RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Revolution Under Siege Gold >> Mods and Scenarios



Message

JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 1:31:07 AM)

...and it is too late here to comment it more....[>:][;)]



Sodei -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 1:37:00 AM)

What were your objectives early on, I am aiming a Kazan/Penza/Saransk line in the mid, the North is not much a trouble and the South is mostly unattended. Most of the work is done without the Czechs though.

EDIT: Ohh, I obviously don't know what time it is on your side[:)].I wish you a good night of sleep!


EDIT2 : So noob I didn't even had the savegame [8|]



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 6:44:33 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sodei

I had the same but one year before, it crippled my capacity to fight even if I had the initiative. Eventually, the cheer number of the Reds coupled with there NM pushed me all the way back. I am trying a no-RGD/historical path and will try to counter that NM fall. It is a obvious but highly unhistorical choice to transport your troops from Murmansk to Archangelsk now that the front is blockaded. Maybe something must be done about it... Chilpreic will know best[:D]. It those give you some sort of movement capacity early on though.

EDIT: BTW, can you tell me the plus vs minus of going the ahistorical path for the SibW Keke, thank a you in advance.

EDIT2: I now have a game with only 2 actives 3-star army leaders ( The Czech guy died)Yet I cannot promote Miller...



Hi, I will look at today. [:)]



JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 9:29:34 AM)

I hate to repeat this, but there's obviously something significantly wrong with how battles affect national morale. That is, they don't affect it at all! When playing with the Southern Whites, I loved the fact how accurately NM gains and losses reflected the size of a battle and importance of the region it was fought on. It couldn't have been tied to the values of lost units only. I have a feeling that the rather complicated morale settings for Siberians causes this.

A case in point in below screenshot: An important battle with a strategic location captured - no NM gains at all!

[image]local://upfiles/5859/860E2B7642CF4EC1997EC98BA76022B8.jpg[/image]



JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 9:36:55 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sodei

What were your objectives early on, I am aiming a Kazan/Penza/Saransk line in the mid, the North is not much a trouble and the South is mostly unattended. Most of the work is done without the Czechs though.


Czechs to the North, Komuch to the South, and the rest to the middle. The objective was to get the lateral railroad between Cheboksary and Saratov under control.



Sodei -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 9:46:34 AM)

I see, pretty much the same as I did, probably with more offensive punch. I was resting my troop thinking that winter could bring me rest and I would keep the offensive, NM wouldn't permit it though. I second your point-of-view on the subject, NM as something wrong with SibW, even if I cannot get my hand on it by lack of modding skills. I have tried (by mod) to add Pol Value to units and it unbalance the whole game, even by adding it only to a specified gendre ( artillery) but it doesn't help you much in the realistic  view. Basicly, it those not represent the pressure that Koltchak had because of the important NM gained from battles BUT countered the aggravating NM loss per turn that SibW have to suffer.

I personnaly did not find a way to represent, to my preference not the overall mod, how hard the SibW suffered from internal dissent. FYI I did not implant my 3 recommendations into the game, mainly because I don't know hoe to lock units into place or the specific event that needed to be adressed for those recommendations.

EDIT : When all this beta-testing is over, I would love to try a White versus Red PBME with you Keke, you look like a veteran and I would love to race to a victory against you :D



JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 10:05:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sodei

EDIT : When all this beta-testing is over, I would love to try a White versus Red PBME with you Keke, you look like a veteran and I would love to race to a victory against you :D


Why not? I may look like a veteran but I have absolutely no experience in playing the Reds (yet).



JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 10:36:24 AM)

Off the topic: How about my idea for a new AGEOD-title? http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?p=216973#post216973 [;)]



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 10:39:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

I hate to repeat this, but there's obviously something significantly wrong with how battles affect national morale. That is, they don't affect it at all! When playing with the Southern Whites, I loved the fact how accurately NM gains and losses reflected the size of a battle and importance of the region it was fought on. It couldn't have been tied to the values of lost units only. I have a feeling that the rather complicated morale settings for Siberians causes this.





There are no relations between events about NM and the engine, so there is something odd indeed, but not from the FY events. Is it the same in the offical version? I'm going to take a look.

I've solved the 2 bugs about Wh2 and Miller( the last being a tricky one).



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 10:41:28 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

Off the topic: How about my idea for a new AGEOD-title? http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?p=216973#post216973 [;)]



here I stand is a superb game indeed, but not with 15 days turns [;)]



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 10:43:16 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sodei

I see, pretty much the same as I did, probably with more offensive punch. I was resting my troop thinking that winter could bring me rest and I would keep the offensive, NM wouldn't permit it though. I second your point-of-view on the subject, NM as something wrong with SibW, even if I cannot get my hand on it by lack of modding skills. I have tried (by mod) to add Pol Value to units and it unbalance the whole game, even by adding it only to a specified gendre ( artillery) but it doesn't help you much in the realistic  view. Basicly, it those not represent the pressure that Koltchak had because of the important NM gained from battles BUT countered the aggravating NM loss per turn that SibW have to suffer.

I personnaly did not find a way to represent, to my preference not the overall mod, how hard the SibW suffered from internal dissent. FYI I did not implant my 3 recommendations into the game, mainly because I don't know hoe to lock units into place or the specific event that needed to be adressed for those recommendations.

EDIT : When all this beta-testing is over, I would love to try a White versus Red PBME with you Keke, you look like a veteran and I would love to race to a victory against you :D



I'm yet listening but the first step is to solve the 0 NM variation in battle for Siberians, as it will have tremendous consequences.



JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 10:48:48 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chliperic

There are no relations between events about NM and the engine, so there is something odd indeed, but not from the FY events. Is it the same in the offical version? I'm going to take a look.



Can't remember. And I'd really hate to try it. [:D]



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 10:59:38 AM)

I will. [:D]

About your battle, I'm going to update the VP for WH3 objectives. Tzaritsyn is too low ( 5) and Omsk too high (30)



Sodei -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 11:02:09 AM)

Then can I be considered a real beta-tester [:D] Look at my majestic Arrogance. Just joking, as long as my favorite mod cleansed, I would consider myself the most happy man. On the NM issue, if this is a game engine bug, that would clear all my problem axed toward the SibW. In fact, that compensate for everything else AND would explain the insane amount of NM moral gained or lsot from my previous game. Lasted 10 turns and was deleted because of uber-stupidity.

Keke, I am no Red pro, but if you and I can play Denikin and Koltchak ( Me being the superior one without a doubt[:D], you would only fall as a number two in Russia[X(]), maybe we could prove a challenge to the Red AI Chilperic made.

Even if I lost my game as SibW, I would obviously win. My Orgueil wouldn't permit me to lose.



Just joking[;)]



JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 12:52:00 PM)

Here it is!

Mr. Pancake's Untested Weather Mod. [sm=character0272.gif]

I used WiTE's weather table to modify North Continental and South Continental weather zones. Probability for blizzard turns during winter months (Dec, Jan, Feb) should be significantly higher. Same for rasputitsa (mud) in April and October. There is also a small chance for a thaw turn (mud) during the deepest winter.

For some odd reason November was a "mud turn" in default settings. Now a snowfall then is much more likelier.

Instructions: Download the zip-file attached here. Extract the two files into the Weathers-folder (RUS\GameData\Weathers). You may want to backup the originals first.




Krot -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 1:02:36 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chliperic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

I hate to repeat this, but there's obviously something significantly wrong with how battles affect national morale. That is, they don't affect it at all! When playing with the Southern Whites, I loved the fact how accurately NM gains and losses reflected the size of a battle and importance of the region it was fought on. It couldn't have been tied to the values of lost units only. I have a feeling that the rather complicated morale settings for Siberians causes this.





There are no relations between events about NM and the engine, so there is something odd indeed, but not from the FY events. Is it the same in the offical version? I'm going to take a look.

I've solved the 2 bugs about Wh2 and Miller( the last being a tricky one).

I concur the report that national morale is immune to battle results in current FY version. Playing as Southern Whites last week it was OK. With "weekend" version of FY my Southern Whites NM around øû 99-101 after months of decisive victories. The only NM points I got are those for enemy garrisons surrenders. Regretfully I cannot attach my saves at the moment.



JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 1:17:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Krot
I concur the report that national morale is immune to battle results in current FY version. Playing as Southern Whites last week it was OK. With "weekend" version of FY my Southern Whites NM around øû 99-101 after months of decisive victories. The only NM points I got are those for enemy garrisons surrenders. Regretfully I cannot attach my saves at the moment.


Thanks for the info! So it is the latest version that broke the relationship between battles and NM.



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 1:27:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Krot


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chliperic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

I hate to repeat this, but there's obviously something significantly wrong with how battles affect national morale. That is, they don't affect it at all! When playing with the Southern Whites, I loved the fact how accurately NM gains and losses reflected the size of a battle and importance of the region it was fought on. It couldn't have been tied to the values of lost units only. I have a feeling that the rather complicated morale settings for Siberians causes this.





There are no relations between events about NM and the engine, so there is something odd indeed, but not from the FY events. Is it the same in the offical version? I'm going to take a look.

I've solved the 2 bugs about Wh2 and Miller( the last being a tricky one).

I concur the report that national morale is immune to battle results in current FY version. Playing as Southern Whites last week it was OK. With "weekend" version of FY my Southern Whites NM around øû 99-101 after months of decisive victories. The only NM points I got are those for enemy garrisons surrenders. Regretfully I cannot attach my saves at the moment.



interesting indeed. What i've done, God, What I've done ?[:)]

Understood: That was by changing sudden death rules....Unexpected side effect. I will get back in the next version to standard sudden death rules. I will add Keke's weather mod too, a few fixes.

Sorry for the unconvenience. This side effect isn't documented...I've learnt yet something new today.[:)]

At least, it proves some are playing FY [:D]



JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 1:29:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke
Mr. Pancake's Untested Weather Mod. [sm=character0272.gif]


Very promising initial test results with "Ice March" -scenario. First blizzard arrived on late January. From the screenshot you can see regions in darker red belonging to South Continental weather zone with very harsh weather stormy weather.



[image]local://upfiles/5859/DA9496E224C348ED8DADB0E7B8DDE175.jpg[/image]



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 1:43:15 PM)

It will be anice addition to FY. Confirming what Ph Thibaut said one year ago about the weather problem related to very small numbers.



JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 2:01:22 PM)

I ran through the scen. There were no more blizzard turns, and that was just what I wanted - once per winter would be optimal. [:)]

March was is a bit too winter-like for my liking, but it probably was just bad luck with the dice. Further testing will show the truth.



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 2:04:00 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

I ran through the scen. There were no more blizzard turns, and that was just what I wanted - once per winter would be optimal. [:)]

March was is a bit too winter-like for my liking, but it probably was just bad luck with the dice. Further testing will show the truth.



Good point I named the mod FY. If not, it would now be the Keke and Clovis RUS mod, with the Krot's AAR on Keke and Clovis Rus mod [:D]

Now will blizzard freeze pancakes? [:D]




Nikel -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 2:32:22 PM)

Clovis, the bug posted in 488 is fixed?

Perhaps it is better to post it in AGEod forum [:)]



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 2:37:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Nikel

Clovis, the bug posted in 488 is fixed?

Perhaps it is better to post it in AGEod forum [:)]



I've fixed it in FY indeed.



Nikel -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 2:48:46 PM)

Look [:)]




[image]local://upfiles/31548/3F3624A9CE02472E8A2D1A0DC81D08AD.jpg[/image]



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 3:05:09 PM)

New version of Fatal years available

Available from my blog ( see my sig)

Compatible with ongoing games.



What’s new?



- fixes an unexpected side effects of Victory rules ( NM variations by battles results should be back)

- some glitches fixed ( Miller may form an Army, some units without portraits)

this version comes with the Keke’s weather mod ( more blizzard during winter). Thanks to him.



Krot -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 3:10:24 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chliperic

quote:

ORIGINAL: Krot


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chliperic


quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke

I hate to repeat this, but there's obviously something significantly wrong with how battles affect national morale. That is, they don't affect it at all! When playing with the Southern Whites, I loved the fact how accurately NM gains and losses reflected the size of a battle and importance of the region it was fought on. It couldn't have been tied to the values of lost units only. I have a feeling that the rather complicated morale settings for Siberians causes this.





There are no relations between events about NM and the engine, so there is something odd indeed, but not from the FY events. Is it the same in the offical version? I'm going to take a look.

I've solved the 2 bugs about Wh2 and Miller( the last being a tricky one).

I concur the report that national morale is immune to battle results in current FY version. Playing as Southern Whites last week it was OK. With "weekend" version of FY my Southern Whites NM around øû 99-101 after months of decisive victories. The only NM points I got are those for enemy garrisons surrenders. Regretfully I cannot attach my saves at the moment.



interesting indeed. What i've done, God, What I've done ?[:)]

Understood: That was by changing sudden death rules....Unexpected side effect. I will get back in the next version to standard sudden death rules. I will add Keke's weather mod too, a few fixes.

Sorry for the unconvenience. This side effect isn't documented...I've learnt yet something new today.[:)]

At least, it proves some are playing FY [:D]


Here see my November 1918 backup files attached. Plus to NM I have mentioned another minor bug which appeared with new FY version. NW White partizan units which appear with von Neff corp aroun Pskov in November 1918 are now missing portraits and have Siberian militia origin instead of NW Whites irregular as before (I mean in previous FY version).






Krot -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 3:28:11 PM)

Clovis, you are improving FY so fast that while I was trying to attach my saves you have already corrected the reported bug and added Keke weather mod. Awesome. [&o]

Many thanks to Keke. I always wished the weather in RUS to be more diverse. As fellow Northerner (to some degree) I also missed winter blizzards playing RUS. [;)]



Chilperic -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 3:37:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Krot

Clovis, you are improving FY so fast that while I was trying to attach my saves you have already corrected the reported bug and added Keke weather mod. Awesome. [&o]

Many thanks to Keke. I always wished the weather in RUS to be more diverse. As fellow Northerner (to some degree) I also missed winter blizzards playing RUS. [;)]



i've taken a cumbersome way to fix the gfx glitch rather than create a new model, hence your new bug. But creating a new model would have possibly causing CTD in ongoing games.

I've fixed your bug. I will update the mod one more time today.

I prefer to updater fast, as long it doesn't hinder continuing games begun with older version. I'm not selling FY and feedback is faster as is. Then I feel the core of the mod is yet here and unchanged. after all, we're working mostly on balance, victory conditions, gfx glitches and AI improvements on secondary fronts. I know other games with current larger and deeper troubles. [:)]




JJKettunen -> RE: Fatal Years for 1.03 (9/5/2011 3:41:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Chliperic

New version of Fatal years available



Excellent! I may start a new game with Siberians later.



Page: <<   < prev  19 20 [21] 22 23   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.515625