Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/19/2007 6:15:54 AM

Veers

Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline

You guys do realize that with the new way amphibious ops are handled that if you set up an attack and then cancel it, your MPs are zeroed, eh?
Likewise, if you set up a move to a port and it ends up being occupied, the automatic attack that is set up, if cancelled, zeros your MPs.

This isn't killer, but it does mean you need to be 100% more carefull about moving troops around in the sea, eh?

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

Post #: 1

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/19/2007 7:32:14 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

Recconaissance is good!! Move adjacent first and see what's there - then you can move away if you need to!

(in reply to Veers)

Post #: 2

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/19/2007 7:53:46 AM

Veers

Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline

True, but if you accidentally set up an attack, bye bye go your MPs.

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 3

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/19/2007 9:20:03 AM

STIENER

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

should be changed back to the old way. obviously this is a bug?

(in reply to Veers)

Post #: 4

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/19/2007 10:58:30 AM

freeboy

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline

well thjere is always the "cheat" of saving and reloading

(in reply to STIENER)

Post #: 5

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/19/2007 5:14:23 PM

Veers

Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

should be changed back to the old way. obviously this is a bug?

The problem was that with the old way you could exploit it to have infinite Sea Transport. This is how they've gotten rid of that cheat.

quote:

well thjere is always the "cheat" of saving and reloading

Well, there is also 'undo', but I know from personal experience that I'll often have made another move before I realize my mistakes. As to reloading, well, yeah, that'll generate a reload message...

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to freeboy)

Post #: 6

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/20/2007 12:09:38 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

Tough - don't accidentally setup an attack....or undo the move.......the game is not here to stop you making stupid moves!! :)

AFAIK it's not a bug - it is a feature specifically mentioned in the list.

(in reply to Veers)

Post #: 7

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/20/2007 4:11:17 AM

Veers

Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Tough - don't accidentally setup an attack

Right. Thanks for that gem of advice.

quote:

....or undo the move.......the game is not here to stop you making stupid moves!! :)

As I mentioned in the post right above the one you just put down, one often realizes mistakes after the undo's window of use has been used up. Adding a feature that encourages mistakes, or 'stupid moves', as you so elequently put it, is not, neccesarily, the best way to go about things.

quote:

AFAIK it's not a bug - it is a feature specifically mentioned in the list.

It is mentioned in the what's new (which I did read, but forgot).
However, I hope that Ralph and James will not simply take your unforgiving view as the only one, and be able re-fix the unlimited sea-transport bug in a way that will cancel that bug and allow the cencelling of amphibious attacks.

EDIT: I appoligise for the stern tone of my post, but I can't tell how you really feel. The tone of your post was, I felt, stern, but you had a smiley, so I dunno...

< Message edited by Veers -- 9/20/2007 4:13:47 AM >

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)

Post #: 8

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/20/2007 5:17:14 AM

JAMiAM

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers
EDIT: I appoligise for the stern tone of my post, but I can't tell how you really feel. The tone of your post was, I felt, stern, but you had a smiley, so I dunno...

He's from New Zealand. It's part of that gruff attitude they must project to keep the sheep in line...

And the rest of the Commonwealth, as well...

(in reply to Veers)

Post #: 9

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/20/2007 5:35:26 AM

SMK-at-work

Posts: 3396
Joined: 8/28/2000
From: New Zealand
Status: offline

Damned straight.......get in behind there!!

I figure I keep screwing up my moves so the designers are simply heloping me out by increasing the chances for everyone else to screw up moves - it's very thoughtful of them

(in reply to JAMiAM)

Post #: 10

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/20/2007 6:17:41 AM

Veers

Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work
Damned straight.......get in behind there!!
I figure I keep screwing up my moves so the designers are simply heloping me out by increasing the chances for everyone else to screw up moves - it's very thoughtful of them

Awesome. :D

quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers
EDIT: I appoligise for the stern tone of my post, but I can't tell how you really feel. The tone of your post was, I felt, stern, but you had a smiley, so I dunno...

He's from New Zealand. It's part of that gruff attitude they must project to keep the sheep in line...
And the rest of the Commonwealth, as well...

Oh, come now, James. You'll comment on that, but not the main point of my post? Tsk, tsk.

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to JAMiAM)

Post #: 11

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/20/2007 7:50:16 PM

Curtis Lemay

Posts: 12969
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers
Oh, come now, James. You'll comment on that, but not the main point of my post? Tsk, tsk.

I'll comment on it. It's a bug we inserted that got missed. During the mucking about with fixing the cheat thing, some aspects of MPs got screwed up. We thought we got it fixed, but we didn't. In fact, I'll post my comments I made at the time on it from the development board:

The game has been returned to the COW behavior, but the above is not quite a correct description of it. Debarking while at sea does not zero movement points (nor should it). Rather, debarking at sea next to the coast, setting up an attack from there against a coastal defender, and then canceling that attack, is what zeros MPs (it also re-embarks the attackers, who remain without MPs if then re-dis-embarked). Frankly, I'm not sure the way COW had it was a good thing. I'd rather be able to cancel the attack AND keep my MPs, thankyou.

The important thing is that debarking at sea does not restore the seacap used.

Unfortunately, the bold above was incorrect. In fact, the game had been changed so that canceling an attack of any seaborne units - NOT just units that have debarked at sea - zeros their movement allowance. This will have to be fixed next time.

(in reply to Veers)

Post #: 12

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/20/2007 8:28:22 PM

Veers

Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers
Oh, come now, James. You'll comment on that, but not the main point of my post? Tsk, tsk.

I'll comment on it. It's a bug we inserted that got missed. During the mucking about with fixing the cheat thing, some aspects of MPs got screwed up. We thought we got it fixed, but we didn't. In fact, I'll post my comments I made at the time on it from the development board:

The game has been returned to the COW behavior, but the above is not quite a correct description of it. Debarking while at sea does not zero movement points (nor should it). Rather, debarking at sea next to the coast, setting up an attack from there against a coastal defender, and then canceling that attack, is what zeros MPs (it also re-embarks the attackers, who remain without MPs if then re-dis-embarked). Frankly, I'm not sure the way COW had it was a good thing. I'd rather be able to cancel the attack AND keep my MPs, thankyou.

The important thing is that debarking at sea does not restore the seacap used.

Unfortunately, the bold above was incorrect. In fact, the game had been changed so that canceling an attack of any seaborne units - NOT just units that have debarked at sea - zeros their movement allowance. This will have to be fixed next time.

I see. Thanks, Bob. I look forward to it being fixed.

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)

Post #: 13

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/20/2007 8:43:15 PM

JAMiAM

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers
Oh, come now, James. You'll comment on that, but not the main point of my post? Tsk, tsk.

I'll comment on it. It's a bug we inserted that got missed.

I beg to differ. It is not a bug. A bug is a game engine behavior that acts contrary to intention, or documentation. This does neither. It may be a feature that you disagree with the specifics of its implementation, but it is in no way a "bug".

quote:

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
During the mucking about with fixing the cheat thing, some aspects of MPs got screwed up. We thought we got it fixed, but we didn't. In fact, I'll post my comments I made at the time on it from the development board:

The game has been returned to the COW behavior, but the above is not quite a correct description of it. Debarking while at sea does not zero movement points (nor should it). Rather, debarking at sea next to the coast, setting up an attack from there against a coastal defender, and then canceling that attack, is what zeros MPs (it also re-embarks the attackers, who remain without MPs if then re-dis-embarked). Frankly, I'm not sure the way COW had it was a good thing. I'd rather be able to cancel the attack AND keep my MPs, thankyou.

The important thing is that debarking at sea does not restore the seacap used.

Unfortunately, the bold above was incorrect. In fact, the game had been changed so that canceling an attack of any seaborne units - NOT just units that have debarked at sea - zeros their movement allowance. This will have to be fixed next time.

One could take the hard-nosed approach and say that operational commanders wouldn't be able to send their invasion units to an enemy beach, sit off the beach, calculating their odds, and deciding to not attack, sail away, and expect no consequences. It might not be a fun game-play event, but it would be realistic in a fashion to keep the units stuck and subject to counterattack, etc. Mind you, I'm not necessarily saying that I endorse this point of view, but it is not unreasonable.

That said, given that the expected behavior of the program has changed significantly with this feature, it could be argued that the restrictions it imposes are overly burdensome. I can somewhat agree with this point of view. Therefore, we will try to fine tune this better for future patches so that the flexibility of planning that normal ground combats have is restored somewhat to the use of sea invading forces. At least until we start making sea hexes "stickier"...

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)

Post #: 14

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/20/2007 10:02:29 PM

Curtis Lemay

Posts: 12969
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM
I beg to differ. It is not a bug. A bug is a game engine behavior that acts contrary to intention, or documentation. This does neither. It may be a feature that you disagree with the specifics of its implementation, but it is in no way a "bug".

Well, I'm not Ralph so I can't be sure. But the cheat problem was with units that had disembarked at sea. Somehow, Ralph applied this to units that were still embarked. Since the final intent (as my post implies) was for the zeroing to be back to ACOW performance, it certainly looks like a bug from where I sit. ACOW only zeroed the MPs of disembarked units that cancel an attack. Certainly, had I discovered it before release, I would have raised the issue.

(in reply to JAMiAM)

Post #: 15

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/22/2007 1:51:56 AM

STIENER

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

well heres a stupid question from a player who didnt no you could debark at sea.......im assuming only in the sea hex next to the coast hex your attacking?........if you debark at sea then you dont pay the attacking amphibious penalty's?? if thats not it can someone explain the advantages please?
ps........im finding that the in game 'help' rules....the ones you can pull up while playing the game...dont seem to have all the info im looking for and im not sure all this stuff is in the PDF either?? is it just me?

thanks

(in reply to Curtis Lemay)

Post #: 16

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/24/2007 12:30:11 PM

a white rabbit

Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline

..bug or not, it's a vicious punishment of sloppy play..

..it, or something similar should stay..

_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..be�n'tus all..?,

(in reply to STIENER)

Post #: 17

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/29/2007 9:51:09 AM

STIENER

Posts: 857
Joined: 1/7/2001
From: Vancouver, Canada
Status: offline

any one got an answer for me on the above question?

(in reply to a white rabbit)

Post #: 18

RE: Amphibious Ops w/the Beta Patch - 9/29/2007 5:00:49 PM

Telumar

Posts: 2236
Joined: 1/3/2006
From: niflheim
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: STIENER

any one got an answer for me on the above question?

If the question was a bit clearer it wouldn't hurt..

So, you can embark your units in any port. Move them to the coast, that means adjacent to a coastal hex. If the coast hex is occupied by the enemy you can immediately order an amphibious assault with the 70% penalty. Simply right click the enemy unit as you would do normally. If the coast hex is unoccupied you'll have to wait until the next turn to disembark. Right click on the unit -> disembark , move ashore if the hex is still empty. If your opponent occupied the hex in the meantime you need not to disembark, but order an assault as previously mentioned.
AFAIK there is no advantage regarding combat odds in debarking first and then order the attack. The only advantage (infinite sea transport) you can get is described in the previous posts and it is a bug and a cheat.

_____________________________

http://thetoawbeachhead.wordpress.com

(in reply to STIENER)

Post #: 19