Gomez

My early strategy was to do about the same thing as you. Except I did Cloning Modules. 4.5 mill at GalComHQ, 5.95 mill at Gazer. It gets better a few jumps further, but I found that speed of gaining money, is more important than straight up profit from a longer trip. Using 8x time, I was able to accrue 200 million credits in probably 2 hours play time. Needless to say, I purchased the top end upgrades. Now, for experience, once I had this money, I found this neat device known as an OTS Missile. Specifically, the Bugnor. Terran/Insurgents on Earth? Not any more.....At least, not in Antarctica and around Australia. After that, I was Flt Cmdr. with about 35k XP.... I decided it was time to give ACM a try instead of FF.....

Thanks SC and everyone else...read other thread after I posted on this one. Haven't had a chance to try it out so far. ACM keeps making me do missions in space. Perhaps I'll try it out in FF mode. So far, I've gotten deployment to work only when I was in command of the shuttle myself. Which is fine too, if I can't get it to work the other way. We'll see what happens.

Wooo! Nice shots SC! Love the snow covered trees...

Hrm...not doing it at an angle, troops are definitely there. If anything, I think the WPs are above ground...like...5000+ feet above ground. Any other ideas?

quote: Lastly, every new game in 2.9 already has cheats installed, which I want to get rid of. Ahhh...that explains why I am able to stop a starbase from shooting at me....I was wondering about that... And I'm having the same troubles with the planetary radar getting stuck at SUL. If you switch from air to ground, you cannot get back to air. If you switch from ground to SUL, there doesn't seem to be a way to get back to air or ground. Unless there's a key I just overlooked (goes to check the key listing)... EDIT: Nope...no key that goes back through the cycle. Definitely gets stuck on SUL, but only planetside. Hitting the K key again, does nothing. Workaround? [ 07-24-2001: Message edited by: Gomez ]

Oh...and 1 question... If your troops attack a planetary base, is it taken over by your race/faction?

...figuring out how to get troops deployed onto the ground. Okay, here's what I am doing, what am I missing? I tell a bunch of marines to board a shuttle. Set up waypoints on planetside for the shuttle, including one point that is "deploy team". And another that is "extract team". Set up waypoints for shuttle team (corresponding number). Launch shuttle. Shuttle flies to WP that is designated "deploy team". Then flies away...very very far away. Doesn't deploy a team. And doesn't return unless I select RTB or resume waypoints (which repeats above process). I also tried this with an ATV. Still no luck. ATV had a team on it as well. Thanks for any help... EDIT: Removed a question I figured out on my own... [ 07-24-2001: Message edited by: Gomez ]

Shogun, while having the problems above, is still probably one of the best strategy/tactical games around. The AI is actually smart most of the time. Especially on higher levels. And while you say it has the archer beats spearman, cavalry beats archer, spearman beats cavalry. It frequently doesn't matter if you have the right tactics. A well performed cavalry outflank, and it doesn't matter who the cav are hitting, cause they're hitting them from behind, while your other guys are keeping them busy from the front. Overall, I thought it was a great game...especially since I got it for (almost) free, cause I used to be a counselor on UO.

SB Live! 5.1 drivers work. Plain and simple. Didn't need to download anything except the latest drivers (which I already had). I gather that in the download are the DOS drivers, and it installs them properly. Once I ran setup.exe again, I did auto-detect, and it found the board. Use the SB AWE 32 settings.

Yeah...learning that one the hard way in BC3000AD (just got it)...Never really needed it in BCM Demo...Strange that. Damn Fighters and Shuttles are expensive to replace...

Got sound working, and that seems to have slowed it down to playable speed. Not exactly sure WHY sound works. I re-ran the sound.exe and it worked fine. No windows protection error that I got the first time. The mysteries of WinME.... Game runs smoothly. Except every once in a while, it crashes to desktop without error message (maybe once every 2 hours?). No idea what's doing it. Makes me want to save frequently. But there you have it...BC3000AD running pretty much fine on a WinME system. It's good to be able to mess around with all those features that are still WIP (or disabled in demo) in BCM. Only problem is, I keep expecting it to act like BCM Demo...which it most assuredly isn't. Nice game SC Cannot WAIT for BCM to be released. Take your time though...nail them bugs to the wall.

*slaps self silly and is glad he posted in new commanders*... I should have realized that. Thanks SC BTW, looks great so far

It ran on the first try for me. However, no sound WinME Athlon 950MHz w/ Asus K7V MB 128MB RAM SB Live! 5.1 GeForce 2 One of the main problems I had, was it ran too FAST!!! Without sound, that's fatal. VERY fatal. Any ideas on how to get sound up? When I tried to run the sound config WinME barfed. I suppose I should be happy it ran at all, and use Moslo on it or something... It also confused my monitor, but that was fixable Any help or ideas would be welcome...

Yes, they've been remapped. I discovered this pretty quickly myself, as I noticed that my rudder axis was now yaw, and what used to be yaw, is now roll. Worse yet, in the demo release, the switch to reverse this stuff is broken (as SC said in another thread a while back). It was supposed to switch both keyboard controls and joystick, but it only switched keyboard. My guess is that it's fixed now in the beta, and if not, it will be fixed in the release.

quote: Originally posted by Supreme Cmdr: The pilot has low AI and is chicken Actually, I thought it was because the pilot had HIGH AI...and was smart enough to recognize a suicide mission when he saw it! My comments on the demo. After messing around with the demo and experimenting with several of the situations and environs, I decided it was time to pre-order the game! I mean, it has it's problems...but it's a DEMO. It's going to have problems. Most of the problems I encountered were listed in the VCF as either WIP, or fixed after the demo release. Only a couple things bugged me. One was the size of the wrist laser. The other is a bit more complex... I was attempting to land a shuttle on the naval carrier, as was recommended to try. I didn't really have any problems, except that the first time I tried. I put my CC on VTOL, then told it to halt. As soon as I left the bridge, the a/p engaged and disengaged my VTOL. But since it was on halt mode, it wasn't going to engage thrust to move forward. Needless to say, before I could get back on the bridge, we were paste on the ground. My workaround, was to set up waypoints for the CC to follow in a circle, while I made my little excursion to the carrier. It worked like a charm. Oh...also, on IA/2. Was trying to enter other craft, instead of the gunship and couldn't. I'm guessing this is a WIP (didn't see it in VCF, might've missed it) or something else I'm just missing entirely. Anyway, GREAT demo. I WANT THIS GAME! No pressure

Now now...be nice, he's from the Netherlands. He probably doesn't speak English all that great. I believe he meant "too" not "to".

Reporting myself as having entered commander's village as "Ataraxia"... Hope you catch the brat...

I don't believe he can. Since being a major stockholder in both, would technically re-combine the companies. Hard to know though, since I'm not a part of the injustice department...

Eep... Sounds like I just walked into a fire storm. When I roamed around last night, I didn't see anything that appeared out of place. But then, it was my first time seeing it all. AW looks great! Galcom looks really damned impressive. Good job guys I'd love to see it when it's more 'complete' I'm touristing around as "Ataraxia". I might go by Gomez to kill confusion as to who I am. But I've grown to like this new name See you all on AW...

quote: Your comments seem to suggest a feeling that a significant number of U.S doctors are little more than money grubbers. These people are typically the brightest in our schools, and there are easier ways for smart people to make money than spending 8-10 years at no or low pay to go through med school, residency, and fellowship training. There are always people at the bottom of their class. People who do poorly in Medical school, and are JUST able to pass and get their MD. There are also people who got moderate grades. Remember, medicine is one of the highest paying professions out there (once you get into Gen Prac or administrative positions in a hospital). It has a significant greed draw. Significant enough, that people would go through all the hoops, just to get to it. Now, as you mentioned that socialist countries are often better at delivery. (I'm not a socialist, remember this) Is not delivery a very critical part of heathcare system? Let's say, for the sake of arguement, that Cuban doctors are marginally worse than the American doctors in their ability to practice medicine. However, the delivery system, getting the service to the patient, is 2 steps better than American service (purely hypothetical). This would result in a higher quality healthcare system than America. Which is exactly what has been being discussed in this thread. That a dictatorship, such as Cuba, can result in better services, sometimes. Which ties directly in with the arguement that Cuba's problems may be related more directly to the embargo, than with Cuba's government. If instead of embargo, the USA tried to help Cuba become a more democratic nation. Through incentives, instead of punishment (carrot, instead of stick). It would probably turn out to be a really nice place. Instead, it remains a dictatorship, very possibly, because America continues it's embargo. Which forces Castro to keep tight control, otherwise it would just collapse into chaos. Remember, when one person runs a country, things are done FAST. Problems are solved immediately (sometimes not to the liking of anybody except the dictator, i.e. shooting people). Which means, as long as Cuba remains under embargo, Castro will be forced to remain in power, so that the country doesn't fall apart. A possible way to solve this problem, would be to propose a treaty with Castro. For each step towards democracy he takes, part of the embargo will be lifted. Once they are a democracy, with at least 2 parties, and checks and balances, similar to the USA...no more embargo. I say similar, because the USA is not perfect. Who knows, maybe democratic Cuba would find a better government than the USA? Purely hypothetical, of course. Personally, I think the USA would do a heck of a lot better in international relations, if it used carrots more than sticks...Carrots with a cost, that is.

quote: Your comments seem to suggest a feeling that a significant number of U.S doctors are little more than money grubbers. These people are typically the brightest in our schools, and there are easier ways for smart people to make money than spending 8-10 years at no or low pay to go through med school, residency, and fellowship training. There are always people at the bottom of their class. People who do poorly in Medical school, and are JUST able to pass and get their MD. There are also people who got moderate grades. Remember, medicine is one of the highest paying professions out there (once you get into Gen Prac or administrative positions in a hospital). It has a significant greed draw. Significant enough, that people would go through all the hoops, just to get to it. Now, as you mentioned that socialist countries are often better at delivery. (I'm not a socialist, remember this) Is not delivery a very critical part of heathcare system? Let's say, for the sake of arguement, that Cuban doctors are marginally worse than the American doctors in their ability to practice medicine. However, the delivery system, getting the service to the patient, is 2 steps better than American service (purely hypothetical). This would result in a higher quality healthcare system than America. Which is exactly what has been being discussed in this thread. That a dictatorship, such as Cuba, can result in better services, sometimes. Which ties directly in with the arguement that Cuba's problems may be related more directly to the embargo, than with Cuba's government. If instead of embargo, the USA tried to help Cuba become a more democratic nation. Through incentives, instead of punishment (carrot, instead of stick). It would probably turn out to be a really nice place. Instead, it remains a dictatorship, very possibly, because America continues it's embargo. Which forces Castro to keep tight control, otherwise it would just collapse into chaos. Remember, when one person runs a country, things are done FAST. Problems are solved immediately (sometimes not to the liking of anybody except the dictator, i.e. shooting people). Which means, as long as Cuba remains under embargo, Castro will be forced to remain in power, so that the country doesn't fall apart. A possible way to solve this problem, would be to propose a treaty with Castro. For each step towards democracy he takes, part of the embargo will be lifted. Once they are a democracy, with at least 2 parties, and checks and balances, similar to the USA...no more embargo. I say similar, because the USA is not perfect. Who knows, maybe democratic Cuba would find a better government than the USA? Purely hypothetical, of course. Personally, I think the USA would do a heck of a lot better in international relations, if it used carrots more than sticks...Carrots with a cost, that is.

You know, I hate to say this, but most of you guys provide a powerful arguement for keeping guns on the streets. I say most, because a few of you, either need to keep your cool a bit better, or learn to express things a bit less hostile. While reading this, I have been on a rollercoaster ride. From "Wow, that makes a heck of a lot of sense to me." to "Gah, what a jerk!" Here are some of the problems I see with keeping guns on the streets at present. No little situational things, or factoids. All opinion. There are just plain too many people out there that can't keep their cool enough, to NOT draw their weapon and shoot someone. I have known far too many people that should never own a gun, to think that there aren't a heck of a lot more people just like them, who DO own guns. And that's what scares me. They do say that an armed society is a polite society. But it's also a violent, deadly society, because there are some people who are just too stupid to own something so easy to kill someone with. Now, how this could potentially be resolved, and thus make you gun enthusiasts happy, as well as people like me happy. The government makes a law that requires ALL people wanting to aquire a gun, take a 2 year course (once a week for an hour or two, no missing a class) on how to safely use and keep your gun (triple this for concealed). This course would have to be extremely cheap, otherwise it is economically prohibitive. Maybe I'm a little overboard on the 2 (6) years, but you get the idea. Now, next, they issue a gun license (some places have these for heavier weapons, if I'm not mistaken). This license would have to be required for anyone to buy any gun. It would have to be renewed every, say...5 years, just like a driver's license (every year for concealed). Now, in addition, manditory background checks for ALL purchasers. Manditory waiting periods of up to 2-3 weeks for ALL weapons (tripled if has concealed license). Felons are prohibited 100%. Any who use a firearm in a crime are felons (this is already in place). Any felon who uses a gun in a new crime, is (as Jaguar put it) put in jail and throw away the key (until technology gets to the point where we can edit their brain in such a way, that they'll never commit another crime with a firearm, pie in the sky). Manditory life sentence, no parole ever, maximum security prison. If the government would enact this, I, as a rather extremely anti-gun person, would be QUITE content, and none of you would hear another peep out of me about gun-control. I AM against registering what firearms an individual has. I am well aware of that problem. I suppose, I should explain what changed my opinion about all this. The right to keep and bear arms, as expressed by the second amendment to the Constitution, intends for a population to be able to defeat oppression (both internal and external) by keeping themselves armed. The current adaptation is, that any idiot has the right to bear arms. Idiot and armed should never be together in the same sentence. Being armed, in itself, does not defeat oppression. Using a weapon to defeat a criminal act IS using a gun for the purpose the 2nd amendment intended. Thus, IF the government requires things such as I stated above, I would be content. Because I would know that MANY less idiots would have firearms. Simply because it is far too complicated to get a firearm. Only those who really want it for the purpose intended, would stick it out for all that time. Of course, during the classes, they would have to stress the real purpose of firearms in our society, as well as how to use it safely. Basically, with this in mind, I am backing out of this discussion. Unless someone has constructive things they wish to point out in my ideas. (meaning I will check back at some point)

There are some valid points by the gun enthusiasts here. But I still have to disagree. Guns do not save lives, they take them. When someone has an arm amputated due to cancer, no one dies. Same with surgery. However, if you shoot someone dead, they're dead. There is no chance of rehabilitation. No possibility of recompensation either. The criminal may have family also. In fact, often times, that's what drives a person to crime. A few more scenarios similar to the others: Two robbers come into the bank, neither has a loaded weapon. People are scared, someone pulls a loaded gun, two robbers dead. Two robbers come into a bank with FAKE weapons that look real. People are scared, someone pulls a loaded gun, two robbers dead. The first situation is assault with a deadly weapon for the robbers, not a crime punishable by death. The second, is manslaughter, not for the robbers, but for the former victim, who thought he was saving the day. These are also serious situations that happen all the time. Most robbers do not want to kill anyone. But they will if they have to. Some are so against killing, that they leave their bullets at home. Some repeat offenders (due to background checks), are unable to get a new weapon, and thus make fake ones. Now, stuff to add to the scenarios. Both robbers are pushed into this situation by severe destitution. It started when the plant closed (or whatever). They have families to feed and clothe. Which is why they thought they would hit the bank. Quick money that will get them on the positive side till they can land a new job (assuming they get away with it). Now...you shoot them dead, their families starve. Who are you killing? A robber is a person too. Just someone who's been messed up by something (either psychological, or socioeconomic). To step aside from my examples and make a separate point... A number of countries have instituted gun control to a rather strict degree. While crime rates are still normal in those countries, we see a drastic drop in people who are outright murdered. We also see a significant drop in people who are slain during a robbery (mugging, bank, whatever). When I say significant, I really mean significant. England, for example, has pretty heavy bans on usage of firearms, even for it's police. The number of murders in England for about the past decade, have been almost entirely in single digits for each year. Same with Japan and countless others who have strict gun control. On the contrary, a country that has absolute freedom to bear arms, USA, we see that most cities over about 1 million have a higher murder rate than entire countries with gun control. In fact, some of the cities are notorious as being among the most dangerous cities in the world (LA, NYC) for crime. It seems to me there HAS to be some kind of connection between gun control, and reduced murder rates. Either that, or American society is soooo messed up that people are driven to murder more frequently. Which is a whole different ball of wax that I certainly HOPE is not the case. Cause it's a heck of a lot harder to fix.

Actually, I think the point is, that guns make it far easier to kill people with. And guns are used only for killing, whereas knives have other practical uses. Actually, in the USA, most school zones are considered zero-tolerance zones. Doesn't matter what you have on you, be it a kitchen knife, hand-gun, or assault rifle, you are in it up to your ears. So, had that incident been in the USA, and the teacher was packing, the teacher would be arrested just as fast as the attacker. Reminds me of a situation that arose, where a 16-year old girl was arrested because her family used her car for a picnic. They missed a kitchen knife in the back seat. A teacher walking by the car, saw the knife, and had the girl arrested. As far as I know, she was tried as an adult (with no prior offenses), and put in jail. Yet another fine example of US justice in action....

quote: I can say it: "They are the best". The US health care system is unequalled in the world. When a rich or powerful world leader gets ill, do they go to the Mayo Clinic, or Havana Medical University? The Mayo clinic is the exception to the rule. They are probably the best medical facility in the world. But they don't just hire internal US doctors. They hire the BEST in their profession, whereever they are from, so long as they are able to communicate with their patients (thus speak English). But also, the Mayo Clinic isn't usually covered by insurance. Mostly cause it's REALLY DAMN EXPENSIVE... I'm not referring to Mayo's when I suggest that the US healthcare system is not the best. Mayo's in some ways, is more the world healthcare system that just happens to be located in the USA. It is clearly unaffected by most US policies regarding healthcare. It would not surprise me to hear that Mayo's opens a branch elsewhere in the world in the near future. Just to expand those it can treat. This would clearly designate it as being outside the US healthcare system. When I say US healthcare, I refer to standard hospitals and doctor's offices, as well as those "Urgent care" facilities. Hospitals, I give a 4.5, urgent care, 4.4, doctor's offices, 4, maybe 3.5...out of 5 BTW... Mayo's, of course, would be the 5s... Still, I'd like to hear what people have to say about Cuba. Otherwise all this is rather moot.