Four Seasons with Models

[LJBurstyn]

I think tech support helped get my email attachment to you...but not the accompanied message. The test Speedconnect did was for the attachment only. Which is why the message only said SpeedConnect Test. But of course, please confirm you got the attachment.

[Ormand]

So, I think most of the glitches are out. I have uploaded v.1.17. This fixes the issue that LJBurstyn had with the carrier fighters. This was caused by a conflict between the ground-support improvements and carrier fighters. So that after you research the ground-support improvement tech, the carrier fighter alteration became inactive.

I also made some tweaks to naval units that I hope will improve game play.
1. Hitpoints for cargo ships from 500 -> 200. I ambushed 8 transports with a BB, CA and 4 DD, and only sank 2 transports. This seems too low. I also nailed it with four dive bombers, and only sank one.
2. Created a new ship type: Escort Ship (and surface ship to Capital Ship). I did this to distinguish destroyers in combat with subs.
3. made some uniform changes in hitpoints overall to ships.

There is also a quirk in the models that I cannot fix as I think it is an issue with the core system. It is not a big deal, and not likely to come up in an actual game, but can. Normally, if you create a model, it can be altered until it is produced. If you create the model, then research an improvement, then implement the improvement, you cannot apply an alteration. This is true for tank models too. If you reverse the order, research the improvement, then create the model, you can apply the alteration (note that the new model will have the improvement). Like I said, it is not something that is likely to happen since you have to decide to do the improvement after creating the model in the same turn. Or rather before producing the model.

[LJBurstyn]

How do I get the new escort ship? It seems not to appear in my version of 117? Do I need to research something?

Still getting names repeated several times for different plane and armor types.

The fighter-bomber alteration does not generate a new type in the TOE list...so you cannot specify it be used in units. Also the FB is put into fighter TOE's since it is still considered a fighter.

Artillery II auto upgrades to Artillery III...so you cannot use auto upgrade after you research Artillery III....this is inconvenient when you want to upgrade a large number of units quickly (like Rifle III to Rifle IV in many units at the same time--rather than a unit at a time).

[Ormand]

ORIGINAL: LJBurstyn

How do I get the new escort ship? It seems not to appear in my version of 117? Do I need to research something?

These are just destroyers and light cruisers. It is a category for combat stats, like I did with anti-tank units. It was useful to separate them from surface ships so that I modify the submarine power points against them. The way it was subs had the same power against them as capital ships, and, well, if you want subs to be dangerous to the larger ships, they would be downright deadly to destroyers, which I felt wasn't right. So, a new combat category made sense.

Still getting names repeated several times for different plane and armor types.

The names are generated randomly, and apparently aren't checked for repeat. I can't control this. It can only be fixed by adding names and reducing the probability it gets picked.

The fighter-bomber alteration does not generate a new type in the TOE list...so you cannot specify it be used in units. Also the FB is put into fighter TOE's since it is still considered a fighter.

Good point. It should be maid into its own reinforcement type.

Artillery II auto upgrades to Artillery III...so you cannot use auto upgrade after you research Artillery III....this is inconvenient when you want to upgrade a large number of units quickly (like Rifle III to Rifle IV in many units at the same time--rather than a unit at a time).

I kind of did this deliberately. The reasoning was that I was looking at the higher artillery SFTs as being heavier artillery. More firepower, but also heavy, and not transportable by horses. I chose Artillery II as the break point. Artillery I and II have weight 2, while Artillery II and IV have 3 and 4, and must be pulled by trucks. This was meant as a contrast between US and German and Russia, where the latter two used a lot of horses. Thus, the idea was to make management of artillery something to think about. But, there are some units where you might want to mobilize with horses (mountain infantry or you don't have enough trucks), so you would like to keep Artillery II in those units. But, at the same time, you might want to update all the Artillery II in a given unit. This could also be accomplished with a Heavy Artillery SFT. But, since the artillery units all have a range of one and are embedded in the core division units, I didn't want to take up too much SFT space, since we can only have 8 in a unit. Effectively, I admit these act this way. Except you can upgrade the lighter to heavier if you want to. The point being tht you might have a lot of lighter artillery that you can't upgrade to heavier.

[Ormand]

I forgot to say that I won't be able to do much until Tuesday as I have a visitor over the holiday weekend.

[LJBurstyn]

ORIGINAL: Ormand

ORIGINAL: LJBurstyn

How do I get the new escort ship? It seems not to appear in my version of 117? Do I need to research something?

These are just destroyers and light cruisers. It is a category for combat stats, like I did with anti-tank units. It was useful to separate them from surface ships so that I modify the submarine power points against them. The way it was subs had the same power against them as capital ships, and, well, if you want subs to be dangerous to the larger ships, they would be downright deadly to destroyers, which I felt wasn't right. So, a new combat category made sense.

IS this a new SFT or just an idea to combine Destroyers and Light Cruisers into one unit but with separate SFT's?.
Oh?! I think I understand now. BTW subs were real good against destroyers if they managed to hit them as one torpedo was usually enough to sink a destroyer. In fact a good hit right under the keel of a Battleship would sink it but you needed good firing triggers to make that work and we (and the Germans) did not have those devices until much later in the war.

Artillery II auto upgrades to Artillery III...so you cannot use auto upgrade after you research Artillery III....this is inconvenient when you want to upgrade a large number of units quickly (like Rifle III to Rifle IV in many units at the same time--rather than a unit at a time).

I kind of did this deliberately. The reasoning was that I was looking at the higher artillery SFTs as being heavier artillery. More firepower, but also heavy, and not transportable by horses. I chose Artillery II as the break point. Artillery I and II have weight 2, while Artillery II and IV have 3 and 4, and must be pulled by trucks. This was meant as a contrast between US and German and Russia, where the latter two used a lot of horses. Thus, the idea was to make management of artillery something to think about. But, there are some units where you might want to mobilize with horses (mountain infantry or you don't have enough trucks), so you would like to keep Artillery II in those units. But, at the same time, you might want to update all the Artillery II in a given unit. This could also be accomplished with a Heavy Artillery SFT. But, since the artillery units all have a range of one and are embedded in the core division units, I didn't want to take up too much SFT space, since we can only have 8 in a unit. Effectively, I admit these act this way. Except you can upgrade the lighter to heavier if you want to. The point being tht you might have a lot of lighter artillery that you can't upgrade to heavier.

I would prefer a designated Heavy Artillery SFT. As I would not combine Heavy and Regular Artillery into a Infantry Division. Heavy Artillery would be reserved for Artillery only units. Does the Self Propelled Artillery have the same brutal counter battery fire as the regular artillery? My regular OOB has Heavy Artillery for Corp Artillery units and Self-Propelled Artillery for Army Artillery units.

Enjoy your company for the holiday...see ya when you get back to the "grind"...

[LJBurstyn]

I am having some crash issues. It always happens at the same time. I cut off the only enemy road leading from one land mass to another. During the AI turn the game crashes when the AI is transferring units.

The game does not crash as long as the only enemy road leading from one land mass to another enemy controlled area is not captured by my units.

[ernieschwitz]

ORIGINAL: LJBurstyn

I am having some crash issues. It always happens at the same time. I cut off the only enemy road leading from one land mass to another. During the AI turn the game crashes when the AI is transferring units.

The game does not crash as long as the only enemy road leading from one land mass to another enemy controlled area is not captured by my units.

Sounds like something Vic might want to hear about...

[Ormand]

ORIGINAL: LJBurstyn

I am having some crash issues. It always happens at the same time. I cut off the only enemy road leading from one land mass to another. During the AI turn the game crashes when the AI is transferring units.

The game does not crash as long as the only enemy road leading from one land mass to another enemy controlled area is not captured by my units.

I agree. This sounds like something beyond my control. I ran into a similar problem just after the new 227 release. If you want, you can send me the file, and I can e-mail it, or possibly just e-mail Vic.

[LJBurstyn]

I'll email Vic on the crash issue.

SO far except for the artillery issue I like the 1.17 version.

[Ormand]

ORIGINAL: LJBurstyn

I'll email Vic on the crash issue.

SO far except for the artillery issue I like the 1.17 version (10:15 PDT).

Thanks for all your constructive feedback!!!!!

I've uploaded a new version v1.1.20. There are several relatively fixes and changes:

1. I made a Fighter Bomber reinforcement type for when you apply the ground-support alteration. Now, FB can be assigned to a TOE.
2. I converted the artillery back to the way they were. Namely all with weight=2 and Artillery III blocks Artillery II.
3. Set rivers to be major and regular for random games, instead of regular and minor.
4. Expanded tracked landing vehicles. In addition to amphibious assaults, they are also now useful for river movement and combat. Their movement and combat penalties are 1/2 that for soft mobile vehicles. Also, I changed the research tree. It is now a research element requiring Halftrack I and Amphibious Assault Theory. There is also a 2nd level.
5. Some minor fixes to SFType stats that I missed in the last update.
6. Also, made some SFTypes not listed in the compare option, such as the Fighter concept, etc. Most model concepts, two pictures, and the dummy SFTypes used for reinforcement types in the TOE.

[LJBurstyn]

I noticed when FB was upgraded it does not upgrade the FB elements...they don't upgrade as well as the fighter elements. This is for version 1.17.

Still would not mind a heavy artillery upgrade...with better stats than the regular artillery but that's up to you.

When were cluster shells developed...they proved deadly to concentrated and units in open terrain in Korea?

My test game with 1.17 has proved interesting so I am going to finish it.
But I will still test 1.20 at the same time.

[LJBurstyn]

OK, testing 1.1.20 now.

Possible (Actual) Model Problem.
Disturbing results. In each case the upgraded Fighter Bomber is worse (except LVT) than the old Fighter-Bomber where the improvements were added first.

FB-1d is Fighter I with 4 improvements (each improvement). FB-2a is based on FB-1d and only has Fighter II upgrade attached.
Fighter Bomber Improvements Attack Values:
OLD UPgraded
Item FB-1d FB-2a
Artillery 58/68 46/48
Soft Mobile 58/68 46/48
Anti-Tank 38/38 20/22
LVT 36/36 40/44
Infantry 38/46 20/22

I am going to run a test and build a new fighter II than add all the improvement and then alter it's mission to Fighter-Bomber?

ACK--spacing commands did not work...

[Ormand]

I looked into your earlier comment, and noticed that there is a little issue with the ground-support alteration and the increase armor alteration. In that the alteration isn't applied to the new model. I am fixing this now, with a few other things, and should have something later tonight. I have to go do some real work now.

[LJBurstyn]

"Real work" ugh....I stopped doing that in 2005 when I retired. I figure work is a 4 letter word which should not be used around me....I'm a snowflake and I might get offended and tear up or burn down something (sarcasm--it's getting late here after a long day of computer surfing.).

[Ormand]

OK, I have a new version v.1.1.22 on the site.
Changes:
1. Fix to Ground Support alteration for fighters when upgrading to new fighter level.
2. Some modifications to SFT hitpoints for armored vehicles.

[LJBurstyn]

Testing 1.1.22.

Only issue so far is a new kind of error. When I hit compare the models don't show up as in list of comparable items?. Try this again later today to see if it was some kind of error on my part.

[Ormand]

ORIGINAL: LJBurstyn

Testing 1.1.22.

Only issue so far is a new kind of error. When I hit compare the models don't show up as in list of comparable items?. Try this again later today to see if it was some kind of error on my part.

Are there specific SFTypes that don't show, or all? I was actually using this in my tests for the fighter bomber and others, so for me it works. How things won't show is by changing the "Show in List" to false. I did this for some SFTypes. Such as the "model concepts". They are actually "shells" for the SFType, so their stats don't matter and may not be accurate even. Thus, it was better to take them out and only leave the standard SFType in. The same is for the Infantry models. There is a shell SFT in the list, but these are just to specify the reinforcement unit. They will not appear in the list until you make their model.

At any rate, some more specifics will help. As I said, the thing I could do to make them not show up is change that attribute, which I might have done wrong for a few.

[LJBurstyn]

As far as I can tell no models show up...will review when I get more models done...few more turns of research are needed to get more models. But fighters and dive bombers did not show up in the list. Get back to you when I get a better look.

(EDIT follows:)
None of my models show up in the list (except those semi-models--SP Artillery, Mobile AA, SP Infantry Gun). None of the other infantry or aircraft or tank models show up.

(Edit 2 follows:)
I opened the game in edit mode and ALL my models had DontShowinList is set to TRUE.

[Ormand]

OK, this is probably caused by making the concepts not in the list. The models likely inherit that attribute and don't show in the list. I will have to fix this. It isn't something I can set in my events, so it will mean that I have to leave the concepts in the list. The concepts should be equivalent to the first generation of the SFType.

You can do a compare your model to the base types in the model editor, but not against other models.