RE: Pocket Fun (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Scenario Design and Modding



Message

BillRunacre -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/1/2017 3:24:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

Hi Bill - I think it was because it wasn't cut off yet, as all that action was spread out across posts 75-77 [which were all three posts from the same turn]. Next turn it was at 2 [3 minus 1 for having two units adjacent], and I didn't post that because I was more excited that my panzers took the town.


Thanks, that's good to hear. [:)]



sPzAbt653 -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/2/2017 3:22:59 PM)

quote:

Five weeks doesn't seem like a lot of time, but historically units surrounded without air supply were very quickly dealt with.

Made me curious, so I checked the historical Kiev pocket, the one where 600,000 Soviet troops were surrounded. From the time of enclosure to the time of last resistance was only 10 days. WOW ! It is also reported that the fighting was vicious [150,000 of the Soviets were killed].



TheBattlefield -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/2/2017 4:24:55 PM)

That's exactly what I meant. The "breakdown" of permanently undersupplied units should be massively speed up during the weekly(+) turn mode. With the current game engine, reducing the strength would be very helpful without having to intervene in the current supply rules. [8D]



TangSooDo -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/2/2017 7:06:16 PM)

There is something puzzling me about this mod, which overall I think is excellent -- Soviet corps seem to have identical qualities as guard corps, but the guard corps are more expensive. Does anyone know the answer?



Meyer1 -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/3/2017 2:00:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

Five weeks doesn't seem like a lot of time, but historically units surrounded without air supply were very quickly dealt with.

Made me curious, so I checked the historical Kiev pocket, the one where 600,000 Soviet troops were surrounded. From the time of enclosure to the time of last resistance was only 10 days. WOW ! It is also reported that the fighting was vicious [150,000 of the Soviets were killed].


Less than a week to clear the pocket in the second battle of Kharhov, 1942, with more than 200k prisoners. I think when the surrounded forces try to breakout, that usually lead to quicker outcomes such in these cases, when supply is not that big of an issue that would be when forces adopt a hedgehog defense and wait to help from the outside.
As Clausewitz said, defense is stronger...



sPzAbt653 -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/3/2017 4:53:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheBattlefield
That's exactly what I meant. The "breakdown" of permanently undersupplied units should be massively speed up during the weekly(+) turn mode. With the current game engine, reducing the strength would be very helpful without having to intervene in the current supply rules. [8D]

Yes, and this is what I meant when I mentioned the various circumstances pertaining to situation and country. In this case, the Soviets had very poor supply infrastructure, so they could not last for long. This is why I've had the idea to reduce some of the Soviet Resource Supply Values when Barbarossa starts. I have yet to playtest it to see if there is any effect.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/3/2017 4:58:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Winslow
There is something puzzling me about this mod, which overall I think is excellent -- Soviet corps seem to have identical qualities as guard corps, but the guard corps are more expensive. Does anyone know the answer?

Nothing in my notes, so either there is nothing there and it is an oversight, or at the time I did it I didn't feel it was important enough to document. However, they all arrive free of charge, and the player is supposed to re-build them only, which is cheaper than building. Of course then, rifle corps are also be cheaper to rebuild ...
Overall I'm not sure, what do you think should be the case ?



TheBattlefield -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/3/2017 11:51:37 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheBattlefield
That's exactly what I meant. The "breakdown" of permanently undersupplied units should be massively speed up during the weekly(+) turn mode. With the current game engine, reducing the strength would be very helpful without having to intervene in the current supply rules. [8D]

Yes, and this is what I meant when I mentioned the various circumstances pertaining to situation and country. In this case, the Soviets had very poor supply infrastructure, so they could not last for long. This is why I've had the idea to reduce some of the Soviet Resource Supply Values when Barbarossa starts. I have yet to playtest it to see if there is any effect.


Maybe, but the supply infrastructure in Stalingrad, Leningrad and Berlin were also not exhilarating and nevertheless was fought for months and not days. I suspect that the factors sea/air supply, weather situation, leadership and moral of the defending troops are somewhat more serious than country-specific differences of infrastucture and therefore a solution approach over the Russian resources may not solve the general problem of encircling.



TangSooDo -> Soviet Guard Corps (3/3/2017 12:58:14 PM)

I like the idea of having the guards. I think Soviet units received the guards designation based on performance in battle, but I'm not positive about that. For example, if the 1st Corps performed really well, it would be renamed 1st Guards Corps. However, in this game it seems appropriate to give the guards a slight increase in combat capability if they are going to be more expensive -- maybe 0.5 points attacking hard targets, or a half point in both soft or hard defense ratings.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: Soviet Guard Corps (3/3/2017 4:26:39 PM)

Yes, the 'Guards' title was given to units based on combat performance. The actual TO&E of Guards units didn't change except they were given a couple more artillery pieces.
quote:

give the guards a slight increase in combat capability if they are going to be more expensive -- maybe 0.5 points attacking hard targets, or a half point in both soft or hard defense ratings.

I like this, I think I'll do it, thanks !



sPzAbt653 -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/3/2017 4:28:15 PM)

quote:

a solution approach over the Russian resources may not solve the general problem of encircling.

But I think it can't hurt, although like I said, I haven't tested it yet so I will see what happens.



James Taylor -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/3/2017 4:52:41 PM)

Having the Soviet Guards arrive with one step of experience and overstrengthed to 11 seems more appropriate then the 0.5 increase in hard target value. Just saying.



TangSooDo -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/3/2017 9:41:27 PM)

The main thing regarding Soviet Guards would be to give some higher value seeing as they cost more -- of course it's a matter of personal preference and design philosophy as to what that higher value should be. Thinking about it a little further, once the Guards Corps has been eliminated, however, will it be rebuildable with any higher value if we go with the one step of experience and overstrength solution? Won't it then be no more valuable in combat ability than a regular corps but more expensive to rebuild?



ME262 -> RE: Pocket Fun (3/5/2017 3:21:36 AM)

playing your MOD... just got into tonight.. so far so good! I like it... enjoying the challenge over the vanilla camps. [8D]



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653H Mod (3/18/2017 5:52:34 PM)

Working on slightly modifying the Surrender Conditions for Axis Minors,
based on historical influences. All will still surrender by normal
Morale Conditions, but some additional conditions will exist, starting
with Italy which has four additional conditions.

If the USA is in and the USSR is not surrendered, Italy will Surrender:

1] If the Allies hold each of these:
Tripoli 172,21
Tunis 167,112
Syracuse 176,112
Palermo 173,109
Messina 177,109
plus any one Resource on the Italian mainland.

2] or if the Allies hold each of these:
Tripoli 172,21
Tunis 167,112
Marseille 157,97
Nice 160,97
Monaco 162,96
plus any one Resource on the Italian mainland.

3] or if the Allies hold each of these:
Tripoli 172,21
Tunis 167,112
Munich 169,86
Salzburg 172,87
plus any one Resource on the Italian mainland.

4] or if the Allies hold each of these:
Tripoli 172,21
Tunis 167,112
Zagreb 178,92
Bihacs 176,91
Ljubljana 176,91
plus any one Resource on the Italian mainland.

The idea being to cover all avenues of Allied advance,
each case which would signal that Germany/the Axis
are not winning, in which case Italy would be following
its historical course by trying to get out of the war.

Any thoughts/ideas/concerns are welcome. [:)]



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653H Mod (3/18/2017 7:50:53 PM)

Finland:
If the USA is in and the USSR is not surrendered, Finland will Surrender:

If the Allies hold each of these:
Leningrad 206,52
Narva 202,54
Vyborg 203,49
Priozersk 205,48
Sortavala 207,45
Petrozovadsk 214,46
Belomorsk 214,36
Kandalaksha 210,24
Murmansk 211,16

plus any one of the following:
Petsamo 209,13
Kemijarvi 201,26
Suomussalmi 203,34
Joensuu 205,43
Lappeenranta 202,48
198,50



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653H Mod (3/18/2017 7:51:26 PM)

Hungary:
When the Soviets entered Hungarian territory in September 1944,
their government was overthrown and the German controlled Arrow
Cross Party became the new government. Hungarian units fought
until destroyed, some survived until the end of the war. Therefore,
in the game Hungary will surrender if Budapest is Allied occupied,
and the Germans will receive an Hungarian corps.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653H Mod (3/18/2017 8:37:38 PM)

Romania:
If the USA is in and the USSR is not surrendered, Romania will Surrender:

If the Allies hold each of these:
Odessa 207,90
Vinnitsa 202,84
Lwow 194,82

plus any one of the following:
Jassy 201,89
Cernauti 197,86
Galati 202,93
Sofia 192,100
Nish 190,98
Belgrade 187,94



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653H Mod (4/5/2017 5:59:14 AM)

The Destroyers seen at the bottom show up even when the Unit Trigger = 0 [I have searched for relevant scripts and this seems to be the only one]. There are no Destroyers in the Production or Deployment que's, and I have zero'd the Destroyer values in the AI Production Scripts. Is there another place where these units are being generated ? [I don't want them arriving].

[image]local://upfiles/24850/55870DBED11D472BA8DB31B98347D8B3.jpg[/image]



TheBattlefield -> RE: 653H Mod (4/9/2017 5:23:21 PM)

Hi sPzAbt653

have you solved the problem in the meantime? There are no more possibilities for the appearance of these destroyers. Probably this is just one of those strange temporary errors or have you just forgotten to update the script after the modification in the editor? [&:]



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653H Mod (4/9/2017 5:41:11 PM)

quote:

Probably this is just one of those strange temporary errors

So far I can only chalk it up to this. Thanks for confirming that I seem to have covered all the possibilities. Each time this happens I check everything to see that it all appears to be ok.
It's no big deal, just a minor annoyance.



BillRunacre -> RE: 653H Mod (4/10/2017 2:06:05 PM)

If they are turning up when the Failsafe Date is reached, then that will be the reason.

The Failsafe Date means that they will turn up then if not triggered before, so you may want to set a much later Failsafe Date, i.e. one after the end of your campaign.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653H Mod (4/10/2017 2:35:59 PM)

Failsafe Date ! [&o]



TheBattlefield -> RE: 653H Mod (4/11/2017 10:09:24 AM)

Ok. I thought so far that this was only the "expiration date" for the respective event. I'm always learning something about it...and then forget it again. [:D]



gogopher -> RE: Pocket Fun (4/15/2017 1:58:00 PM)

loving the mod...just reinstalled sc though and not sure what version of ur mod is current...the one i have is 1.01



sPzAbt653 -> RE: Pocket Fun (4/15/2017 3:51:28 PM)

You have 1.1, which is the latest. 1.2 is taking a while. [:)]



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653H Mod (4/17/2017 8:32:17 AM)

How do I stop a convoy once it has started ? For example, I'd like to add a US East Coast convoy, but then stop it if the US takes a later Decision to build an overland pipeline.



BillRunacre -> RE: 653H Mod (4/18/2017 4:03:02 PM)

You could stop it by having an alternative convoy higher up in the file whose triggers will take precedence when that later Decision is fired.

It will show on the map but it doesn't necessarily need to send any MPPs anywhere.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653H Mod (4/19/2017 6:28:46 AM)

Thanks Bill, but this one is over my head. I looked thru the existing convoys to try and figure out how they end, for example Egypt-England, or Narvik-Germany, but I don't see it. No worries, I can do without.



BillRunacre -> RE: 653H Mod (4/20/2017 7:04:15 PM)

Convoys continue for as long as the conditions triggering them continue, there is no direct mechanism to turn any off.

However, within the script file they are read from top to bottom, so one placed in the file above another will, if its trigger is met, be the active convoy in game.

Which is why I'm thinking that placing a convoy script that fires (possibly triggered by a dummy Decision, as they can have more variable triggers) higher in the file than the one you want to turn off, would effectively fix it.

I hope that makes a bit more sense?



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.140625