Update 2.21d Public Beta (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series



Message

Andrew Loveridge -> Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/6/2015 1:58:41 PM)

Hello All,

We are making v2.21d available as a Public Beta in the Members Club.

This adds Table of Organization & Equipment (TOE) functionality and auto-reinforcements to the New Dawn v3 random games and allows any scenario to be configured to use this TOE and auto-reinforce functionality.

Please check it out and give us your feedback.



tinjaw -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/6/2015 2:23:42 PM)

Steam has the ability to offer beta builds that users can opt to use. Will we see a Steam beta as well?



Vic -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/6/2015 8:59:41 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: tinjaw

Steam has the ability to offer beta builds that users can opt to use. Will we see a Steam beta as well?


Sorry.
Honestly I prefer to use just use one version of ATG for beta testing.
But if all goes well the gold version will follow shortly to matrix and Steam.

Best wishes,
Vic



lion_of_judah -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/7/2015 12:31:37 AM)

Vic
do I need to get this public beta 221d if I already have this via your link on the mod page



Tac2i -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/7/2015 12:40:14 AM)

Don't think so if past history is any indication.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lion_of_judah

Vic
do I need to get this public beta 221d if I already have this via your link on the mod page




Vic -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/7/2015 6:10:06 AM)

The public beta is exactly the same as private beta 221d

best wishes,
Vic



Tac2i -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/8/2015 11:57:44 AM)

Suggestion: Make the TO&E buttons 1) that when you select one type it deselects the other types so that you are looking at only one unit category at a time, and 2) make it so that it remembers your last selection.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Loveridge

Please check it out and give us your feedback.



[image]local://upfiles/16226/1CE70202D120462C87EE20A54F5E4CA9.jpg[/image]



Tac2i -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/8/2015 11:59:45 AM)

Same as above for this one:

[image]local://upfiles/16226/25E2113830D3495B9AE254437CC26A41.jpg[/image]



Philo32b -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/11/2015 9:43:12 PM)

This feature is amazing. The obvious benefit is that it eliminates the manual distribution of reinforcements, but the less obvious benefit seems to be that you can also have all your factories always pointing to your Supreme HQ, instead of manually pointing some to this Field HQ or that one. The reinforcements just find their way from the Supreme HQ to where they need to go. (It probably takes me an extra turn to reinforce by leaving all the factories pointing to the Supreme HQ, since there seems to be a step to the local HQ and then the next turn a step to the unit needing reinforcements. But the extra delay is a small price to pay for me.)

In the best of all possible worlds the factory screen would show a grand summary of the quantity of formations lacked across all units in the armies, so that you could make sure you build enough of each formation to meet the demand. ("There is a lack of 23 mortars in all my units," for example.) But this is nitpicking--the feature by itself is great. I love this.



Boggit -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/13/2015 4:03:13 PM)

A nice improvement![8D]



Philo32b -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/17/2015 1:40:14 AM)

I can't find more detail about the mechanics behind the auto-reinforcement, so I thought I would post my questions here. I have all my factories pointing at my Supreme HQ, and at first in the game all the sub-HQs received the auto-reinforcements needed to fulfill the model types of those sub-HQs' units, which got passed down to them on the next turn. But as the distance between the Supreme HQ and the sub-HQs is increased, increasingly the Supreme HQ doesn't seem to properly reinforce the sub-HQs. It is spotty at best, now.

Does the auto-reinforcement rely on the transportation points of the Supreme HQ? (As opposed to the factories logistic chain, which doesn't rely on transportation points.) If it does rely on transportation points, that limits its useful a bit, because eventually the transportation capability of the Supreme HQ is going to be very much over taxed, and a lot of units will go without reinforcements. If this is the case, I suppose I will need to go back to pointing particular factories at particular sub-HQs, which is something I was happy to get away from. Or is there another way to have everything supplied while still pointing everything at the Supreme HQ?

Thanks for any insight that will illuminate this more. I am very much liking this new feature; I just need to know what it can and can't do.



Vic -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/17/2015 6:21:49 AM)

Hi Philo,

http://www.vrdesigns.nl/atwiki/doku.php?id=tables_of_organisation_and_equipment

The auto-reinforcement thus does use CAP points indeed. But at a big discount compared to regular transfers.

Keep in mind that the 'New Dawn' games are basically a early beta laboratory for a next game and I am looking forward to finetuning these features further after further player feedback.

One thing that would do away with the issue you noted would be to play in hardcore logistics mode. This would require every town to have a HQ to receive production.
If you would attach all town HQs to a Supreme HQ and then also all Army HQs to the Supreme HQ you'll only need CAP points in your supreme HQ that will take care of returning excess troops from the town HQ and sending them to the Army HQs. The cost would be less or equal than using regular transfers. (in the editor resetting rulevar 910-912 you can give a bigger advantage to auto-transfer versus regular transfer)

best wishes,
Vic



Kaldadarnes -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/17/2015 9:15:20 AM)

Ok - so I have finally given this beta a spin. To echo the comments of others, this is very very good.

The interface is intuitive, import and export tools work well, the auto reinforcing happens neatly - excellent. Thank you vic.

The only request I have is at there is a option to have 0% reinforce request. This is for the situation when I do not want to dilute my veterans with but wish to maintain the units classification (as light infantry, shock infantry or whatever).

Thanks

K



Vic -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/17/2015 11:06:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kaldadarnes

Ok - so I have finally given this beta a spin. To echo the comments of others, this is very very good.

The interface is intuitive, import and export tools work well, the auto reinforcing happens neatly - excellent. Thank you vic.

The only request I have is at there is a option to have 0% reinforce request. This is for the situation when I do not want to dilute my veterans with but wish to maintain the units classification (as light infantry, shock infantry or whatever).

Thanks

K


Yes I might distinguish beteen 0% and DISBAND indeed. Probably next patch though.

But you do realise that for example a 25% setting means that only reinforcements will be asked by the unit to bring it up to 25% of its table of organisation. Its not like it asks 25% of its ideal number of reinforcements. If you have a 40 inf unit thats down to 8 it will ask for 2 infantry and then ask no more.

best wishes,
Vic



Kaldadarnes -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/17/2015 1:57:54 PM)

I had not understood that...but that could explain some slightly odd results on auto reinforce which I put down to lack of capacity...

*Facepalm*



Philo32b -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/19/2015 1:42:26 PM)

Thanks, Vic, your explanation and the link you shared were very helpful. From the Wiki at that link I found the logs in the game that show what each HQ's sub-units are requesting. At this point I am taking a picture with my phone of that sub-unit request screen and then comparing that screen to the current inventory screen that the HQ already has, and then finally changing the production screen to produce what is needed. If it could be possible to have the sub-unit request screen and the current HQ inventory screen summarized at the production screen, that would make production-level changes extremely easy. But even without that change, the current setup is still much, much easier than manually doing it all by hand without the new feature. I am really liking this new feature.



Vic -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/19/2015 3:17:14 PM)

It is not a bad idea. I put in on the nice-to-have list for this feature. Remember that I am trying to get the basics of a number of new ideas up before finally finetuning them completely for ATP/AT2.

Best wishes,
Vic



lion_of_judah -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/23/2015 4:38:15 PM)

Vic
I have created a TO&E for my Six day war scenario. I have made a Mig-15 (Level 2) Fighter and a Mig-19 (Level 3) fighter for the Arab side. I have noticed that when the level 3 fighters take losses, level 2 fighters are replacing the level 3 losses as well as replacing the level 2 units as it is suppose to. So my Mig-19 units are showing the mig 19- unit and the level 2 unit as well. I have checked and do not know why this is happening.



Vic -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/23/2015 8:11:52 PM)

Hi Lion,

If you look in to the SFType tab of the editor you'll see you can assign a reinforcement type number to each SFType. If they have the same reinforcement type number they'll show the behaviour you told me above.

Best wishes,
Vic



lion_of_judah -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/23/2015 9:23:39 PM)

Vic
when I create a pre-defined unit, then in the TO&E I put the corresponding number, say it is 1 so in the TO&E I put 1, then I always do -1 for the second number. So your saying I should use a different number for the second number, doesn't matter. I've never had this issue before though. Thanks



Vic -> RE: Update 2.21d Public Beta (7/24/2015 5:58:12 AM)

Lion,

If you create a Predef unit with for example Figher Level 2 in it.

Then it depends on the SFType settings of Fighter Level 2 which other SFTypes are accepted as reinforcements. The other types that are accepted are the ones with the same ReinforcementType value (which can be set in SFType tab).

Best wishes,
Vic



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.671875