing to stand their ground when you confront them. If your idea of "respect" is that people kiss your ass because you are a CORE dev, and never disagree with you, you've got another think coming.
 
excellent. So all parties think the other could behave better when posting. Lets try that now and quit the mud-slinning it not like anyone is going to back down anyway no matter how long we debate it.
 
Back to the original topic, if nobody minds....

It's not so much that I want to know the event design particulars, it's that I want to know what DPs do in C.O.R.E. that's different from vanilla.

Taking the interventionism slider, I now know that while in vanilla this is only relevant for DOWing and joining alliances before war, in C.O.R.E. more interventionism may also be required for events that represent a belligerent policy while still remaining short of war.

Are there any other general DP principles I should know about?
 
AlanC9 said:
Taking the interventionism slider, I now know that while in vanilla this is only relevant for DOWing and joining alliances before war, in C.O.R.E. more interventionism may also be required for events that represent a belligerent policy while still remaining short of war.

Are there any other general DP principles I should know about?
There are many events that I've looked at (in both the UK and USA files) that depend on certain settings of the Interventionism, Political, and other sliders or they will not trigger. As far as "general principles" go, that would get into so-called "gamey" aspects of playing CORE, and thus you are not likely to get the answers here that you seek. Your best bet is to read the event files for yourself. However, one quite obvious thing is that more Interventionism is almost always "better". Whether it is worth you moving that slider yourself (as opposed to moving a different slider) is a choice only you can make.