quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

For naval units spotting land units, I can't seem to be able to find the original thread on this where it was discussed in more detail, but essentially it stems from the idea that players were using cheap units to transport them to use as spotters of hidden enemy land unit positions, e.g. along coasts as well as on islands for the world map, and that it was also debatable if naval units in general should be able to spot hidden land units along coasts and on coastal positions on islands etc.

From memory it was argued it gave too much of an advantage to naval units in this sense, where realistically those units would only truly be spotted with air or by land units via overland movement or from being amphibiously transported and dropped off etc.

In the end it doesn't stop you from attacking these coastal units, they just need to be spotted first, and it helps to eliminate the "gamey" tactics that otherwise prevailed in these situations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hubert Cater

The campaign changes will only show on a newly started game. Whereas continuing any previously saved games, under the old incorrect values, will still show the older incorrect values.

Does this explain it?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Markiss



The issue that drove this change was micro-landings. The ability to drive up and down an enemy's coastline looking for empty cities, and then making single-unit nuisance landings had ruined the game for many people.

I find it ironic that some of the very people who created this gamey tactic are now complaining about the change that their own actions forced to be implemented. Honestly, it is the people who are constantly pushing the rules to the breaking point looking for exploits that force this kind of reactionary change from the developers. This never needed to come up, but due to some peoples behavior, it had to be done. Italy was being forced to surrender within a couple turns of entering the game consistently, at least by certain players, by doing this very thing. If people hadn't started doing it, the fix would not have been necessary.

And it never made any sense for ships to spot land units. So I drive my battleship within a few miles of the coast. Cliffs, buildings, hills, and vegetation will limit the view inland to a few hundred meters. How can you tell what land units are stationed there, and their strengths and dispositions? You can't. Especially since the hexes on the coastline actually extend many miles inland. Ships can be spotted out to sea for many miles from land, but ships cannot see inland in any meaningful way. And submarines? Give me a break.

Nothing stops you from bombarding a resource. As far as the supposed loss of game balance from ships not being able to bombard units without spotting them first, I have never noticed these bombardments to have much of an effect. If you were counting on that to save you, you're doomed anyway.

Since this hasn't even started working yet, lets see how it goes. Maybe once a hex is bombarded by one unit, any units in it could be revealed. This would allow a ship to illuminate one hex per turn, not an entire coastline. Maybe that would work.

Let's try to find a way to make it work instead of returning to micro-landing hell. That is NOT the answer.

quote:

ORIGINAL: PvtBenjamin


1) I agree on spotting in cities then amphibing to the vacant city.

2) How do you get Italy to surrender in the first few turns?

3) Subs/surface ships doing recon certainly isn't realistic. Neither is the Germans executing Sealion 4 weeks after France's fall by blocking the channel with subs. Especially being the fact that the Brits historically had a much stronger Navy, strong airforce, radar and the Germans had very slow moving barges as amphibious carriers. Even the most optimistic on Sealion agree that the Germans would have had to eliminate the Royal Airforce. Sealions there for the game, and thats ok.

As it stands right now the only way in "the game" to figure out if your opponent is going to attempt an unrealistically easy Sealion is with unrealistic subs/ships doing recon. It ain't right but its so.

I don't care if the game changes the spotting ability of ships but accommodations need to be made for Sealion and Egypt or the game isn't balanced.

quote:

ORIGINAL: nnason

Hello Hubert,
Well, the mystery gets thicker.
I reinstalled the hot patch and then rebooted. I get two different results.


[image]local://upfiles/53788/AE0D1FEEC9FC4D96867D25D6FF8BDC77.jpg[/image]

quote:

ORIGINAL: BillRunacre

quote:

ORIGINAL: nnason

Hello Hubert,
Well, the mystery gets thicker.
I reinstalled the hot patch and then rebooted. I get two different results.


[image]local://upfiles/53788/AE0D1FEEC9FC4D96867D25D6FF8BDC77.jpg[/image]

When did you start this game?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Markiss

quote:

ORIGINAL: PvtBenjamin


1) I agree on spotting in cities then amphibing to the vacant city.

2) How do you get Italy to surrender in the first few turns?

3) Subs/surface ships doing recon certainly isn't realistic. Neither is the Germans executing Sealion 4 weeks after France's fall by blocking the channel with subs. Especially being the fact that the Brits historically had a much stronger Navy, strong airforce, radar and the Germans had very slow moving barges as amphibious carriers. Even the most optimistic on Sealion agree that the Germans would have had to eliminate the Royal Airforce. Sealions there for the game, and thats ok.

As it stands right now the only way in "the game" to figure out if your opponent is going to attempt an unrealistically easy Sealion is with unrealistic subs/ships doing recon. It ain't right but its so.

I don't care if the game changes the spotting ability of ships but accommodations need to be made for Sealion and Egypt or the game isn't balanced.

1. Yay!

2. Without giving away the specifics of certain people's strategy, Italy is invaded from all points of the compass on the turn it enters the game(I will let you figure out how). It does not have enough units to cover all of it's coastal cities without abandoning North Africa to the British, and any empty cities are easily identified using ships. It also, before the last patch, took huge national morale penalties for any landing on its territory, far higher than any other country. These facts, in addition to the loss of most of its navy on the first turn as well, drives its national morale down to dangerous levels on the first turn it enters the game. With its national morale shot, the combat effectiveness of its troops(already minimal) goes to zero. The rest of the country can now be taken easily. The only thing that the Axis player can do is flood Italy with German troops for the rest of the game trying to prevent any further morale loss. The loss of these troops permanently and so early in the game means an Allied victory. If the Germans don't move the troops in, Italy surrenders and the Allies win again. Now THAT is game unbalancing.

3. As far as Sealion goes, I always used aircraft to scout the French ports, not ships. But I believe that under the new rules if there is an amphibious assault ship in a port, a ship will see it if it gets adjacent to the port, I do not think that ability is impaired. So I am not sure what the problem is. You seem to want to be able to see them on land, in the cities before they even embark, which just isn't realistic with a ship. Or necessary. Use an aircraft, that is how these reconnaissance missions were accomplished during the war, not with ships. Unless you have already flown them all to Egypt, which is your choice, but you have to live with the consequences of it. Sealion is a little too easy, but in a turn based game, the invasion cannot be intercepted between France and Dover. Getting on Britain is fairly easy, taking all of Britain is very hard and time-consuming, I guess that is the deterrent in this game.

I'm not sure how Egypt is effected. You have aircraft there too, if you feel that you just have to know what is in a certain hex. What do you think the issue is there? Maybe we could find a way to mitigate it...