RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> WW2: Time of Wrath



Message


borsook79 -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (6/17/2010 10:42:27 PM)

Speaking about changes - can you please do something about target selection for Air units? Currently it is terrible in terms of usability:
1. Click on air unit
2. click on the icon for given attack
3. click on the target
4. click on air unit again, because the air unit becomes deselected after the attack
and here it loops. With a single unit being able to attack 3 times a turn this is really terrible and off-putting.

I propose 2 changes:
The air unit should not become deselected after an attack, unless it has no attacks left. If the player wants to use a different unit, he can just click on it. Deselecting does not save time or anything. Secondly I propose a default action - so that you could just click on the enemy (like we do with land units) and default action is done, icons would be used if you want to do something different.

For me this would be a lifesaver. I play with a touchpad and using air units is so tiresome that I cannot play more than one turn at a time...




Patbgaming -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (8/25/2010 12:07:31 AM)

I know this post is probably after everything for the next patch is probably already in the works or done but.........[:D]

I would like to possibly see some version of the following

1. Fighter and Tac Air interdiction - maybe lowering the APs of units for a turn by bombing the city they are drawing supply from.

2. Fighters providing Air Cover to Fleets in the adjacent sea zone.

3. The ranges of aircraft limited to the individual aircraft Units Tech level, not the countries researched Tech level. (Tech level 1 SAC flying 52 hexes because you have researched to Tech level 5 just bugs me a bit).

4. SAC ability to use Carpet Bombing - Working like naval bombardment but based on Tech level of bomber instead of number of ships. ( might need to be limited by requiring the SAC not perform a mission the turn before or after the Carpet Bombing attack ).

Love the game. Keep up the Great Work[&o]




Krupinski -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (8/29/2010 12:31:30 PM)

when you klick on a unit you see the range and movement points left on some hexes like 5,4,3,2,1.

it would be nice, if i could select a destination outside the range of the unit for the current turn. the next turn the unit will mnove there on autopilot. you can show this on the map on the hexes like 3,2,1,0,-1,-2,-3...

so i have not to select the unit every turn to get it to the far away destination point.




Magpius -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (8/30/2010 1:08:23 AM)

I think I've mentioned this elsewhere, but just simple U.I. improvements to give it the same controls as SOP.
ie
Center on map hot-keys &
Right mouse button map drag would be useful.




cpdeyoung -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (9/8/2010 2:41:31 AM)

Please adjust the penalty process for having over 500 PP. When your production per turn is over 500 it is a bother to have this penalty occur. Frankly I am tired of this device, and would like to see it removed entirely. The problem with saving for a nuclear device , or for naval builds, is already known. I know waste happens in wartime, but how about it being considered as already factored into the net PP we receive.

Chuck




17russia -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (9/10/2010 5:13:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung

Please adjust the penalty process for having over 500 PP. When your production per turn is over 500 it is a bother to have this penalty occur. Frankly I am tired of this device, and would like to see it removed entirely. The problem with saving for a nuclear device , or for naval builds, is already known. I know waste happens in wartime, but how about it being considered as already factored into the net PP we receive.

Chuck


I think that another problem is convoyed PP taking a country over 500 and forcing the penality




17russia -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (9/10/2010 5:54:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung

Please adjust the penalty process for having over 500 PP. When your production per turn is over 500 it is a bother to have this penalty occur. Frankly I am tired of this device, and would like to see it removed entirely. The problem with saving for a nuclear device , or for naval builds, is already known. I know waste happens in wartime, but how about it being considered as already factored into the net PP we receive.

Chuck


1) UK should have to supply units in Africa by Convoy
2) Africa should not be able to be used as a origination point for supply convoys to other regions without a supply convoy from UK to Africa
3) PP convoys should not be able to originate from Africa
4) The AI seems to group units around siege cities way out of proportion to what is needed (20+) units. When these units should be moving on. (Riga).
5) Russian Units group in Finland and are left there after the north is dead.
6) AI should create more Corps size units and less Divisional units (Picking them off is too easy).
7) I get sub success messages as Germany when I have no subs out of port
8) DIPLOMACY, any country should be able to declare war on any other country. Germany should be allowed to take out Spain, Finland, Hungry, and other historical Axis minor country. We should not be tied to political history so much.
9) Would be cool to have the ability to construct factories and other economic infrastructure such as the investment in Russian oil option when that is taken.
10) Air interception needs to be overhauled; Allied bombers can go through 7+ Germany fighters and bomb with the possibility of taking no bomber losses.
11) Carriers should defend against land based Tac Air targeting the fleet more effectively. Carriers are expensive, they should have claws.
12) Carrier Air should be able to recon land areas like land based air.
13) Russian army collapse should take place as soon as DoW from either side.
14) Would like to see Engineer units with the ability to build fortifications
15) Kiel Canal
16) Le Mans is never occupied by an allied unit
17) Germany should have the option of absorbing Axis Minors, out right annexation.
18) Introduction of Artillery Divisions that could fire at a 2 hex range.
19) Once a commander reaches ?/20 the next experience point pushes him to the next level at ?/0




cpdeyoung -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (9/10/2010 7:17:48 PM)

Many good points here, but I do not agree with 18 on artillery units. I thought 15, Kiel Canal was already there?

Chuck




borsook79 -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (9/10/2010 10:14:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: 17russia


quote:

ORIGINAL: cpdeyoung

Please adjust the penalty process for having over 500 PP. When your production per turn is over 500 it is a bother to have this penalty occur. Frankly I am tired of this device, and would like to see it removed entirely. The problem with saving for a nuclear device , or for naval builds, is already known. I know waste happens in wartime, but how about it being considered as already factored into the net PP we receive.

Chuck


1) UK should have to supply units in Africa by Convoy
2) Africa should not be able to be used as a origination point for supply convoys to other regions without a supply convoy from UK to Africa
3) PP convoys should not be able to originate from Africa
4) The AI seems to group units around siege cities way out of proportion to what is needed (20+) units. When these units should be moving on. (Riga).
5) Russian Units group in Finland and are left there after the north is dead.
6) AI should create more Corps size units and less Divisional units (Picking them off is too easy).
7) I get sub success messages as Germany when I have no subs out of port
8) DIPLOMACY, any country should be able to declare war on any other country. Germany should be allowed to take out Spain, Finland, Hungry, and other historical Axis minor country. We should not be tied to political history so much.
9) Would be cool to have the ability to construct factories and other economic infrastructure such as the investment in Russian oil option when that is taken.
10) Air interception needs to be overhauled; Allied bombers can go through 7+ Germany fighters and bomb with the possibility of taking no bomber losses.
11) Carriers should defend against land based Tac Air targeting the fleet more effectively. Carriers are expensive, they should have claws.
12) Carrier Air should be able to recon land areas like land based air.
13) Russian army collapse should take place as soon as DoW from either side.
14) Would like to see Engineer units with the ability to build fortifications
15) Kiel Canal
16) Le Mans is never occupied by an allied unit
17) Germany should have the option of absorbing Axis Minors, out right annexation.
18) Introduction of Artillery Divisions that could fire at a 2 hex range.
19) Once a commander reaches ?/20 the next experience point pushes him to the next level at ?/0


Many great suggestions, but please do not introduce 18! this would really break the game scale and feel... Also I do not think that 17 is such a good idea




Tomokatu -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (1/15/2011 1:42:00 AM)

A suggested enhancement for WWII:ToW for the next patch (1.82 - if it ever happens) or for some astute programmer to write as an add-on, would be a Planner's Aide.

I envisage the ability to select a hex (even if the visible hex grid is turned OFF in Prferences) and specify a range in hexes (for planning air drops) or in APs (for moving land units) or in supply distances (in Mot Div APs). All these would be useful in assembling assault forces, making sure that they were all in full supply, or an acceptable level of depleted supply.


[image]local://upfiles/19934/B6A3253C1B2144C08A993A2F63BB7C12.gif[/image]




Tomokatu -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (1/15/2011 1:43:02 AM)

An alternative would be to mark the two end points of a line and have a sidebar readout of the values.

Range
APs Infantry,
APs Motorised,
APs Armour
Supply Level 100%, 66%, 33% OoS

I know that movement and airdrop values ARE highlighted during the game phase, but that means that generals have to commit units to the action before planning for the next one.

[image]local://upfiles/19934/B74D4BE32B334DB08F3B07EADDEAB504.gif[/image]




Tomokatu -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (1/15/2011 1:44:08 AM)

...or do a LOT of LMB/RMB clicking.




sheridangreen -> RE: Wish list for a possible new patch (1/22/2011 12:05:30 AM)

After reading through this thread, I took note of a bunch of suggestions I liked and thought would be good additions to a future update.

- Some kind of overrun mechanic is needed. It is incredibly frustrating to have to make three or more 7:1 attacks and not destroy a unit because you can’t roll a 5 or 6. Maybe double or triple the AP cost to move into a hex and destroy the other unit if you have greater than 8:1 odds. Either that or make an 8:1 column where every roll causes 100% damage to a defending unit. This would use up 2 APs for the attack, plus whatever APs it costs to move into the space would represent overrun costs.

- Tactical Bombers are taking too much damage against land units. Rolling a 3-6 on the attacker’s die (66% chance) causes a loss of a strength point no matter if you are attacking a weak infantry division or fully repaired corps. You don’t get to bumped up to column 2 (roll 5-6 [33% chance] to lose a strength point) until you attack a level 2 unit with >80% strength. But that doesn’t make sense, since newer, heavier units should have a greater chance to cause damage. Damage to aircraft should be reduced to be not common at lower upgrade levels; however, damage rates and effectiveness should drop if attacking smaller, damaged units versus full, heavy corps. A more difficult to program fix, but definitely better, would be to treat tac bombers like shore bombardment. Commit a certain number of bombers to reduce the EFFECTIVENESS of the unit rather than the strength. Airstrikes in WWII were good at messing up organization and making you keep your head down.

- Raiders inflicting damage on their attackers. I’ve noticed that even single-ship fleets that are set on “Regular” will not shoot back, and that the first ship in a multi-ship fleet does not shoot either. Please just make a change so that all ships shoot at each other in combat, but that Raiders always fight by themselves. This may help the AI, too, since they tend to group their ships in small numbers, when it is clear that big fleets are the way to go (if you have two ships, 50% of your force can’t shoot; if you have 10 ships, only 10% of your ships won’t shoot).

- Tactical Bombers doing sea attacks rarely take casualties and score hits very often. While aircraft tended to dominate the seas where there was no air cover, they didn’t hit every time, and grouped ships tended to shoot down a lot of aircraft. This was especially the case where carriers were present, and that doesn’t seem to come through in the game. Also, this situation would be helped out if Fighters could provide air cover to Fleets in the adjacent sea zone, which was very common during WWII.

- ‘Tweaking down Strategic Bombers”; I think this would be fixed if air intercept chances by fighters were increased, and that the -4 column for strategic bombing losses was fixed (right now, on the -4 column, bombers will only lose a strength point if a 1 is rolled; if you are on the ‘0’ column, you lose a strength point if a 1-2 is rolled. I think the -4 column has a typo, and should at least have a 50% or 66% chance of losing bombers.) On the other hand, if the previous fixes are made, please also change the default value of -4 for air superiority if the enemy does not have ANY fighters in range. For example, I have German bombers attacking cities in the UK, and I know that the UK has zero air units left, but I still get a -4 to air superiority. If the enemy has no air units in range, the air superiority modifier should be 0, not -4.

- A visualization of the sub warfare and the impact of British PP's. I see the “U-boat Strike” event, but don’t really see how much it is actually costing them. (this one is not a big deal; it’s enough to know that UK is losing PPs)




Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.265625