caranthir.pkk wrote:Why not?

Because by sending the bomber at a 90 degree angle to your target you expend fuel while not getting any closer yo your target. This will shorten your effective range, and will leave your bomber without the necessary fuel to make a return flight from very long range missions.

I don't know if this is what you wanted, but there is an online version of those maps at http://www.frappr.com/ that you can use.

I just tried playing a game on your demo server with another guy, and on getting into the game neither of us could place any units. With installations nothing happened at all, and with fleet the ships were just kicked right back into your reserve.

Yeah, I've been thinking the exact same things as you, General. Only I think it's a bit of a stretch to say it's about how well you can manipulate people. I believe it's more a case of predicting the actions of your adversaries, and where and when you strike.

Xander is completely correct, and I shall have to go and try to find some way to cope with the embarrassment.

I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Denocide for getting this thread back on topic, and God, for the fact that it doesn't seem like any of the pairs of [expletive deleted] that sometimes work together in Defcon have happened upon this strategy. I just wouldn't be able to live with myself. In ...

There is in fact some utility to be had from nuking your own cities. Consider the following; Default scoring, two players, you are (for the sake of this example) Africa. Now, if one was to give up Cairo for dead, as most people usually do, the best thing to do would be to simply wipe it off the map ...

I've had one game where I was winning. Then, just to make sure I didn't, the nme alliance broke, one turned on ceasefire and the other nukes his cities. After he got enough points, they made the alliance again. This happened including smacktalking. Smells like a cheap cheat. I'm pretty sure that if...

This is a tactic I have been thinking about, but have as yet to try, as it requires either a trustworthy ally, or the ability to persuade an ally of the validity of the strategy. It would only apply in standard scoring games, as it relies on kills being rated higher than deaths. Usually, if my ally ...

xander wrote:as a spectator, can you /msg another player or spec? i.e. can you select their name from the list and message them?

xander

No, they cannot. As a spectator you have no other means of communication than the spectator channel, this being either public or private, as set by the host.

Having thought about this some more, I can now see a possible problem with implementing two channels for spectators. The problem is that sometimes, it's easy to forget what channel you are in, and having your reply to what someone said and up in the wrong channel. Why, just today someone accidentall...

A private spectator channel is something I have long wished to see added, and I have bumped into several people who share my sentiment. The lack of it just seems awkward. If I am one of of a number of spectators in a game, I might see something I would like to remark upon to another spectator, eg. &...

I encountered a bug where I was able to change what player I controlled at will. While I was controlling another player, I had their radar coverage, (not in addition to my own), could launch fighters, bombers, nukes, in fact do everything you would be able to do yourself - even chat. All the while t...

My bug report only contains one bug, and that is a rather pleasant one. I had been playing for about half an hour, taking a few beginner missions, intentionally failing a few yo stay under confident level (Which i still hate! Damn you! :Þ ). I had not yet taken an Academic Database mission as I didn...

I see that the restriction "feature" is also in the 0.98 version. This took me about an hour of hard work to find out, and I lost a pretty nice account that I had been carefully grooming. I had even backed up the .usr file, but nooooo, that didn't work