RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (Full Version)

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



Message

operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/12/2015 8:48:43 PM)

Kirk,

Found this French hex in England, have to think it is mislabeled...

Bob



[image]local://upfiles/43885/BAFEF72689E54E7AB6EEF6C0B4F5C705.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/13/2015 12:05:45 AM)

In case anybody is interested: increasing labs from 4 to 5 in a Research category with a multiple of at least 4 techs in the tree, will result in advancing those techs 1 turn.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/D8DC58197C244738B87F026A8240F2E1.jpg[/image]



Cataphract88 -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/13/2015 11:52:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

Kirk,

Found this French hex in England, have to think it is mislabeled...

Bob

Operating,

Or else there is a little corner of England that is forever France! [:)]



[image]local://upfiles/43885/BAFEF72689E54E7AB6EEF6C0B4F5C705.jpg[/image]




operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/14/2015 4:22:00 AM)

Why not a Spainish hex in Ireland for the "Black Irish"?[:)]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/16/2015 6:17:04 PM)

This is one of my favorite SS:

Admiral Sarek and myself are battling it out till the very end, of which is near after capturing Washington, it's the crowning achievement to a hard fought match. Going this far into a match (95 turns) still keeps the learning light on. Initially the Admiral was able to fend off landings and mercilessly sink or damage transports and fleets, I was beginning to have doubts an invasion was going to work, even gave it thought to turn my Armada around to set sail back to Europe, but time was of the essence. Learned in this 1.60 beta the existence of American Commanders (3 generals, 2 admirals, I think and at least 1 air commander), which was sorry and lacking in previous patches/versions and grateful to know that Kirk and likely Johnny Bravo made it possible for them to be in this game.. What has even been more delightful: "That NO fatal CTDs killed the game in progress", a huge improvement over past experiences. Another learned feature is: The American's ability to build planes, which was nonexistent before. I absolutely love how well the 1.60 beta patch has performed!



[image]local://upfiles/43885/92A8D3926AEB4555A60DF005FD9B53CB.jpg[/image]



kirk23 -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/17/2015 3:11:09 PM)

I'm like you in that I'm pretty happy with the 1.60 Beta patch stability, in that I have had zero crashes to desktop during game play, the only think that bothers me is the time it is taking to get this released officially, I really stopped working on this thing in November last year, it is now mid February and zilch happening, in my eyes this is an unnecessary delay, added to that I have had no contact from the powers at bee since before xmas, and I'm not amused.[:-]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/17/2015 5:50:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

I'm like you in that I'm pretty happy with the 1.60 Beta patch stability, in that I have had zero crashes to desktop during game play, the only think that bothers me is the time it is taking to get this released officially, I really stopped working on this thing in November last year, it is now mid February and zilch happening, in my eyes this is an unnecessary delay, added to that I have had no contact from the powers at bee since before xmas, and I'm not amused.[:-]


Do know one thing: "Redirect Count: 3426" has been growing at a pretty good pace the last few months, a decent measure to attribute to your work. The PR you have had with the membership, I think has been invaluable, whereas, some of the others of "Your Team", only post NEWS CLIPPINGS.[>:]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/21/2015 4:39:38 AM)

By mistake I have bought ammo for countries that have no use for ammo, it would be another thing if I could give that ammo to another country that uses it, however in MP the mistake cannot be reversed.



[image]local://upfiles/43885/CB8C15AC74814B3295BCECA39305F073.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/22/2015 4:55:40 PM)

The Admiral finally surrendered on his turn. To give him a full picture of what the invasion force looked liked and where his last 2 subs had to face, attached this SS. Philadelphia was his last and only city left to fall. He and I have 2 other matches that are still ongoing 38 and 42 turns at the moment, don't expect the CP one to get as far as this and the other one I got to play as Entente.. If the tables were turned on this 98 turn match, I would have fought him down to the "Bitter End", there were lessons to be learned for the both of us in this match. GOOD GAME! Congratulations Admiral Sarek!





[image]local://upfiles/43885/279D4C24AFA647D89E85977E70F0F090.jpg[/image]



AdmiralSarek -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/23/2015 10:43:05 PM)

I lost to counters, it looks so much better with the nice pictures.

I learned a lot in this game, also gives rise to a lot of suggestions to improving the game mechanics, but that can wait until after the next patch release.



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/24/2015 8:09:48 PM)

One of the features of this patch, that no one has commented on is: The uniformity of individual commander's Zone of Influence! "All" commanders get a 2 hex radius of influence beyond the owning commander's hex, whereas before, it was a hodge-podge of influence from 1 to 3 hexes of influence. The latest game improvement IMHO is one of the best made for this game. An example shown in the SS below:



[image]local://upfiles/43885/BD652734EFC64800833D47753218275A.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/25/2015 4:01:35 PM)

Also, what is not getting much attention: In prior versions if you upgraded a "unmoved" damaged/low strength unit first, "then" it would cost you more (penalty) PP than usual to increase the strength of the same unit second (on the same turn), unless you increased the strength first, then did the upgrade. "Now", it does not make a difference to which (upgrade or strength) task is done first, without paying a penalty for doing so.

An example: If a class I, 7 strength garrison was upgraded to a class II (industrial warfare tech) first (in prior versions), then used 1 PP to increase strength, the 7 strength garrison would only increase to a 9 strength instead of to a 10 strength, however if you increased strength first with 1 PP the garrison would go from 7 to a 10 strength, afterwards upgrade would be at it's normal cost.

I'll recheck the results to be absolutely sure....



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/25/2015 8:08:44 PM)

Rechecked the results of my previous post and proved myself "WRONG". There has been no change to the order that repair and upgrading "should" be done. Below SS will demonstrate what I am talking about. If a player is not paying attention to this stuff, it could cost them unnecessary PP expenses unwittingly.

In this first SS you will notice 1 PP will add 3 strength points to the garrison


[image]local://upfiles/43885/4F18A02E5DA7476689B074CD0778FE94.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/25/2015 8:12:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

Rechecked the results of my previous post and proved myself "WRONG". There has been no change to the order that repair and upgrading "should" be done. Below SS will demonstrate what I am talking about. If a player is not paying attention to this stuff, it could cost them unnecessary PP expenses unwittingly.

In this first SS you will notice 1 PP will add 3 strength points to the garrison


[image]local://upfiles/43885/4F18A02E5DA7476689B074CD0778FE94.jpg[/image]


This second SS will show 1 PP will add 3 strength points to the nearby infantry



[image]local://upfiles/43885/885E6FA83AF140FF937BC692944CEC69.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/25/2015 8:20:11 PM)

Third SS Garrison upgrade costs 2 PP (industrial warfare), is the same for infantry unit, this can be done even after a unit moves



[image]local://upfiles/43885/CC4D1FAE9F6A494CAB4EAB719CB99FC7.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/25/2015 8:22:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

Third SS Garrison upgrade costs 2 PP (industrial warfare), is the same for infantry unit, this can be done even after a unit moves



[image]local://upfiles/43885/CC4D1FAE9F6A494CAB4EAB719CB99FC7.jpg[/image]

Fourth SS infantry upgrade


[image]local://upfiles/43885/9D9A3572268C41538856A1126A3A227E.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/25/2015 8:31:42 PM)

Fifth SS shows garrison has been upgraded first, but now the 1 PP for increasing strength only allows an increase of 2, whereas, the infantry has "not" been upgraded first instead it had 1 PP used to increase it's strength first, which brought it to a 10



[image]local://upfiles/43885/7C56F5DD47584761AE0E9972C6BA9479.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/25/2015 8:42:14 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

Fifth SS shows garrison has been upgraded first, but now the 1 PP for increasing strength only allows an increase of 2, whereas, the infantry has "not" been upgraded first instead it had 1 PP used to increase it's strength first, which brought it to a 10



[image]local://upfiles/43885/7C56F5DD47584761AE0E9972C6BA9479.jpg[/image]

In this last SS the infantry is at a 10 strength, plus now it can get upgraded "without losing" a strength point like the garrison did, because of the order in doing the tasks. To some this might seem like small potatoes, but if done incorrectly constantly, it could mean the difference between winning or losing the game, misusing your PP.


[image]local://upfiles/43885/A51154C8246547729593A73761FDF6D7.jpg[/image]



chemkid -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (2/27/2015 6:24:08 AM)

.



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (3/1/2015 6:58:16 PM)

Here is another problem with the CTGW MP lobby: Can't "claim" a long dead MP match off the MP Lobby list, "without reaching for the gods" for help. Once in awhile someone initiates a match, plays 1 turn, then for some unknown reason never responds. It's annoying, and should be able to be cleaned up by the players themselves (click the task is done). Personally I would surrender to just get rid of the match, Bu-u-u-t-ttt, the match cannot continue to the next turn for me to do so, it's so lame and should be corrected.. example SS below:


[image]local://upfiles/43885/A82E37830F5C45C887A4CFB428625154.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (3/2/2015 2:40:29 AM)

Kirk

Is there anyway to "close" the whole Information Panel so it does not block the screen when doing maxed out camera view? Cannot see the bottom portion of the map when doing so, as shown in the below SS. The Max view helps in determining if the enemy occupies, or about to occupy hexes, the contrasting colors of hexes makes this very distinct.
Bob

<EDIT> Also it would be nice to close Info Panel when doing MP SS, instead of modifying as is the case now (cut, shape, delete, whiteout, ect.)


[image]local://upfiles/43885/CBAC310744F441BBBCD2FD3D63C206AB.jpg[/image]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (3/4/2015 12:00:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating


quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

Kirk,

Before I try doing so: Can the Entente deploy warships in the Persian Gulf?

Thanks, Bob

Thanks anyway: Found the answer to my above question----No Entente warships can deploy in the Persian Gulf----If an English sub will not deploy there, gathered nothing else will either, except for transports.

Don't know what I did wrong to have a different result than the success that Admiral Serak had in deploying a British cruiser to the Persian Gulf? It could be that British subs can not deploy there, if so, Why? By being able to deploy Entente fleets to the Persian Gulf adds dynamics to the game previously unheard of. He followed up by landing tanks, cavalry, fighters and armored cars to tie up considerable Turkish forces, besides capturing Kuwait, which gave him a port. It was a bit unnerving to say the least, plus it gave him bombardment capability ... Below is a SS of his early development of this invasion strategy:


[image]local://upfiles/43885/FF9B7E9773BF46699FE537161C121F3E.jpg[/image]



AdmiralSarek -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (3/4/2015 1:05:50 AM)

The squares are red and my cruiser is now out of supply, so I can't disband it and it is stuck there. But it was fun.

There are 3 squares that are deploy squares just like there are south of Egypt. What we need is a way of sailing from the Persian Gulf around to Suez, as in reality this is a short trip. Maybe subs can't deploy as they do not have the range (and would be useless).



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (3/7/2015 10:45:40 AM)

The stench of a new patch getting here anytime soon, is starting to be unpalatable and having been a strong proponent of the game has me feeling rather uncomfortable, especially where Steam sends out bogus updates that have made MP matches unplayable. Would somebody just speak the truth about what is going on? I used to like hearing from Kirk, at least he would get down to the details, but unfortunately he seems to be in the boat with the rest of us. Sorry state of affairs...



Rongor -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (3/7/2015 11:05:26 AM)

It is embarrassing how nobody feels responsible to communicate steps like that to the community.



wolf14455 -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (3/7/2015 5:48:13 PM)

agree



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (3/9/2015 2:50:38 AM)

quote:

Wikipedia:

Member states[edit]

The Central Powers consisted of the German Empire and the Austro-Hungarian Empire at the beginning of the war. The Ottoman Empire joined the Central Powers later in 1914. In 1915, the Kingdom of Bulgaria joined the alliance. The name "Central Powers" is derived from the location of these countries; all four (including the other groups that supported them except for Finland and Lithuania) were located between the Russian Empire in the east and France and the United Kingdom in the west. Finland, Azerbaijan, and Lithuania joined them in 1918 before the war ended and after the Russian Empire collapsed.


Never realized till now that Finland, Azerbaijan and Lithuania joined the CP (Central Powers)... Did you?[:)]



operating -> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch (3/9/2015 2:38:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: AdmiralSarek

The squares are red and my cruiser is now out of supply, so I can't disband it and it is stuck there. But it was fun.

There are 3 squares that are deploy squares just like there are south of Egypt. What we need is a way of sailing from the Persian Gulf around to Suez, as in reality this is a short trip. Maybe subs can't deploy as they do not have the range (and would be useless).

Admiral,

You know what would be a solution to the trapped cruiser fleet: If it (fleet) could return to the Persian Gulf deployment sea hexes to be in a position to be redeployed to the Red Sea via those specialty hexes. My gut feeling is we won't see anything like that maneuver anytime soon, if ever, after reading LZ's post.

Bob



Page: <<   < prev  3 4 5 6 [7]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.796875