Play testing the newest patch. (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII: World at War



Message

Judgementday -> Play testing the newest patch. (10/1/2019 6:43:10 PM)

I really appreciate your efforts to balance the game. I know you are trying.

And at the risk of being too whiny, the adjustment to a single chit Infantry, armor and combat air only ensure that Germany continues its technological advantage throughout the war. They start out in the lead and the Allies cannot catch up. I like the idea of this restriction, but the allies should be able to at some point catch up if not surpass the Axis technology. Previously this was through double chitting and superior Spying & Intelligence investments.
Both USSR and China are compromised beyond hope facing higher moral, experienced and technologically superior units. Although the enhanced Chinese units did help some, but they are still overcome in the end. Britain struggles to support but is too stretched to really do much. Hopefully they can hold the homeland (although it can be dicey, as operation Sea Lion is Very viable and against an unprepared British player almost a certainty). Assuming they hold England, and can hold off the Italian navy and German air force in the med, they can eventually take out north and east Africa and probably take out Italy with the US in 43. Although a strong German commitment in Italy will almost certainly stalemate them in northern Italy.

Germany crushes USSR without their level two infantry well into mid to late 42, USSR /British armor are always a level behind and US two, since they have to dedicate so much early tech to Naval and Air.

I believe by mid to late 42, USSR actually had better tanks than Germany, the T34 and KV 1&2 were considered superior to their German counter parts, although German tactics and superior communications and leadership still made the German army a serious threat.

With the exception of the US in the Pacific, the allies find themselves either stalemated or even retreating in almost all fronts other than Africa and MAYBE Italy throughout most of 43.

Also, I noticed that the Allies can no longer obtain standard supply in Persia or any USSR territory, meaning they can no longer shore up a collapsing Caucus, which is pretty much guaranteed now.

On the flip side, I’m not sure that the Allies strategy of super Strategic Bombers used to knock out Axis supply has been fixed as well, something that was discussed and I thought to be addressed.

Why anyone would want to play the Allies, knowing that they are to face defeat and frustration well into 43 and maybe 44, it beyond me. As an Allied player, I accept early game defeats with the challenge of defending and building up to an eventual superior force. Unfortunately as now presented the superior force never materializes. Late 43 and I’m fighting the battle of Kursk at Uralsk! and not to a victory but a stalemate.

The Japanize will eventually lose, barring a disastrous naval encounter, USA will push the Pacific, Although, there is a good chance Japan will take Vladivostok and maybe other cities on the USSR’s far Eastern border. Italy will most likely fall, barring an early conquest of England and game over. Germany will run over USSR, they MAY hold Leningrad and Moscow, but the entire south will be overrun. Most likely past Stalingrad and well into Persia. The USSR army will be a shell, dangerous if the Axis are reckless but easily contained if they lose too much trying to defend the Denpr.

I may not be a great Allied player, but I certainly am not a bad one. I should have a realistic expectation to hold England, Africa, China, the East Pacific and USSR at or near historical locations if I play without major errors in tactics. With the opportunity to counter attack and even assault in late 42 and beyond.
As presented, I can only look forward to defeats and stalemates probably into 44.

If this game is intended to just be an Axis hay day, then I’m not sure I plan to continue to play, which would be saddening, as I really love the game.



Hubert Cater -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/1/2019 9:12:06 PM)

Hi Judgementday,

Thanks for your feedback and what do you think of the opposite concerns expressed here?

https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4690817

quote:

Also, I noticed that the Allies can no longer obtain standard supply in Persia or any USSR territory, meaning they can no longer shore up a collapsing Caucus, which is pretty much guaranteed now.


This is a correction as it was never intended to be the way it was before, but to compensate we did also add minimal supply of 3 for all non cooperative majors, so Western Allies in the past would have had 0 supply in the USSR (when it was correctly implemented) but now have 3. This is the same for Germany and Japan where they can provide each other a maximum of 3 supply as they too are set as non cooperative allies.

Part of this correction would also naturally correct the tactic of the Western Allies using Strategic Bombers from within the USSR as it would now be less viable to do so.

quote:

On the flip side, I’m not sure that the Allies strategy of super Strategic Bombers used to knock out Axis supply has been fixed as well, something that was discussed and I thought to be addressed.


Other than hopefully deterring the a-historical use of Western Allied Bombers from within the USSR to be used against the Axis (as mentioned above), what else did you feel needed to be corrected? I just ask as Strategic Bombing was always a viable option when used appropriately against supply connection targets, e.g. Allied bombing France prior to D-Day and so on.

Hubert




Judgementday -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/1/2019 10:26:09 PM)

I respect HamburgerMeat's opinion greatly, he is easily the best player I have run up against, although there are several really good players out there, and I thank everyone that I have come up against for great games, win or lose. I am not sure that he had actually played a game or two out at the time of his post, or if this was his analysis of the patch notes. I would be interested to learn if he still agrees with his post as written with a game or two played out.
HamburgerMeat, would appreciate your feedback if you have time.

Also, to be fair, I have not played a game as the Axis under the new patch, there is always the "Grass is always Greener" view.

However, the fact that Germany will retain its technological lead seems to be a fact, unless the Allies invest even more into S&I which is very difficult to do while the Axis are pounding on you. And even so, Tech is SLOW, it would take 1/2 years minimum to catch up even if the Axis did minimum investments. Something that a good Axis player is not going to do.

I THINK Tech may just be too decisive, impacting a unit by roughly a 20%/25% improvement per level in combat has a drastic impact on the combat system, best guess is that one level of tech will swing combat odds at least 1 level. A 1 to 1 that turns in to a 2 to 1 is huge. And given that this lead is likely to last up to 3/6 months makes it a disaster for anyone that does not try and keep up.

I see what your doing with the non-cooperating powers, and that is fine, but again, if USA or UK can not feed USSR units, then USSR needs to be able to stand up to Germany on its own.

Also, regarding the Strat. Bombers, in my game with HamburgerMeat, he just clobbered Turkey and used it as a base to totally stop Germany in the south, we are talking 0 supply and disaster for the entire front. Long Range Aircraft and Heavy Bombers can still both be double chitted, this strat seems to still be very much in play. Perhaps they should be limited as well? Although untested, I do not think the beefing up of Turkey (and Spain), BTW thank you, will stop this tactic from succeeding. The Allies fly from India to stop Japan in China. USA gets 2 Strats UK gets 2, USSR gets 2. 2/3 will totally stop Germany in southern USSR, 1/2 will stop Japan in China dead in the water. MAYBE the fact that Axis can maintain an advantage in advanced fighters might counter this, maybe not.

Over all the early game is slightly skewed to the Axis, they can take out Poland in one turn, France in May/March, I have seen it time and time again. Well ahead of historical. Then they can either, beat up the UK either in England or the Med, Malta will always fall (not historical) and a strong Axis commitment in north Africa will threaten if not take Egypt. Although a good UK player can probably stop the North Africa push before it starts by destroying the Axis ports. Although a delicate balance with protecting England from Operation Sea Lion.

By mid game, the Allies inability to catch up/surpass the Axis in Tech, coupled with minimum to no experience for the US means very painful 1st encounters with their Axis counter parts, that sets them back 3/6 months. Soon your looking at late 43 with limited to no success, USSR on the brink of collapse, China either all but gone or soon to be. Hopefully Italy is severely beaten up, they are weak, or out all together. The USA will probably we doing well in the Pacific, but the Allies will struggle to push into France and into Germany not even an option.

Not sure how late game will play out, as I have not gotten into 44 yet, but it does not look good in the European Front. India is barley holding on, but the Pacific is clearly owned by the USA.



calcwerc -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/1/2019 10:58:45 PM)

I guess this is our game you are referring to :) Well, to game balance: I have pushed further than the Germans did historically in South Russia, but was stopped earlier in front of Leningrad and Moscow, although using considerable ressources especially on the Leningrad front. You pushed me out of Africa in 1942, and landed in Italy and Greece (where i was able to push back) the same year. Now we have 1943 and you have additionally landed in Southern France. In Asia and the Pacific I am further into China than historical, but in all other scenarios I am suffering, having lost almost all pacific islands if I was able to take them in the first place, and now also being confronted with American landings in the Phillipines, the Home Isles are within your reach. Additionally you have defeated my subs which tried to stop the convoys to Russia, and it is my impression that you pretty much catched up in tech except tanks (?) The reason I have pushed further in Southern Russia than historical is also due to the fact that I allocated all my air power and parts of the Africa Corps there. So I think that is a priority which is not unbalanced per se. Still, I will not be able to conquer Russia, and will probably be pushed back the next years.
About France I recall that there was no British troops there? It fell in Mai, since I attacked in Benelux already in Fall 39, but I think with more British troops it can be held longer. However, I am no expert on this.
Now you are surely a much better and more experienced player than I am (been playing Strategic Command from the very first version back in 2002 or 2003, but new to this version), and of course when you play against a real expert axis player the game balance might tip in their favour. But I do not really see it in our game.



sveint -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/1/2019 11:05:40 PM)

Unfortunately my findings are exactly the same (I play 50/50 Axis/Allies). The game is little more than an Axis Victory Simulator at this point.

Something that wasn't mentioned above, the UK got hit BAD when it comes to infantry tech. It is now at the level of Italy whereas historically they should be crushing Italy. Facing level 1 German tanks with lvl 0 armies is just a walkover.

I get it, I really do, players want to live out their "world conqueror" fantasies but why play the Allies?

Not only that, isn't it supposed to be a historical game? The production points for the Axis vs Germany are just ridiculous, Allied production should be much much higher.



sveint -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/1/2019 11:13:03 PM)

My proposed solutions (sadly not holding my breath for any of these):
-Major powers should start at infantry tech 0 (unit for unit German/Japanese units were NOT better than UK/French at the beginning of the war)
-Review MPPs to better fit historical. No Germany's economy didn't produce nearly as much tanks etc as the US nor even the Soviets. Easy to find historical tables.
-Strategic bombers can only reduces cities/supply to 50% of max. Some supply always gets through.

There is much more but that would be a start at least.



Judgementday -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/1/2019 11:41:03 PM)

Thank you for that feed back Calcwerc, and yes our game is the reference.

I agree that partly France falls early due to a lack of commitment from the UK, however I am fairly certain that if UK stays and fights it will be destroyed along with the French for maybe a month? of holding out, which will cost the UK 6+ months to recover and they will almost certainly lose England, which part of where the forces retreat to, in order to stop Operation Sea Lion, pretty much a must. And/or the med, where the other part runs to. The German navy is formidable early on before the UK can tech up their own and receive their additional units, coupled with the German Airforce, they can extract a heavy toll on the UK fleet and have a good chance to destroy an evacuation attempt at a Dunkirk if the UK does not leave France early, assuming the UK units have not already been smashed by superior Axis units.

Personally, this is another example of where the Allies are overwhelmed in the early game. Forcing un-historical commitments in France just to survive.

As for tech, I'm pretty sure your fighters are +1 on mine, USA just got level 3, Britain is still level 2, Your Air ground attack is level 3? mine is 1 for US, none for the others. You have level 4 tanks now, Britain just got 3, US is still at 2, USSR is at 3, I'm fairly certain that your industry and probably production are very high for Germany, not so sure for Japan. I think we are fairly even here, as both start close.

The Tech advantage coupled with the Axis experience makes it extremely difficult for the under teched and almost green allies. You came very close to pushing me out of Italy, and If you had known about Italy's likely hood to surrender, might have if better prepared.

Japan is pushing India, currently winning there, while still being able to attack USSR and take Vladivostok. China is barley holding on, but breaking more and more with each turn. Not sure they will hold out, but yes the Pacific is clearly belonging to the USA I believe, unless you have a surprise that I am not ready for, perhaps and still to be determined. I still consider the Japanize navy a serious threat.

Its been a great game thus far, but as expressed I feel that the Allies are losing overall. If I had unlimited time, I think the Allies will eventually turn the corner. But it is Sept. 1943, how much ground do you think the Allies can make up before spring/summer of 45?

Italy was historically conquered September 8, 1943 (so yes it fell early, the UK had a very good African campaign, their only bright spot), Germany fell in spring 1945 and Japan in August of 1945. USA MIGHT get through Japan within that timeframe, but I don't see Germany falling until will after Japan is defeated, probably will into 46?

Leningrad is very hard to take for the Germans, your attack in the north was very impressive, aided by the USSR's inability to have level 2 inf until 42. Rarely have I seen Leningrad fall, or Moscow. Although as the Axis I have taken both, noting that was pre-patch. Even conquering USSR.



HamburgerMeat -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/1/2019 11:50:34 PM)

I have not played a game under the current rules (very very busy at work, I can barely keep my head afloat with just one game).

With double chitted strategic bombers and long-range aircraft (while the other major techs are stuck at one chit), I can't see the allies losing. As long as the western allies concentrate their MPPs into one front, not sure how japan or germany beats that.

With the amphibious changes, also not sure how an actively-scouting UK gets sealioned. Carriers will destroy any amphib barges. The german player has to basically block the channel and hope it rains on the UK player's turn, which is a HUGE gamble.



Judgementday -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/2/2019 12:05:40 AM)

Thank you for that response HamburgerMeat, yes Opeation Sea Lion is more of a gamble, and weather in the Channel is very unpredictable. Very risky for both sides, Britain has to defend it or game over. But I still consider it a viable option for the Axis, especially coupled with a likely early surrender of France. Two paratroopers alone with the Axis air can clear the way for an unprepared UK opponent.

Scouting for the Brits can be a dangerous endeavor, with a large sub force and overwhelming Airforce, both naval movements and air recons can be meet with very painful results. A few bad encounters could actually make a successful Sea Lion even more likely. The Navy surprise rolls can be deadly, but yes risky for both sides. I think a well prepared UK should be able to prevent it, although at the cost of supporting France and additional risk to the med. UK is in a very precarious position early on, as it was historically, part of the fun playing them.

And yes, I agree the Allies strategic bombing is still viable and probably a guaranteed victory if they go that route, I still have not tried it, but still lose sleep over the devastation you lashed out upon my poor Axis forces, again well played.



HamburgerMeat -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/2/2019 12:31:09 AM)

I believe that the UK has the resources to prevent sealion 99% of the time. The trick is, as you indicated, how to balance home defenses vs Mediterranean defense/offense.

As for a non-strategic bombing centric strategy, I'll admit that I'm not sure how balanced it is. But the axis have the MPP advantage in the beginning, which is why I think the single chit change has hurt the axis more overall, since they can't take use their MPP advantage to double chit powerful techs anymore.

Still, I haven't actually played a game under the new rules, so I can't say any of this with absolute confidence



Hubert Cater -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/2/2019 1:43:25 PM)

Thanks for the feedback everyone and based on this we'll likely hold off from any further changes until this new version is played out more thoroughly as we do feel things are pretty close and much of the feedback here continues to support this.

For example, calcwerk has provided a counter point of view from the same game as described in the original post, and even Judgmentday concedes that if he were able to push past 1945 he would a chance at victory as the Allies. How long after is the question of course.

From our point of view, what is the challenge in terms of getting the balance right are situations such as Japan likely winning out in China and possibly India, but as seen in this game losing out the entire Pacific. From the outside looking in, that feels more or less balanced as it comes across as more of a player choice to pursue a Japanese mainland strategy first, but could still cost the Japanese ultimate victory, and therefore playing a bit differently than the Japanese did historically and so on.

We had similar situations in our War in Europe game where players felt that the Axis pushing hard and easily taking out Egypt in game was unrealistic, but if it came at the cost of an effective Barbarossa and ultimately overall victory, then once again it is a self balancing player choice more than anything else.

Essentially players should be able to entertain different strategies so long as there are pros and cons to each choice. Granted some games those choices may work out well, while in other games not so much, but this is why it is important that quite a few games are played, and that players of similar or equal skill play each other (or that players play both sides against the same player), before we seriously consider further changes.

In terms of research, while it is true that the Allies can now only invest in 1 chit in critical research categories, this is also true for the Axis so this should slow it down for both sides which based on past reports seemed to indicate it hurt the Allies more than the Axis in the past, and thus the change.

One consideration is the following which is in place now for the latest v1.05.00 build but seems to have unfortunately not been included in the patch notes (apologies for this):


- Research screen will now indicate the expected advancement range including all applicable bonuses when mouse hovering over the location where a chit is applied. This is only shown when Fog of War is not selected.
- Research Breakthroughs can now happen at any time, 45% threshold no longer applies, and the breakthrough range is increased to 15-25% from 10-20%
- Spying and Intelligence research bonus can now only be negated by a higher value from fully mobilized enemy Major, i.e. pre war USSR cannot negate the German bonus.
- Spying and Intelligence research bonus can now only be decreased by a value from a fully mobilized enemy Major, i.e. pre war USSR cannot decrease the German bonus.
- Spying and Intelligence research bonus for a non mobilized Major, can no longer be affected in any way by a mobilized Major, i.e. Germany cannot decrease a pre war USSR bonus.

Hubert



Judgementday -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/2/2019 6:46:18 PM)

Thank you everyone for your comments and feedback on this post.

Thanks again for this fantastic game, I look forward to a future patch.

Until then, Good Hunting



Mercutio -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/2/2019 11:49:57 PM)

I agree more games are needed. Some of these changes are pretty big and we need to look for ways to offset the advantages of 2 chits on core techs that don't apply anymore. Speaking of which, should those be marked in some way to stand out for new people on how important they are? Maybe even each country with some recommendations on the research screen?






calcwerc -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/6/2019 1:57:13 PM)

So I have played quite a few opponents on the new patch, both sides.
A few remarks:
1. A very commited Germany/Japan bossing up on Russia is very very hard to stop. One reason for this is that it is very easy for Japan to conquer or blockade Vladivostok. The event letting Russia making sabotage on vessels blocking the harbour is too expensive, especially if Japan uses torpedo boats.
I suggest that a new patch will have an event that the US in this case reroutes via Persia, as they historical did, and that this can be stopped by the axis by conquering Stalingrad, Astrakhan or Teheran. It could be less efficient, say 40 or 60 MPP instead of 80, and it could be countered, but an attack on Vladivostok would be less gamebreaking. Now it just feels gamey.
I also dont get the event letting Germany take Lithuania. In the historical agreement, Germany should originally get Lithuania and Russia the part of Poland with Warzaw. Then they agreed to switch, so that Germany got the central part of Poland and Russia Lithuania. This isnt portrayed in the game, and it gives Germany an very good position for little cost. I feel the event should be taken out or at least replaced with a more historical one.
2. China. Loosing Nanning, Changan and a few other cities will happen when you play against a commited Japan. But I think it is still very well defendable, and Japan will in that case have less ressources for navy, without defeating China completely before the war with the US breaks out. I have been able to hold it every time so far, and often able to hit back from 41-42. So here I think the game balance is quite good at the moment.
3. Diplomacy/scripts. These are generally to unpredictable in their outcome. Of course you can study the manual more thoroughly and spend days and weeks in single player trying out different outcomes, but for the average player this is tideous. More ingame messages, and very precise ones, would be a help here for most players I am sure.
4. Of course expert players, which I am not myself, will find new ways and strategies to exploit the mechanics. That is part of the fun. Still the game balance must be for average players too, and great tweaks in game balance will probably hurt them. I think it is overall very good right now, apart from parts of the Russian campaign. Perhaps one of the great modders out there could make mods with more challenging Russia, or Axis for that sake, where the expert players really can test their skills.

One inquiry: I have seen players use Japan war declarations on Benelux before Fall Weiss, so that Germany didnt declare war and still could go in. Does this influence Russian and American war readiness? Which would make it a gamey approach needing fixing, but not sure about how this works out.

And great work, Hubert! I have played Strategic Command since the demo of the first version was released, and was very hooked at that time. After then years pause I have come back, and you have developed one of the best strategy games I have played, and I have played a few, hats off!



BillRunacre -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/7/2019 4:48:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: calcwerc

One inquiry: I have seen players use Japan war declarations on Benelux before Fall Weiss, so that Germany didnt declare war and still could go in. Does this influence Russian and American war readiness? Which would make it a gamey approach needing fixing, but not sure about how this works out.


Hi

Thanks for the feedback, it's always good to have, and on this, I think they are either doing this with Japan in error, or under the mistaken behalf that it might reduce the political penalties of doing so. The scripts just react to Axis (or Allied) declarations of war, rather than who specifically declares war.

Bill



4100xpb -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/7/2019 7:17:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: calcwerc

4. Of course expert players, which I am not myself, will find new ways and strategies to exploit the mechanics. That is part of the fun. Still the game balance must be for average players too, and great tweaks in game balance will probably hurt them. I think it is overall very good right now, apart from parts of the Russian campaign. Perhaps one of the great modders out there could make mods with more challenging Russia, or Axis for that sake, where the expert players really can test their skills.


From what I've seen in some other games I got heavily into, it's a real challenge getting game balance right for players of various skill levels. Some unit or technology or strategy that works okay for an intermediate player could turn into an overpowered exploit in the hands of an expert. And as you mentioned, it's a continuous evoluation (or game of whack a mole) - you tweak the balance over here and even things out, but the law of unintended consequences applies and something else pops up as a dominate tool. I appreciate all the efforts put into balancing this.

quote:

ORIGINAL: calcwerc
And great work, Hubert! I have played Strategic Command since the demo of the first version was released, and was very hooked at that time. After then years pause I have come back, and you have developed one of the best strategy games I have played, and I have played a few, hats off!


Agreed!



ThunderLizard11 -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/8/2019 6:05:46 PM)

One reason for this is that it is very easy for Japan to conquer or blockade Vladivostok. The event letting Russia making sabotage on vessels blocking the harbour is too expensive, especially if Japan uses torpedo boats.
I suggest that a new patch will have an event that the US in this case reroutes via Persia, as they historical did, and that this can be stopped by the axis by conquering Stalingrad, Astrakhan or Teheran. It could be less efficient, say 40 or 60 MPP instead of 80, and it could be countered, but an attack on Vladivostok would be less gamebreaking. Now it just feels gamey.
I also dont get the event letting Germany take Lithuania. In the historical agreement, Germany should originally get Lithuania and Russia the part of Poland with Warzaw. Then they agreed to switch, so that Germany got the central part of Poland and Russia Lithuania. This isnt portrayed in the game, and it gives Germany an very good position for little cost. I feel the event should be taken out or at least replaced with a more historical one.

I agree with these ideas, especially taking out Vladivostok which is too easy and results in big loss of Soviet MPP.



BillRunacre -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/10/2019 1:37:18 PM)

I think increasing the range of potential damage to Axis vessels at Vladivostok may help deter the Japanese more, given that an MTB is a cheap way of interdicting the port.

Or we remove Japan's ability to build MTBs, which might be a bit extreme but if that's what it takes then so be it, but I'd rather try increasing the range of damage first.



sveint -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/10/2019 6:11:33 PM)

If Russia doesn't pay the sabotage event, the Japanese blockade doesn't seem to work.



Christolos -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/10/2019 10:23:35 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

I think increasing the range of potential damage to Axis vessels at Vladivostok may help deter the Japanese more, given that an MTB is a cheap way of interdicting the port.

Or we remove Japan's ability to build MTBs, which might be a bit extreme but if that's what it takes then so be it, but I'd rather try increasing the range of damage first.

I think that removing Japan's ability to build MTBs would definitely be too extreme.

Would there be a way to restrict them from blockading instead such that a minimum force of say 3 ships or more of at least cruiser size ships (and maybe also of a minimum strength), so excluding MTBs, would be required?

This way the Japanese would need to invest more and so also risk more...

C



Christolos -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/10/2019 10:25:03 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sveint

If Russia doesn't pay the sabotage event, the Japanese blockade doesn't seem to work.

Hi sveint,

I'm not sure what you mean by this. Can you kindly explain?

Thanks,

C



sveint -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/11/2019 2:48:10 AM)

Russia says no thanks I won't pay to sabotage => blockade seems to have no effect.



Xsillione -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/11/2019 9:07:08 AM)

If you need three or more ships, than just make a normal convoy route and let them raid it if they want, when US enters the war, they can try to limit the raid if they can.



Mercutio -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/11/2019 10:09:39 AM)

A convoy route would be raided and nothing damaged in return. Hence the current mechanic. I do like the idea that all blockade points must be of a certain size and strength to work through. Say light cruiser or better.

Also the effects of the blockade could scale based on naval attack value?




Xsillione -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/11/2019 3:31:07 PM)

To raid 80 (40) point, you need two-four ships or subs, losing all those units would be quite a cost for the japan navy, and the US would now where are those ships, so easy targets. Only free for the few month before the US enters and the route already open. Currently it needs a single ship at a well defended area, so we need this solution, but still quite cheap for the japan with boats (well, not really, 100 per boat, you need two in rotation, and repair cost of 10-20 per turn) But is it needs two boat or one proper ship, it would be ok at around twice the cost for japan.



BillRunacre -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/11/2019 4:53:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sveint

Russia says no thanks I won't pay to sabotage => blockade seems to have no effect.


I've checked the scripts and there isn't a connection between the USSR's decision and whether or not the Axis can blockade the arrival of US supplies.

So if playing as the Allies and there are Axis ships within 1 hex of Vladivostok, then no supplies will get through regardless of the USSR's decision via DE 407 to send supplies. That decision is merely there to discourage the Axis from blockading the supplies.



Christolos -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/11/2019 4:54:09 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sveint

Russia says no thanks I won't pay to sabotage => blockade seems to have no effect.

So this could be a bug...[&:]

Thanks,

C



BillRunacre -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/11/2019 5:00:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Christolos

Would there be a way to restrict them from blockading instead such that a minimum force of say 3 ships or more of at least cruiser size ships (and maybe also of a minimum strength), so excluding MTBs, would be required?

This way the Japanese would need to invest more and so also risk more...



I can't exclude MTBs specifically from being able to blockade.

The script to send supplies actually relies on the absence of Axis vessels outside the port for the supplies to flow.

Instead making it so that the supplies still flow if there are 1 or 2 ships present but not flowing if 3 are present would turn the scripting method on its head and I don't think it would be possible I'm afraid.

Hence increasing the damage seems the best answer, and when we consider that the US sent ships to Vladivostok throughout the war without the Japanese attacking them, making it more painful should encourage more historical actions by the Japanese.



Christolos -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/12/2019 4:04:37 PM)

Thanks Bill.

But then the question becomes: how much more damage and should it be proportional, to some extent or in some way, to how much the Russians want to invest in it, so as to not shift the balance too much in favour of the Allies...

C



BillRunacre -> RE: Play testing the newest patch. (10/14/2019 2:00:02 PM)

Because the Japanese didn't interdict these supplies in real life, my intention has been to make it unlikely that a player would interdict them themselves.

As this doesn't look like being the case, then I'll have to shift the damage up somewhat. I'm not sure yet in actual figures, but by increasing the potential range of damage then it could mean that some turns the Axis will be lucky, and on others they'll regret having used a naval unit to blockade Vladivostok.

At the moment it doesn't feel that there is enough Axis regret for doing this.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.046875