Quick note. Playing as Entente, SP. Used a small garrison sitting outside its city hex to finish off a German garrison unit. It then did the advance after combat, and ended up two hexes from the city hex. Is now immobile. Not a big deal since this is pretty much of a special case, but I wanted to point it out. Need to reiterate, though, that small garrisons still don't consume manpower points to repair. Means your "real" units have to whack them hard to actually hurt, since they get a 3 point repair each turn for free. You also might come off on the losing end of the deal if your "real" unit takes a loss in the attack and requires actual resources to repair.
If I understand you correctly; When the SG polished off the CP unit it had 2 choices from what you want it to do (For it does not advance into the vacated hex automatically). (one) You don't move SG after attack, or (2) You advance SG into vacated hex as a spoil of war/combat, but leaving it 2 hexes from a city hex.
To bring that SG back adjacent to a city hex on a follow up turn, you have to have a unit between the SG and the nearby city hex or one of it's surrounding hexes, once in position you are eligible to do a unit swap the following turn: garrison<SG as an example. After that is done the SG should move freely.
When SGs lose strength points they are counted towards that side's overall combat losses, which I believe will show in the Management window in Kills/loses, over time the tally effects NM or MP. I'll have to pay closer attention to be confident about the results..
AdmiralSarek and myself (as CP) are in our 32nd turn of an MP match. He asks me what my NM is for Germany? I'm not obliged to release any information, regardless, I wrote 100 NM during an in game chat (we are having a very open game, his first in CTGW MP). He was then surprised that my NM should be so high after he had sunk both my Dreadnaught fleets very early in the game. When he sank those fleets my NM did go down to 100, I'm pretty sure, actually my NM should have gone down further than that (2 major fleets worth 30 NM each, times 2 should have been a 60 NM point loss). I believe the NM max is 144, no matter how many combat victories won and, or cities captured, so at the very least "my NM should have been 84 or lower". Can anybody from CTGW explain to myself and AdmiralSarek (plus others) why my score should not be lower?
Noticed that a Fort entrenchment level 13 never changes in spite ever increasing entrenchment techs. Is this intended or not? While I'm at it: Could a numbered system for entrenching be included to show each level of entrenching, instead of a "3" signifying the highest level. For when attacking enemy hexes, there is no indication that the hex has "pillbox" or higher level "concrete bunker" entrenchments, especially after reconnaissance which most everybody uses prior to an attack and, or to see what state/level of entrenchment rear trenches have. Also. what is confusing to me: When the enemy vacates a level 3 entrenched hex on his turn, then when it's my turn there is no entrenchment value left in the vacated hex, That strikes as being wrong.
60 turns in MP without game killing CTD, have 5 other matches going at the same time, no CTD on my side has stopped games. Although I have reports from the other side about crashes, but none fatal. It seems as though when a country losses NM, it is unable to increase it's NM, even after capturing several cities. The NM scale does not accurately reflect the game's NM wins and loses.
When Russia Surrenders, Finland forms an Independent country, yet it des not have a flag in the Diplomat window. Because it has no flag I can not "Declare War" on it to free trapped units in that new country, nor can I pass through it's hexes if able to make Finland an ally of CP.
On your agenda to get stuff done: Could you "Please" add Finland's flag to the Diplomat's window, also Finland may need to get it's own production window.
Thanks, Bob
< Message edited by operating -- 1/27/2015 10:45:58 AM >
If a country's "request for surrender" is accepted, then on a later turn that same country has "War Declared on it" by the side that accepted surrender, the penalty should be more than just giving 30 to 40 or so NM to defending country, it should also include a PP boost of let's say 30 or more PP, or perhaps a free tech upgrade to defending units. Mind you: if it was a country that had fleets, those fleets should be repatriated at full strength and upgraded at no cost, as deterrent to violating the "Surrender Treaty". I am as guilty as others of violating that Treaty, however there should be more consequences for doing so, perhaps including Diplomatic repercussions.
Sorry I have not been about recently, but my PC somehow got infected with a really bad Trojan Virus, which in affect deactivated my windows operating system,and then systematically started to infect all the programmes on my system. To solved this problem I resorted too doing a complete new install off Windows.Fortunately I have a complete backup of all my stuff,so nothing was lost.
That said I come bearing a gift,MANUAL CONTROL OFF CONVOYS!
Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008 From: England Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: kirk23
Sorry I have not been about recently, but my PC somehow got infected with a really bad Trojan Virus, which in affect deactivated my windows operating system,and then systematically started to infect all the programmes on my system. To solved this problem I resorted too doing a complete new install off Windows.Fortunately I have a complete backup of all my stuff,so nothing was lost.
That said I come bearing a gift,MANUAL CONTROL OFF CONVOYS!
warspite1
Sounds promising!
_____________________________
England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805
What do you think about when a country surrenders "unconditionally" (they are totally wiped out, all cities lost); That their Management assets go to the Victor?
Any chance that England and Germany could get an additional 1 each transport capacity at the start of their respective turns? Or when these countries get Naval Research that they then get an additional troop transport included? Since it would be about the time that commercial ships were being commandeered for military use.
If I wanted to "demolish" my own city (destroy my own PP) before vacating it. Would that be possible to have as a tactic in the game? In other words: I cannot hold the city without sacrificing the unit that is presently there, yet the city is worth 7 PP, but I do not wish to just hand over that kind of PP value. So I am looking for a solution to deny the enemy those points.
Making a request that next turn PP and PPs that are in the bank be posted on the Management page, to make it easier to figure or guess when a player may have enough PP to buy: Ammo, RR or Transports. As it is, it's a PITA to jump from one window to another, especially if you are like me, who has short term loss of memory.
Thanks, Bob
EDIT: It would be easier to spot than the Finances Overview window...
Kirk, did you use the same method as me for removing convoy movement, and will this ship in 1.6? I deleted the following in ManageConvoys, game_convoys.lua:
if not arrived then
-- Move convoy automatically
-- For player only! AI should do the same in AI scripts
if alliance.id == playerAlliance.id then
table.insert(gameplay.convoys, unit)
end
end
Slight problem: Countries like Bulgaria that have an artillery tech tree have to develop Rail Road Super Guns, but upon completion of the RR Gun tech, the host country does not have the availability of the RR Gun in their Production Panel!!!!!
Slight problem: Countries like Bulgaria that have an artillery tech tree have to develop Rail Road Super Guns, but upon completion of the RR Gun tech, the host country does not have the availability of the RR Gun in their Production Panel!!!!!
Slight problem: Countries like Bulgaria that have an artillery tech tree have to develop Rail Road Super Guns, but upon completion of the RR Gun tech, the host country does not have the availability of the RR Gun in their Production Panel!!!!!
Bob
This has been fixed for the 1.6 official release whenever that happens.
Kirk, did you use the same method as me for removing convoy movement, and will this ship in 1.6? I deleted the following in ManageConvoys, game_convoys.lua:
if not arrived then
-- Move convoy automatically
-- For player only! AI should do the same in AI scripts
if alliance.id == playerAlliance.id then
table.insert(gameplay.convoys, unit)
end
end
I have altered a great many scripts, and I really can't mind when I changed how Convoys are handled, but hopefully this will be in the official release when it does finally become available.
Posts: 41353
Joined: 2/2/2008 From: England Status: offline
quote:
ORIGINAL: kirk23
quote:
ORIGINAL: operating
Kirk,
Is there a reason why airships do not have "Depth Charges" this version versus all the past versions?
Bob
Airships carried small bombs, they never ever carried Depth charges hence the reason they are not allowed to be carried in game.
warspite1
Good work kirk23, and that is really good to hear - another example of how the original game was too heavily weighted toward air power. This is 1914-1918 not 1939-1945 after all!!
_____________________________
England expects that every man will do his duty. Horatio Nelson October 1805
Admiral Sarek and myself are in our 84th turn of a MP match and have been experiencing what may be a BUG from airship/zeppllin sub attacks that cause friendly fighters to lose strength points, it's absolutely maddening, and seems so unnecessary. Below are the before and after SS of one such attack as an example.
Admiral Sarek and myself are in our 84th turn of a MP match and have been experiencing what may be a BUG from airship/zeppllin sub attacks that cause friendly fighters to lose strength points, it's absolutely maddening, and seems so unnecessary. Below are the before and after SS of one such attack as an example.
Question: Is there any value to adding labs to a "single" tech beyond the present 4 armor labs? For it seems a 5th lab has "no effect" on tech development...
Question: Is there any value to adding labs to a "single" tech beyond the present 4 armor labs? For it seems a 5th lab has "no effect" on tech development...
Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War I] >> Commander - The Great War >> RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch 
RE: Thoughts on 1.60 beta patch - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread