Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Global Glory v3.00

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's World at War: A World Divided >> Mods and Scenarios >> Global Glory v3.00 Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Global Glory v3.00 - 11/17/2007 9:32:10 PM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
Hi guys,

I was able to include Global Glory in the release, so you will all have a brand new scenario to play with!

I think that it could fairly be called an "advanced" version of the game. There are a few more rules to think about. I won't describe it in detail, because there is a detailed description in the distribution, but I thought I'd provide a brief overview.

One thing I'd like to point out is that playtesting has been somewhat limited, and play balance may be questionable. So far it has generally appeared to be biased towards the Allies. I made some quick tweaks before the release, but really I felt it was better to get the patch out there and get GG out there and get feedback from everybody rather than try to make it perfect offline. Hopefully it is not too far off, and you all can enjoy it.

Erratum

  • end of Japanese gift
    * contrary to documentation, the Japanese gift ends in Summer 1941 (the same as Total War). This was an error in the data file which must be corrected.
    * this is corrected in the patch file attached to this message.
    * Installation: download the file. Rename the file "GlobalGlory_v3.00_patch.zip", changing the file extension to ".zip" instead of ".txt" (this forum doesn't allow zip file attachements for some reason). Extract the zip file into your AWD v1.020 directory. It should place a single file, wawgoldfrozen_gg.txt into your dat\ directory.



Highlight overview:

  • emphasis on oil
    * more resources in the middle east, some starting damaged so the WA must repair them to exploit them
    * Germany has a non-military resource consumption (NMRC), making resources valuable from the beginning of the game
    * Germany goes to FM=3 in 1942, so a succesfull capture of middle east resources can be exploited in production in preparation for a late war with Russia
    * addition of factories in zero-population regions (Trans-Jordan, Borneo, Sumatra) representing oil refining capacity. Changed so that factories in zero-population regions cannot do research, they can only produce supplies.

  • changed air rules
    * fighters cost 3, heavy bombers cost 5. This seems a more reasonable population-to-production ratio, compared to other units. It can easily be considered to be a cost of crew training, since often availability of trained personel was a constraint more than overal population or equipment.
    * air units can flyover narrows, e.g. it costs 1 MP to go from W France to England or 2 MP from Saudi Arabia to Italian East Africa.
    * air suffers a penalty at max range. Firing attack roll penalty -3, fired at penalty +1. A unit is not considered "at max range" if it is 1 move (not 1 MP, just one region move) from its base, _unless_ that move is across a narrows (this enables a Battle of Britain scenario with 1MP fighters considered to be at max range over the Channel).

  • changed WR threshold and frozen strat moves
    * frozen strat move limits increase over time
    * the USA can strat move, sometimes, in 1941, 1942+
    * the goal is to allow the Axis to delay war, and allow the Allies to be better prepared without necessarily DOWing.

  • enhanced transport rules provide increased benefits to ports (notably Norway and Malta).

  • additional modifications to make the transportation problems in the Med and North Africa more realistic
    * reduced Italian starting transports
    * increased starting Italian militias in N Africa and E Africa, representing the overwhelming numbers of poor quality Italian troops.

  • new political events for surrenders
    * Russian surrender, which cedes territories, refreezes the remaining Russia, and reestablishes a gift to Germany. If this occurs, then an AV game is probably already about to end, but it could allow for a better non-AV game.
    * Indian surrender, with regions becoming Japanese without damaged resources, representing an Indian nationalist movement.
    * Australian surrender.

  • some fine tuning of USA->Japan gift rules
    * The gift does not stop if Japan invades inland China. Instead, there is a political event that can trigger and reduce the gift. This event gets more likely as Japan captures more Chinese regions or bombs more Chinese factories.
    * Japanese gift does not end in Su41, instead it can continue. But it is cancelled when Japanese move troops to Indochina.

  • all neutrals produce insta-militia equal to population when attacked as a neutral. This makes a neutral a little better able to defend itself, while not such a big force when it joins an alliance voluntarily. This was mostly seen as useful against WA invasions of Portugal and Spain, making it a little harder early in the game. But it was made consistent everywhere.

  • all inland routes in Africa are severed to land unit traffic, but air units may still fly over the continent. This eliminates unrealistic things like supplying Sudan from British East Africa, or campaigning across the continent.


The rules, especially for Japanese gifts, require careful reading.

Thank you to everyone who helped out, provided feedback and playtest. I've played several useful games recently with tica, and I remember a particularly productive bug-fixing 2x2 game with tica, Lebatron, and Forwarn45.

Many of the ideas here were not originally mine. I cannot credit everyone, because I don't necessarily remember where everything came from. Some of the biggest ideas I can think of ultimately originated from JanSorensen, Lebatron and Forwarn45.

Thanks all. I hope everyone can enjoy it. Be sure to let me know how it can be improved, there is leeway to change it in the next patch.

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by WanderingHead -- 1/23/2008 9:08:42 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 11/18/2007 2:12:52 PM   
GKar


Posts: 617
Joined: 5/18/2005
Status: offline
Thanks WH! As soon as I have the time (~4 weeks?) I'll try it out in a PBEM.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 2
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 11/18/2007 2:44:04 PM   
xianing

 

Posts: 347
Joined: 9/22/2007
Status: offline
Really great work! Thanks to WH and all guys who have contributed to this.


(in reply to GKar)
Post #: 3
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 11/20/2007 11:15:16 AM   
cgarmfeldt

 

Posts: 12
Joined: 10/6/2007
Status: offline
Neato - finally a GGWaW with the possibility of a BoB :) 

(in reply to xianing)
Post #: 4
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 11/22/2007 11:22:25 PM   
Tom Grosv

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 6/20/2005
Status: offline

quote:

I won't describe it in detail, because there is a detailed description in the distribution,


Sorry, being thick - where exactly do I find the detailed description of the current GG?

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 5
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 11/23/2007 12:14:40 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Tom Grosv
quote:

I won't describe it in detail, because there is a detailed description in the distribution,

Sorry, being thick - where exactly do I find the detailed description of the current GG?


If you've installed AWD v1.020, you should have a file Global_Glory_description_v3.00.pdf in your main AWD directory.

"Gary Grigsby's World At War - A World Divided\Global_Glory_description_v3.00.pdf"

(in reply to Tom Grosv)
Post #: 6
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 11/26/2007 11:31:06 PM   
Tom Grosv

 

Posts: 84
Joined: 6/20/2005
Status: offline
Got it - thanks.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 7
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 12/2/2007 6:28:04 PM   
MrQuiet

 

Posts: 805
Joined: 4/2/2005
Status: offline
If you want some friendly pbem competition in the latest mods then check THIS out

-MrQuiet

(in reply to Tom Grosv)
Post #: 8
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 12/21/2007 12:39:17 AM   
wawawd

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 6/29/2007
Status: offline
I see you changed fighter costs to 3. Does Germany have any more motivation to build Fighters and Tac Bombers? My opinion is that they don't. A CAG for Germany cost 3 and is superior or equal to the fighter in every category (for world standard). They are also better than the Tac Bomber (except by 1 point in ground attack) for world standard. It is better to build one type of aircraft that can fill both roles and then some (naval anyone?). It makes it more cost effective from a research point of view.

Even though the German CAG starts out lower in many areas from the Fighter and Tac Bomber, liberal theft of Japanese tech and the benefit of having to only research one plane more than offset this.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 9
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 12/22/2007 7:47:11 AM   
christian brown


Posts: 1441
Joined: 5/18/2006
From: Vista, CA
Status: offline
quote:

Does Germany have any more motivation to build Fighters


I believe Brian was working toward reducing the ahistorically large number of fighters being built and the unrealistic "feel" of the ease to which new crews/pilots could be found and trained. Forgive me if I have misunderstood your comment.

_____________________________

"Those who would give up a little liberty for a little security deserve neither and will lose both."
~ Thomas Jefferson

(in reply to wawawd)
Post #: 10
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 12/22/2007 3:20:23 PM   
Lebatron


Posts: 2166
Joined: 5/30/2005
From: Upper Michigan
Status: offline
The change in HB and fighter cost started in this thread I made a few months back. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1564339

wawawd, it explains what I did to CAG to balance everything out.

quote:

For UV 2.0 I've been thinking of increasing the heavy bomber cost by 1 for everybody. Japan would now pay 4, everyone else 5. As a result, tac air would hopefully become more popular. And I'm about to suggest a heresy. Increase fighter cost to 3. I'm kind of tired of seeing 20 plus fighters, almost no tac air, and to many HB's. Changing the cost of fighters to 3 would go a long way to balancing the distribution of air types. And what about carrier air? It would now appear cheaper to build since the difference would only be 1 production point between them and fighters. But rather than increase their cost to 5, I would reduce their world standards by 1 in EV and AA. What do you guys think?


Going from UV2.0 beta to the final release I only changed HB cost for Japan and UN. Japan now pays 4, the 'standard' cost, and the UN pays 5 but is the only nation to have super HB's with armor.

< Message edited by Lebatron -- 12/22/2007 3:27:55 PM >


_____________________________

Jesse LeBreton, AKA Lebatron
Development team- GG's WAW A World Divided

(in reply to christian brown)
Post #: 11
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 12/30/2007 6:41:46 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: wawawd

I see you changed fighter costs to 3. Does Germany have any more motivation to build Fighters and Tac Bombers? My opinion is that they don't. A CAG for Germany cost 3 and is superior or equal to the fighter in every category (for world standard). They are also better than the Tac Bomber (except by 1 point in ground attack) for world standard. It is better to build one type of aircraft that can fill both roles and then some (naval anyone?). It makes it more cost effective from a research point of view.

Even though the German CAG starts out lower in many areas from the Fighter and Tac Bomber, liberal theft of Japanese tech and the benefit of having to only research one plane more than offset this.


In Global Glory, the CAG cost for Germany is the same as everyone else. I think Germany has great motivation to buy Tacs.

(in reply to wawawd)
Post #: 12
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 12/30/2007 6:51:26 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lebatron

The change in HB and fighter cost started in this thread I made a few months back. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/fb.asp?m=1564339

wawawd, it explains what I did to CAG to balance everything out.

quote:

For UV 2.0 I've been thinking of increasing the heavy bomber cost by 1 for everybody. Japan would now pay 4, everyone else 5. As a result, tac air would hopefully become more popular. And I'm about to suggest a heresy. Increase fighter cost to 3. I'm kind of tired of seeing 20 plus fighters, almost no tac air, and to many HB's. Changing the cost of fighters to 3 would go a long way to balancing the distribution of air types. And what about carrier air? It would now appear cheaper to build since the difference would only be 1 production point between them and fighters. But rather than increase their cost to 5, I would reduce their world standards by 1 in EV and AA. What do you guys think?


Going from UV2.0 beta to the final release I only changed HB cost for Japan and UN. Japan now pays 4, the 'standard' cost, and the UN pays 5 but is the only nation to have super HB's with armor.


I had toyed with this very idea before your post, Jesse. I think you called it "sacrilege", but that is why I latched onto your post so quickly and enthusiastically. I had thought about it, but discarded it as heretical. But when I saw from your post that I wasn't alone in thinking like this, I had the courage to actually do it :).

I think that the increases in fighter cost are essential to balance of units and also the value relationship between flak and fighters.


< Message edited by WanderingHead -- 12/30/2007 6:52:30 AM >

(in reply to Lebatron)
Post #: 13
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 1/1/2008 9:35:05 PM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
FYI

There is an error in the data files. The Japanese gift ends in Summer 1941 (like in standard Total War), rather than the later date given in the description.

The files will have to be updated.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 14
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 1/1/2008 10:18:30 PM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
I know it hasn't been too long, and the rapid tourny is just starting, but I would appreciate any feedback on the scenario. If I am able to push a patch soon (I still need to discuss with Joel) then I would like to make modifications to the scenario.

Current plans:

  • use the new "raw resource development" feature to make about a dozen resources undeveloped, in need of 20 supplies and 2 turns to develop. This would be applied in places that historically ramped up oil production, or could have ramped up oil production: Iraq, Persia, SW USA, SC USA, Caucasus, Kazakh. It total it would only apply to about 10 resource centers.
  • adjustment in USA NMRC, to reflect the first bullet.
  • correct the problem with the Japanese gift


(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 15
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 1/19/2008 9:43:29 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
I added an attachment to the first post on this thread with a fix for the Japanese gift problem. The release version is buggy, it expires in Summer 1941 although it is not supposed to expire until 1943.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 16
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 1/22/2008 7:04:03 AM   
Citadel

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
One of the latest games Mike and I played was GG and all was well with Japan conquoring into China when USA released for War 2 or 3 turns early...boy was Japan surprised.

we called the game early...with all of Japans forces still in the CHinese interior it seemed impossible for them to do anything since they also lost the surprise element

Should USA War involvement be a surprise? or sahould the Axis get a 1 turn warning? After all the reason why Germany and Japan are Axis is because they didnt play exactly according to the rules but USA would be waving flags weeks before declaring war no?

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 17
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 1/22/2008 7:05:36 AM   
Citadel

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 12/31/2007
Status: offline
Oh

Thank you and the rest of the modders for making a great game even greater!

Cheers,

Craig T

(in reply to Citadel)
Post #: 18
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 1/23/2008 9:09:41 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
I regret to inform that the patch announced in post 16 also had a small issue (Japan gift started at 5 instead of 6). I just reposted with the correction.

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 19
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 1/23/2008 9:14:45 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Citadel
One of the latest games Mike and I played was GG and all was well with Japan conquoring into China when USA released for War 2 or 3 turns early...boy was Japan surprised.


What turn exactly was the USA DOW?

It is intentionally a surprise. You have to monitor the WR and be prepared for what they might do. Usually the USA or Russia won't be able to do much right away except prepare defensively. Then the Axis still has some small compensation in that the Allies don't get the WR boost from being attacked so Russian and/or US production will ramp up slower.

(in reply to Citadel)
Post #: 20
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 1/23/2008 9:15:08 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Citadel
Thank you and the rest of the modders for making a great game even greater!


Thanks :)


(in reply to Citadel)
Post #: 21
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 1/29/2008 2:26:12 AM   
OliverHazard

 

Posts: 4
Joined: 6/23/2006
Status: offline
Is patch 1.02 public or development team only? I just re-installed AWD and want to play the GG and UV mods. If I can't get 1.02, which version of each is most current for patch 1.011?

Nevermind. I found it.

< Message edited by OliverHazard -- 1/29/2008 2:39:36 AM >

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 22
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 2/4/2008 12:30:31 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: OliverHazard
Is patch 1.02 public or development team only? I just re-installed AWD and want to play the GG and UV mods. If I can't get 1.02, which version of each is most current for patch 1.011?

Nevermind. I found it.


It is public, but it is beta. Anyone can get it through the members section.

Beta basically just means a little less confidence that it is bug free, but so far I think it seems pretty much clean.

(in reply to OliverHazard)
Post #: 23
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 3/2/2008 9:59:41 AM   
GKar


Posts: 617
Joined: 5/18/2005
Status: offline
WH, SGT Rice and me are going to start our Lightning Tourney match with GG. Which version should we be using? Just the one included in the public beta patch with the fix attached to the first posting here?

(in reply to WanderingHead)
Post #: 24
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 3/2/2008 4:21:37 PM   
MrQuiet

 

Posts: 805
Joined: 4/2/2005
Status: offline
Its been 11 days since WH logged in, maybe he is on vacation?
GKar if you guys want to get that game going right away I would say to do like you mentioned and use GG3.0 that came in the AWD 1.02 and install the attachment in this thread to correct the GG USA/JP gift bug.

-MrQ

(in reply to GKar)
Post #: 25
RE: Global Glory v3.00 - 3/4/2008 6:31:08 AM   
WanderingHead

 

Posts: 2134
Joined: 9/22/2004
From: GMT-8
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MrQuiet
Its been 11 days since WH logged in, maybe he is on vacation?
GKar if you guys want to get that game going right away I would say to do like you mentioned and use GG3.0 that came in the AWD 1.02 and install the attachment in this thread to correct the GG USA/JP gift bug.


I've been incommunicado. Actually, I've made a bunch of progress on coding and been playing a couple of games to both test and work out GG updates. I sort of deliberately avoided the forum, just to avoid distractions I guess.

Anyway, since this is a tournie the only fair thing seems to be to stay as consistent as possible, and just use the distributed scenario with the correction posted at the top of this thread.

I have some major tweaks to the scenario, but it wouldn't do to update them in the middle of the tournie.

(in reply to MrQuiet)
Post #: 26
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Gary Grigsby's World at War: A World Divided >> Mods and Scenarios >> Global Glory v3.00 Page: [1]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.734