653N Mod (Full Version)

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



Message

sPzAbt653 -> 653N Mod (7/22/2017 5:40:26 PM)

As changes to the 653H Mod continued after the last version was posted five months ago, the Naval Game also went thru a couple of major changes. The result was so different from 653H that the mod has been renamed to 653N.

Download the Mod from:
653N v2.0 [Apr. 2019] https://www.dropbox.com/s/cb91gmqyjv241vb/_653N.zip?dl=0

For Installation Instructions see : http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4300169
Note that due to Unit and Map changes contained in this mod, other Graphics and Map mods cannot be used with 653N.

653Nv1.7 Axis AAR
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4479984
653Nv1.7 Allies AAR
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4490927&mpage=1�


Changes for 653N v2.0, SC3 v1.15:
Adjustments to France/Vichy/Free.
Adjustments to Computer Amphibious and Transport scripts.
Adjustments to Computer reactions to abnormal events.

Changes for 653N v1.9, SC3 v1.15:
Added DE for UK to occupy Norway if Germany does not.

Changes for 653N v1.8, SC3 v1.15:
Added another Non-Historical Option:
No Pearl Harbor - For the Human Axis Player vs. the Computer only. If the USSR and Germany are at war on 1941/11/26 and the USA is not yet at war, the player may choose to have the attack on Pearl Harbor not occur. The Japanese will instead attack the USSR. This will delay the USA's entry into the war and will also prevent the USSR from receiving the Siberian reinforcements. If the USSR is defeated and surrenders, Germany will send 125 MPP's per turn to Japan for the rest of the war.

Changes for 653N v1.7, SC3 v1.13:
Added Partisans to Saudi [if the Axis owns the Middle East].
Added Partisans to France [if Partisans are very active in USSR, Yugoslavia or Greece].
Canada switched from a Minor Country to a Major Country.
Added Petsamo Nickel Mine.
Greenland becomes a US territory upon Denmark's occupation.
Added more German HQ's at start.
AVL's removed.

Changes for 653N v1.6, SC3 v1.12:
Added 1st Provisional Marine Brigade to occupy Iceland.
Added two UK Fighter Units to arrive when France falls [the UK had fighters for Home Defense that were not used in the Battle of France, so it seemed a good idea to let them arrive once France falls].

Changes for 653N v1.5, SC3 v1.10.02:
Fixed Liberation of France boosting USSR Morale by 25000 when France hadn't fallen.
Adjusted Allied Computer ASW scripts [too lethal].
Added Supply Script to reduce Soviet Urals Resources to zero if USSR surrenders. [These were historically off map to the east and beyond the Axis reach].

Changes for 653N v1.4, SC3 v1.10.01:
Some adjustments to Soviet Factory Transfers. The following locations will be temporarily reduced to zero supply and production if the Soviet player chooses to relocate factories to the Urals:
Leningrad 206,51
Moscow 220,65
Kiev 207,80
Kharkov 218,82
Dnepropetrovsk 215,85
Zaporizhia 215,87
Rostov 225,88

Added Partizans to south-east Russia [if the USSR surrenders].
Added FF Garrison at St. Pierre.
Gave Albania and Sardinia to Germany when Italy surrenders.

Changes for 653N v1.3, SC3 v1.09.09:
The percentage chance for Subs to be successful in raiding convoys is now 90%[Allied] and 95%[Axis].
Increased 'Allied Anti-Sub Warfare' event effects for the Allied Computer Opponent [this offsets the computers lack of aggressive use of its' Maritime Bomber Units in Anti-Sub Warfare].

Major changes/additions since 653H v1.1:
For the DAK DE, if NO is chosen. the Germans get a free HQ in Poland.
The use of more Coast Guns to represent naval assets.
Added the Panasqueira Tungsten Mine in Portugal.
Increased Land Spotting Ranges to be the same as each units Movement Allowance.
Changed the Axis buildup restriction for Barbarossa from '18 units within ten hexes
of Warsaw' to '9 units within three hexes of either Lublin in Eastern Poland OR
190,69 in Eastern Prussia'.
Some combat values of Guards Corps increased by .5.
Deployment of DAK is now triggered by Allied capture of Tobruk, Gazala, Derna, Mekili,
Msus or Benghazi, or Allies within three hexes of El Agheila [previously this was
triggered on a specific date].
Some Soviet Lend-Lease adjustments [more to the Pacific Route, less to the others].
Effects of Soviet Diplomacy reduced.
If Suez falls to the Axis, US Troops arrive in Kuwait to protect Mid-East interests.
Two hexrows have been added to the bottom of the map in order to make it easier to
play those areas [the interface was in the way].

Additional Decision Events:
USA Oil Pipeline.
German Coast Guns in Norway and NorthWest Europe.
Territorial disputes between Italy, Vichy France and Spain.
Delayed Italian entry [UK offers Malta to Italy].
Delayed USSR entry.

CONVOY MOD:
Rule:
Subs that occupy or are adjacent to map hexes that contain
crosshatches have a percentage chance to cause convoy losses. Red crosshatches are Allied convoys, Blue crosshatches are Axis convoys. The presence of multiple subs to a crosshatched
hex has no effect [only one sub is needed to have a possible
effect].
See the attached 653ModDNotes document for further details.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (7/22/2017 5:44:16 PM)

653N Convoy System example: With no surface units other than a few Destroyers, the main threat to enemy Convoy Raiders comes from Maritime Bomber units.

[image]local://upfiles/24850/5236EFE74301446B8E5A2078F34874BB.jpg[/image]



Montbrun -> RE: 653N Mod (8/11/2017 8:03:40 PM)

How do we get 653N to load? - No problems with 653H.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (8/11/2017 11:14:14 PM)

I tested the dl and it looked ok, what problem are you having ?



Montbrun -> RE: 653N Mod (8/12/2017 12:27:47 AM)

I move the folder to the Documents/My Games/Strategic Command (blah blah)/Campaigns folder, but it doesn't show up in the game menu. 653H works fine.



Montbrun -> RE: 653N Mod (8/12/2017 12:28:23 AM)

Is there a way to force weekly turns?



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (8/12/2017 5:37:00 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter
I move the folder to the Documents/My Games/Strategic Command (blah blah)/Campaigns folder, but it doesn't show up in the game menu.

Can you check this - double click the Campaigns folder and make sure that you see the three circled files [in addition to anything else that may be there].


[image]local://upfiles/24850/E77459FCCB7E4840B573F504EAC76D0C.jpg[/image]



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (8/12/2017 5:42:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter
Is there a way to force weekly turns?

That is something that you can do in the Editor. I've never done this, but I imagine that you may need to make a few other changes. I think I have seen where some other guys have done it, maybe they will chime in.

The reason I haven't changed to weekly turns is that I have played other games that have weekly turns and during the Oct/Nov to Apr/May turns you end up with a lot of nothing to do. Every year [:(]



Montbrun -> RE: 653N Mod (8/12/2017 11:04:24 AM)

I didn't unpack the 653N.cgn file - that was it.

Yeah, I'm playing with the editor.

Thanks!



mroyer -> RE: 653N Mod (9/14/2017 8:09:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

ORIGINAL: Brad Hunter
I move the folder to the Documents/My Games/Strategic Command (blah blah)/Campaigns folder, but it doesn't show up in the game menu.

Can you check this - double click the Campaigns folder and make sure that you see the three circled files [in addition to anything else that may be there].


[image]local://upfiles/24850/E77459FCCB7E4840B573F504EAC76D0C.jpg[/image]



Hi sPz, I just downloaded 653N, but the zip seems to be missing the 653N.dat file you show in the image, and so it doesn't load.

Thanks for any thoughts on this (AND... thanks for all the hard work putting these mods together!)

-Mark R.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (9/15/2017 1:04:31 AM)

It's been a while since this was an issue so I hope I remember correctly - the .dat file is generated when you run the mod, so it is not a necessary file in order to run the mod. Please check the installation again to see if you think you have it all in the correct place.



Mantis -> RE: 653N Mod (9/17/2017 3:42:23 AM)

I have a quick question about forcing weekly turns - can't that seriously mess with the game balance? Or do they scale down the MPPs proportionately or something? I too would like to see a few mod/map options where we get 52 turns per year, but you can't just change that in a scenario that has 12/year without expecting it to break the game somewhat, right? I have never loaded any mods or the editor, so I genuinely do not know...



BillRunacre -> RE: 653N Mod (9/17/2017 7:15:30 PM)

You would need to change income and perhaps the timing of some events too, so it might take a little bit of playing around with to get it right.



mroyer -> RE: 653N Mod (9/17/2017 11:43:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

It's been a while since this was an issue so I hope I remember correctly - the .dat file is generated when you run the mod, so it is not a necessary file in order to run the mod. Please check the installation again to see if you think you have it all in the correct place.


Yep, turns out my problem had nothing to do with the .dat file and was user-induced (installed it to Program Files and not myDocuments [:'(]). I've got it properly installed now and it's working fine.

Thanks again,
-Mark R.




mroyer -> RE: 653N Mod (9/18/2017 1:31:08 AM)

sPz,
I'm curious on the rationale to eliminate the capital navy in favor of coastal defenses. Was that simply a play preference so we don't have to fiddle with far-flung naval units very much?

-Mark R.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (9/18/2017 3:39:58 AM)

Hi Mark - Thanks for asking and yes, you have noodled out why I got rid of most of the naval units. I suppose many will not like this change but I also guess that there may be a few guys like me who would rather not have to deal with the naval game, which in my opinion doesn't work. I'm not intending to be critical of SC3 because it does well within the games' structure, but I feel that interception is very important in naval games. Also, after the opening phase of WWII, airpower reigned over naval units, reducing most naval units to being 'threats in place'. I've added a lot of Coastal units and some of these do represent naval assets [mostly for the UK] but many represent actual coast batteries [the German defenses of Norway and NW Europe]. Overall, for me personally, I can now focus my game time on the land combat/strategy, which is what I enjoy.



mroyer -> RE: 653N Mod (9/20/2017 1:09:37 AM)

Yeah, I think I tend to agree with your assessment. In spirit, I always get excited that this or that scenario/game is really cool to have named battleships and cruisers lurking around. But, in practice when it comes to play I find myself thinking, okay, now I gotta search around and do all the navy stuff and it sort of becomes a chore to get past each turn.

It'll be interesting to see how it plays.

-Mark R.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (9/20/2017 4:21:08 AM)

quote:

really cool to have named battleships and cruisers

First version I made had all the individual ships historically named. Lot's of work and lot's of fun, but ultimately [to me] very boring and silly, so therefore that version went unreleased [:)]

This version boils it all down to what I felt were the strategic choices - how do I manage my subs, how do I manage my anti-sub planes, and where do I use the few destroyers that I have. The capital ships seemed to be a separate game on their own, with little effect for the playing efforts they involve.



gwgardner -> RE: 653N Mod (9/27/2017 11:02:04 AM)

from the thread 'ignoring the naval game':


quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653


I think 653N is really good if you would rather not deal with all the naval stuff, and if you can put up with historical oob's plus my spin on some of the DE's. I really enjoy it myself [;)]


I prefer a historical OOB. I have played the AXIS so much that I wanted to play as the Allies, but am wondering if the AXIS AI would be able to handle the convoy hexes that you set up. I'm guessing that the AI would still be playing with the old convoy paths. Hit or miss, whether the AXIS AI would place its subs adjacent or on a convoy hex - no?

I'm going to try it nevertheless.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (9/27/2017 11:25:42 AM)

quote:

I'm guessing that the AI would still be playing with the old convoy paths.

No sir, I modified those scripts and the computer will send subs to the 653N convoy locations. However, I have noticed that later in the game when the Allies start getting better coverage of those locations with their Maritime Bombers, that the computer will then try to hide its' subs farther away [and thus off of the specified hexes]. I intend to try and see if I can make a further modification to remedy this situation.

Thanks for giving it a try and feel free to comment !



gwgardner -> RE: 653N Mod (9/27/2017 11:40:15 PM)

1) I see reports like 'db - south channel raiders are active.'

Is it like a recon report, that AXIS raiders have been spotted?

2) I'm finding this mod gives me that 'one more turn' urge, which I struggled to find when I had to do the excessive tedious naval game.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (9/28/2017 8:36:35 AM)

Yes, just ... one ... more ... turn !! Then 8 hours pass.

The 'db's' are explained in the Design Notes, but so you don't have to look for it, here it is:
Some News Messages begin with 'DB'. These help to monitor and troubleshoot which scripts are firing and when they fire. They are not necessary to the game and eventually they will all be removed, but you may still see them on occasion.



gwgardner -> RE: 653N Mod (9/28/2017 4:16:56 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653



The 'db's' are explained in the Design Notes



Just went back to read the notes. Unfortunately I ignored the .txt files in the mod download. You have put a great effort in this mod obviously. Quite impressive, not to mention that it's also impressive how well the game lends itself to such changes.

How do you keep the German AI from placing occupying units in those capitols where HQs would appear?



gwgardner -> RE: 653N Mod (9/28/2017 5:22:49 PM)

Just for informational purposes, unless I have something messed up, when using the Sipres counter mod with the 653n mod, the mechanized corps looks like an infantry division.

So I will change to the 653 bitmaps.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (9/28/2017 6:45:37 PM)

quote:

impressive how well the game lends itself to such changes.

Agreed. Hubert has done a great job and spent a lot of extra time and effort in allowing us such access.

How do you keep the German AI from placing occupying units in those capitols where HQs would appear?
I haven't done anything and sometimes they don't appear. I have reduced the number of HQ's that are set to arrive this way, but let me know if you think it is a problem and I will do more.

I will change to the 653 bitmaps.
Oh right, this will only work with the 653N unit counter sheets [bitmaps]. I should add a note, thanks !



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (9/29/2017 1:45:45 AM)

Regarding the German HQ's that appear free of purchase, I removed these events in the current version. To explain why - HQ's are expensive, and initially I felt that the Germans were at a disadvantage so I made it so that some of their HQ's would arrive at captured capitols [a nice bonus for conquering countries]. As the mod progressed, it seemed it might have been too much of a bonus, so I removed them. I played it a few times and am ok with it, but I left the notes in the document in case I wanted to return to it.
I have reread that doc and made a few minor changes, and it is attached here.



gwgardner -> RE: 653N Mod (9/29/2017 2:46:34 PM)

Thanks for the update. A couple of observations (not necessarily anything you would want to change):

1) It's August 1940 in my game, so far the AXIS subs have struck my convoys four times, for a total loss of 20 MPPs to the Allies. Any thought to upping the percentage chance to hit? Might add some serious tension for the Allies and urgency to develop ASW capabilities. -20 MPPs for the year is negligible.

2)I had kind of expected that the Destroyers for Bases deal would net the Allies a destroyer, but none appeared [later - makes sense, got a destroyer in Scapa Flow, took a couple of turns for delivery]

3) The Germans attacked in the Low Countries in April, 1940, pretty much following the Schlieffen type plan. Paris was taken in late July. I managed to lose the BEF, with the exception of the HQ.

4) Too bad I chose 'no' (just for the halibut) on the occupation of Irish ports, since now I find that my early maritime bombers, when based in Cornwall, are still out of range of the South Channel convoy locus. I think they would be just in range from Ireland.

5) I haven't figured out why my subs cannot fire on the enemy subs, no matter whether mine are in hunt mode or submerged. Properties show an attack factor of 2 against subs. I believe twice during the game the German subs have fired on mine.

6) The Mers-el-Kebir event seems a no-brainer to say 'no' since there are no capitol ships in the game, and the Allies can then save 30 MPPs for the cost of the raid. Would it be possible to perhaps give the Allies another incentive to carry out the raid?

7) This last observation is perhaps a bug in the base game: the Soviets refused the modification option to the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact, and chose to not gain the right to move into Lithuania. However, later on when the Russkies chose to occupy the Baltic States, it got all three Baltic States.



sPzAbt653 -> RE: 653N Mod (9/29/2017 6:51:09 PM)

1. Good idea. When I have played the Allies, the U-Boat menace has not scared me either. I think I had it based on the overall percentages during the war, so I'll try to think of a better way.



gwgardner -> RE: 653N Mod (9/30/2017 2:57:11 PM)

from August '40 to April '41 the AXIS success in sub attacks on convoys has increased to around every 2 out of 3 turns. You mentioned changing the sub/asw method - I'd note that your current method has some elegance to it, and makes that part of the game more interesting in my opinion.

In vanilla campaigns, as the AXIS, I found convoy hunting to be frustrating in the extreme, with quick supply loss, frequent need to return to port, swarms of enemy destroyers which seemed to always find my subs even when not near the convoy routes.




gwgardner -> RE: 653N Mod (9/30/2017 3:55:09 PM)

1) May 18 '41, AXIS subs hit convoys near Greenland, Azores and Iceland. Heaviest convoy loss per turn so far.

2) I turned off fog of war just prior to Barbarossa, to see how the German AI is handling the 653N OOB. Number of panzer corps is near historical. About 40% more infantry corps. There is a serious dearth of HQs. One mechanized corps, which given the abstractions in the game is probably about right. Four tac bombers, which one might abstract (along with the accompanying fighters) into the four historical air fleets.

Altogether quite impressive. The war in the east is going to be interesting.

[image]local://upfiles/20372/8E0ACB68022B4C5B98B017FAD3BC08F9.jpg[/image]



Page: [1] 2 3 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.296875