RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Commander - The Great War



Message

operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (5/26/2014 12:21:52 AM)

quote:

Screen shot is from the 1916 scenario,in 1914 Basra is controlled by Turkey!


Monsieur Kirk,

Have not played a 1916 scenario in quite awhile, never in MP, so I am going to hold off commenting on the Basra Capital change, but would ask if Bagdad is still a Capital? also, if Basra is a British Capital can it deploy units from the production queue directly there? Which does not sound right. For one of the changes to the game was the introduction of the ability of Persia to build units, where there "none" before. I'll have to refresh myself as to if they (Persia) even had units at all then, in that 1916 scenario. IIRC the British should have been within 30 hexes of the Persian Capital to be in full supply.

quote:

Kirk wrote;
I have left a message with the software wiz kid,to see if there is a way,to have Battleships & Cruisers offer supply to land forces,say within 2 or 3 hexes from the coast,fingers crossed something can be done to fix this long standing problem,since the game was released!


Never thought about supply going that deep from a ship. It would create chaos. I know I would have a blast with it, however, I would pity the hoops a defending nation would have to jump through to get units in place, especially with limited RR points or lack of nearby cities to deploy units off the production queue. Sheer chaos!

Boston, Bob


[image]local://upfiles/43885/2FFE471A9D414AD4B069A9C0E6E94DD4.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (5/26/2014 3:13:44 AM)

Heavy German mortars firing on Przemysl forts before the attack.


[image]local://upfiles/43885/644E185C7CC5405381834E24EA882E2C.jpg[/image]



kirk23 -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (5/26/2014 10:26:18 AM)

I have asked the software wiz kid,to see if an official fix can be made,for the Naval supply problem in the Persian Gulf.I have removed Basra Capital status,it is now just a City,I have done a trial run, by placing a British Cruiser into the Persian Gulf,to supply Britain's land forces there,but as you can see,even the Cruiser is out off supply range,and its trapped in the Persian Gulf without an exit.I will end this on a positive note,Transports now have a combat sound added,when landing troops onto the enemy coast,as they did not have an attacking sound file before![:)]

[image]local://upfiles/36378/E0582274BAF44BBEBE27AA812CB66FE9.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (5/26/2014 11:26:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

I have asked the software wiz kid,to see if an official fix can be made,for the Naval supply problem in the Persian Gulf.I have removed Basra Capital status,it is now just a City,I have done a trial run, by placing a British Cruiser into the Persian Gulf,to supply Britain's land forces there,but as you can see,even the Cruiser is out off supply range,and its trapped in the Persian Gulf without an exit.I will end this on a positive note,Transports now have a combat sound added,when landing troops onto the enemy coast,as they did not have an attacking sound file before![:)]

[image]local://upfiles/36378/E0582274BAF44BBEBE27AA812CB66FE9.jpg[/image]


First off, I would attack Kuwait first, to achieve half supply, also a cruiser could bombard it and at the same time supply a disembarked unit or two. question what a out of supply cruiser would do? lose a strength step each turn, would it be able to bombard, if so at what capacity and would an out of supply cruiser be able to supply units? Once capturing Kuwait should resolve the supply problem for the ship (port) and maybe turn the Gulf waters to neutral. Then again, those waters should not have red dots to begin with, unless the Straights of Hormus (off map) are being considered a land hex.

Logistically: A cruiser takes 12 turns in the production queue, so a cruiser could not be next to Kuwait for at least 13 turns, maybe 14 or more turns if out of supply (an unknown situation). Kirk, How many hexes can a out of supply cruiser travel?

Black Sea is all neutral sea hexes to both sides, same with the Baltic and Red seas. Oh! I think I see now why the Persian Gulf would be red dot, is because it is further than 25 hexes from a friendly port. Funny thing is that transports are in supply when in the Persian Gulf! How can that be? while cruisers are out of supply......



kirk23 -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (5/26/2014 10:26:25 PM)

1917 Scenario 2nd July Greece joins the Entente.[:D]

[image]local://upfiles/36378/9AF3FAC3918545E4AB87D9484D837575.jpg[/image]



kirk23 -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (5/27/2014 9:04:46 PM)

German research 1918 scenario. ( I bet there are things on here you have never seen before )[:D]

[image]local://upfiles/36378/48188915220A406C9F7E5B49F4424626.jpg[/image]



kirk23 -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (5/27/2014 10:43:23 PM)

Can someone tell me why the game has Greece as neutral in March 1918,Greece should still be in the war.[&:]( I'm discovering all these errors in the game,while I'm fixing all the Tech research that is all over the place )

[image]local://upfiles/36378/BE487CAD00134BDB977F29EB462DCB1E.jpg[/image]



kirk23 -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (5/27/2014 10:57:02 PM)

Greece are now in the war in 1918 Ok![:D]

Greece will be getting Artillery in game.[8D]

Greece
Field artillery
7.5cm Schneider-Creusot QF guns
Mountain artillery
7.5cm QF Schneider or Krupp OP guns
Siege artillery
17cm, 15cm, & 10.5cm guns

[image]local://upfiles/36378/CEC869155E6D4366A4CF4F84A02632D2.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/2/2014 2:19:23 PM)

Kirk,

You mentioned someplace, whereby capturing enemy hexes/territory it increases NM for the aggressor. What is the formula for how this increases NM? And what is the effect on the nation losing hexes? Mind you I am only talking about "non-city hexes". I will try and find the post to refresh this.

Bob

quote:

Morale is also based on other in game mechanics,like one or more of your Enemies surrendering,along with a few other things the AI calculates,did you know that you gain National Morale,by simply expanding your borders invading your enemies territory, plus I'm sure you noticed that at the start of the game,most Countries start with their National Morale in excess off 100%

< Message edited by kirk23 -- 5/23/2014 7:39:09 PM >


Found it.....



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/2/2014 6:34:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

quote:

Kirk,

What is NM% loss to owner for losing city?

Curious, Bob

<edit>

Is the NM% loss the same for losing a capital city vs city or fort?

< Message edited by operating -- 4/9/2014 2:30:38 PM >


Kirk,

Read page 26 about National Morale (NM) in the Manual: it does not explain the difference in NM percentages between Capital Cities and Cities, only that one is greater than the other. Forts are not covered in this section as to losing or capturing and it's effect on NM. Nor, is there any reference to cities with ports (which are of additional value) (supply fleet destination). Trying to weigh in on an MP end game strategy, where I am losing on one front, yet winning on another, need some hard numbers.

Thanks, Bob


Hi Bob,I tracked this down in the Game Morale script.

The heading states NO LONGER USED?

-- no longer used
--~ function CaptureMoraleEffect(captor, construction)
--~ if construction.type == Construction.TYPE_CITY or construction.type == Construction.TYPE_FORTRESS then
--~ -- morale loss for original owner
--~ local owner = construction.hex.originalFaction
--~ ChangeFactionMorale(owner, -100)

--~ -- morale boost for captor's factions
--~ for faction in captor.factions do
--~ ChangeFactionMorale(faction, 50)
--~ end
--~ elseif construction.type == Construction.TYPE_CAPITAL then
--~ -- morale loss for original owner
--~ local owner = construction.hex.originalFaction
--~ ChangeFactionMorale(owner, -200)

--~ -- morale boost for captor's factions
--~ for faction in captor.factions do
--~ ChangeFactionMorale(faction, 100)
--~ end
--~ end
--~ end

If you loose a City or Fortress = -10% Morale loss to your Nation.
If you loose a Capital City = -20% Morale loss to your Nation.

If you Capture a City or Fortress = +5 Morale boost.
If you Capture a Capital City = +10 Morale boost.


Kirk the Wizard,[;)]

Question: My opponent captured some of my cities and a Capital (realize that I take a hit in NM). Then I recaptured those cities and Capital; (3 part question), Does the owning nation of the cities and Capital regain NM if an ally does the recapturing? or does the ally get an NM increase? Also, Does my opponent take a NM hit upon losing those captured cities and Capital?

Stats crazy, Bob[:)]



kirk23 -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/2/2014 10:17:11 PM)

Hi Bob, The below apply to the individual Country.But if a Major power surrenders,then everyone who is part of that alliance takes a Morale hit.

If you loose a City or Fortress = -10% Morale loss to your Nation.
If you loose a Capital City = -20% Morale loss to your Nation.

If you Capture a City or Fortress = +5 Morale boost.
If you Capture a Capital City = +10 Morale boost.


Might I suggest you just click the end turn, without defending,and watch the AI forces capture your Capital.Watch what happens to your Nations morale percentage takes a big drop,as also stated previously,your country also looses morale if you take heavy casualties in battle,or loose your Battlefleet.[;)]



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/2/2014 10:51:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

Hi Bob, The below apply to the individual Country.But if a Major power surrenders,then everyone who is part of that alliance takes a Morale hit.

If you loose a City or Fortress = -10% Morale loss to your Nation.
If you loose a Capital City = -20% Morale loss to your Nation.

If you Capture a City or Fortress = +5 Morale boost.
If you Capture a Capital City = +10 Morale boost.


Might I suggest you just click the end turn, without defending,and watch the AI forces capture your Capital.Watch what happens to your Nations morale percentage takes a big drop,as also stated previously,your country also looses morale if you take heavy casualties in battle,or loose your Battlefleet.[;)]

I should have been a little more explicit; The Capital is Algiers with Tunis and Sfax as cities. While my entire Entente fleets were occupied bashing Split, Trieste, a Turk garrison snuck under the radar to make the captures of these cities, the damage was done before I could react. It was not a fatal blow, it was one that I did recover from by recapturing and killing 2 units. When I posted the above question, I had just recaptured everything and thought immediately to ask you about results, did not wait a turn to see what (if any) these actions might do to NM. Again, I can not see what the results are or know positively how it would affect my opponent. I expect that these cities will fully recover for they were originally mine. What I was not sure of, is if the same city get's captured and recaptured a number of times, would your above STATS hold true each and every time? or does it change in some way to some degree?.



kirk23 -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/3/2014 6:14:32 AM)

Yes you need to watch out for this,Capitals in your Colonies same rule applies.If the Central Power player,captures Algiers,France looses -20 Morale the same as if it were Paris,and if and when you recapture it,you only recover + 10 Morale.[;)]



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/3/2014 10:10:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

Yes you need to watch out for this,Capitals in your Colonies same rule applies.If the Central Power player,captures Algiers,France looses -20 Morale the same as if it were Paris,and if and when you recapture it,you only recover + 10 Morale.[;)]

Kirk,

Whereas, an Italian garrison recaptured Algiers and a English cavalry recaptured Tunis and Sfax, does France get a NM boost out of this by getting these cities back?

Bob



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/3/2014 6:32:24 PM)

quote:

Amtrick wrote:
3. Convoys should be moved by the human player. Unless I missed a setting somewhere (entirely possible) the AI moves all convoys. And South Atlantic CP convoys will doggedly keep trying to make for Cuxhaven, even if the CP controls Brest or Nantes. Just not very realistic. And very frustrating to see all though PPs chewed up in the English Channel.

Kirk,

Can changes be implemented to the convoy system? Yes, the AI convoy makes for less micro-management, but it does take away the elusiveness of how it could function. Might there be a in game selection button to let the AI control convoys or player controlled convoys. The smart player can lie in wait for a somewhat predictable convoy. Have had some games recently, where my opponent had this uncanny ability to ambush convoys rather frequently.

I can understand where Amtrick is coming from about CP convoys and what he would like to see done. On the other side of the coin, English convoys could go to Port Siad or port Suez to unload, also Gibralter to be fair, actually I feel they should go to England. After clearing Brest, there is very little chance a CP convoy would go undetected through the English Channel. If in SP the English navy never misses on the opportunity to sink a convoy there.

Just thinking, Bob



Connfire -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/3/2014 8:05:44 PM)

I agree with the above post. As far as which ports convoys can unload, what if the rule was convoys can offload at any port with uninterrupted rail access to the nation's homeland? This way British and French can't offload in the colonies, but to use amtick's example German convoys can offload in captured French ports.

In any event, I would also prefer to see convoys under human control. To continually ram German convoys into choke points controlled by the Allies with 0% chance of survival is not realistic - the sailors would rebel. It is probably a good thing that convoy losses don't effect German NM. Perhaps a warning, similar to that when you end a turn without moving a country's units, could be implemented to remind players who forget to move their convoys?



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/3/2014 9:01:23 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Connfire

I agree with the above post. As far as which ports convoys can unload, what if the rule was convoys can offload at any port with uninterrupted rail access to the nation's homeland? This way British and French can't offload in the colonies, but to use amtick's example German convoys can offload in captured French ports.

In any event, I would also prefer to see convoys under human control. To continually ram German convoys into choke points controlled by the Allies with 0% chance of survival is not realistic - the sailors would rebel. It is probably a good thing that convoy losses don't effect German NM. Perhaps a warning, similar to that when you end a turn without moving a country's units, could be implemented to remind players who forget to move their convoys?

Each Entente convoy that reaches it's home country increases that country's MP by 1 (page 25 of the Manual/Convoys) (the Manual is somewhat ambiguous in it's wording, it leaves out specific language concerning CP convoy MP bonus point, even though all supply ships use the same route of travel, particularly from the South Atlantic where Germany has Colonies).

Connfire's thoughts and suggestions, mirror mine.

<edit>

Just thought of this: If an Entente convoy has the value of I MP, then if this convoy is sunk, maybe the owning country should loose 1 MP or a NM loss %. due to this loss of 1 MP.



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/6/2014 12:29:18 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

German research 1918 scenario. ( I bet there are things on here you have never seen before )[:D]

[image]local://upfiles/36378/48188915220A406C9F7E5B49F4424626.jpg[/image]

The 1918 scenario starts March 21st, ends in 21 turns, it looks like the triple gun turrets won't be available for at least 10 turns, maybe more, then another turn to apply tech, and at what cost? Do all the naval nations have this same tech tree picture? Germany has one BB and a few cruisers, I'm sure Entente has a lot more in their fleets. Just a little skeptical.



Tomokatu -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/7/2014 7:57:12 PM)

Sounds to me as though the solution is to make the play open-ended ie. delete the forced end in 1918 and rely on the other surrender or capturing the capital conditions to end the game. It would certainly make the tech tree options valid for a CP player who has managed to keep the High Seas Fleet in being.
Can this be done? (It may already be the case in MP, I don't know)
Should it be considered in the scenarios?



Connfire -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/7/2014 9:41:30 PM)

I agree with Tomakatu's statement. Can we have an option to not have the game finish at the end of 1918? Maybe games like this can include a "Surrender" button if the game appears hopeless for either side?



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/7/2014 10:19:39 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Connfire

I agree with Tomakatu's statement. Can we have an option to not have the game finish at the end of 1918? Maybe games like this can include a "Surrender" button if the game appears hopeless for either side?

Tomokatu & Connfire,

There is a "SURRENDER" button that can be hit at anytime in MP during your turn. As for myself, I hate using it, there are players who do abuse it.

Yes, it would be nice to go beyond the finish date in SP and MP. Right now, the end of scenario messages makes it almost too annoying to continue on, just for the fun of it.

Tomokatu, If a country's sole Capital is captured, that country losses the tech tree screen, it does not mean you lose your tech labs, it just means you have no tech choices, no additional labs, no ability to eliminate labs, until you recapture that Capital.

Bob



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (6/8/2014 7:08:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Tomokatu

Sounds to me as though the solution is to make the play open-ended ie. delete the forced end in 1918 and rely on the other surrender or capturing the capital conditions to end the game. It would certainly make the tech tree options valid for a CP player who has managed to keep the High Seas Fleet in being.
Can this be done? (It may already be the case in MP, I don't know)
Should it be considered in the scenarios?

What I do notice is: There is no "surrender" button in SP. Nor, can a player in SP or MP surrender individual countries if he so wishes. The reason I bring that to light: Is there might be a strategic value in doing so. It might sound insane to do, however, if one of your countries is about to fall (Lose capital with no chance of recapture), it might be advantageous to deny the potential victor the capital and or any other remaining owned hexes by surrendering. If the potential victor then attacks that newly neutral country, then that neutral country automatically get's 30 PP + 30 NM I believe, plus it might diplomatically cause other countries to go on the "March to war". The other benefit is: If you now have other friendly units on hexes of the proposed nation to surrender (go neutral), all those units will be repatriated to the production queue at full strength and efficiency, whereupon, you, the owner of those units can place them immediately on the map on that turn or the next. Not only that: when you place those repatriated units on the map, they can move immediately for positioning or attack, and also be upgraded if techs warrant it, if not attacking. This is not spelled out in the MANUAL. This happened to me in an MP match: France surrendered, my English and Italian units (on French hexes) were repatriated, then my opponent violated France's recent neutrality to gain more territory, that's how I arrive at the above diatribe.



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (7/5/2014 12:31:49 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

I have asked the software wiz kid,to see if an official fix can be made,for the Naval supply problem in the Persian Gulf.I have removed Basra Capital status,it is now just a City,I have done a trial run, by placing a British Cruiser into the Persian Gulf,to supply Britain's land forces there,but as you can see,even the Cruiser is out off supply range,and its trapped in the Persian Gulf without an exit.I will end this on a positive note,Transports now have a combat sound added,when landing troops onto the enemy coast,as they did not have an attacking sound file before![:)]

[image]local://upfiles/36378/E0582274BAF44BBEBE27AA812CB66FE9.jpg[/image]

Hello Kirk,

Don't know if you gave up on the Persian Gulf supply dilemma, but got to thinking, What if? : ships could go up river 1 or more hexes to remain a direct supply source, or ships in the mouth of a river could supply units (directly in contact with a hex with a river hex side) upstream for 1 or more hexes.

Just thinking, Bob



JeffroK -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (7/8/2014 9:20:14 AM)

Move Basra 1 hex SE, given the scale of the map it wouldnt be too far out.



operating -> RE: 1.4.2 PATCH (7/8/2014 3:40:44 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: JeffK

Move Basra 1 hex SE, given the scale of the map it wouldnt be too far out.

It's not so much about Basra, the British army surrendered at Kut. If supply was done right the English could have gone all the way to Bagdad, by gunboat, transports or by land, as long as they kept in supply up/near the river, as was originally intended.



Page: <<   < prev  8 9 10 11 [12]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.234375