Talk:Carrier Command

message: :In "Strategy" mode, each side starts with one island, while the rest are free. The two carriers each start at their respective home island, and the two home islands are chosen to be almost as distant as possible from one another. The enemy carrier, however, already has several islands under its control and therefore has an advantage.
This paragraph contradicts itself. Does the enemy only have one island or does it have several? JIP | Talk 15:25, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: You're right; there was confusion. All fixed now. Preacherdoc 20:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Contradiction 

message: :"If the player manages to destroy the enemy carrier, the game is considered to be won. However, the player is then offered the opportunity to recapture all of the remaining enemy islands in the absence of the enemy carrier."
I think you'll find that, if you take too long to assimilate Nemesis, the Enemy Carrier is respawned. So the game isn't won at all. I can't remember how long it takes, but I know that I nearly went into shock when islands began to be taken again. It is therefore suggested that one takes the quickest route to Nemesis and make it friendly.  mcnaugha 19:44, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: There's no mention of that in the manual and contradicts my experience.  Probably had around ten hours gameplay between destroying the enemy carrier to taking Nemesis.  On a similar vein I have noticed that it is possible to neutralise the Omega without destroying it.  Since it will typically fail to take a defence island, if it starts attacking a sequence of them and simultaneously you take the nearby hostile islands it has nowhere to resupply from.  Eventually you don't hear anything more from it - presumably it is stranded in the ocean somewhere out of fuel. CrispMuncher (talk) 21:30, 16 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Enemy carrier respawn 

message: It's been announced today that Bohemia Interactive Studio and Black Element Software are in the development of making the official sequence for the original Carrier Command. .
More info at Games Convention 08 (GC08)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.202.208.245 (talk) 16:06, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: You mean sequel I presume. Zargulon (talk) 16:52, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Carrier Command: Gaea Mission announced 

message: Was the source code for the various ports of this ever made public? Does it still even exist? I assume it was written in assembler and compiled with MASM or suchlike? 2fort5r (talk) 23:33, 5 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I have some floppy disks that contain it, but no floppy drive and the backup software (fastback) is no-where to be seen. I'm afraid that it's best to consider this code as lost. Ian (talk) 12:59, 15 June 2010 (UTC)
replies: text: OK, after a 12 hour marathon session of fiddling with obsolete hardware, using GNU ddrescue to glean every reluctant sector, and VirtualBox to run fastback, I have the 68000 source in my hands. I'll now tackle the x86 version and also try and get agreement to make it public. --Ian (talk) 13:30, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

text: Wow, you are seriously hardcore. Zargulon (talk) 14:13, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
thread_title: Code

message: If full 3D was possible for the Spectrum version why was it not possible on the Commodore 64? Is there some technical reason for this? Drutt (talk) 00:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I believe the problem was that the C64's CPU only ran at 1 mhz, whereas the Z80 in the ZX Spectrum ran at 3.5 mhz. This might also explain why the contemporary 3D game Starglider 2 was ported for the ZX Spectrum but not the C64. In most other respects the C64 was technically superior. -Ashley Pomeroy (talk) 18:55, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
thread_title: Commodore 64

message: This is a very rare occurrence on the English Wikipedia, but now, an article that I myself started, about a computer game in the period where I was most active in gaming (from the middle 1980s to the middle 1990s), has got so detailed about the game itself rather than its impact on the world, that I feel part of this article is becoming a game guide. I don't mind the detailed descriptions about the game's setting and the objects under the player's control, and about how the game handles the carrier's internal workings, but the strategical and tactical guide on how to conquer islands and how to beat the enemy carrier seems to be too much. JIP | Talk 21:12, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not a game guide 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on Carrier Command. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081214134246/http://amigareviews.classicgaming.gamespy.com:80/carrierc.htm to http://amigareviews.classicgaming.gamespy.com/carrierc.htm
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100503045601/http://www.gamedev.net:80/community/forums/mod/journal/journal.asp?jn=472138&cmonth=5&cyear=2009 to http://www.gamedev.net/community/forums/mod/journal/journal.asp?jn=472138&cmonth=5&cyear=2009
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20051208215054/http://homepage.ntlworld.com:80/martingbell/projects/ to http://homepage.ntlworld.com/martingbell/projects/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:41, 16 November 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Who were Lingard and Ursula named after? 2fort5r (talk) 17:28, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Island Names 

message: There isn't any description of gameplay? At all?
I mean, for an article about a game, isn't that key? 2A00:23C7:3119:AD01:355E:5E4C:ABC3:B1DA (talk) 18:08, 29 December 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  The Actual Game