Sealion 1940 question

[currahee55]

I think supply in this scenario doesn't work as advertised in the scenario briefing. The German's supply
sources (once he's in England) are all on deep water hexes; his notes say they'll supply adjacent land hexes,
without need for "land bridges" or other devices, and that if you construct (repair) a chain of unbroken rail
hexes beginning next to the sea-hex supply source, they'll extend full supply into the interior. This is not so;
they extend some supply to the adjacent hex, it drops off 10 SP's immediately, and then drops off more rapidly
as you move inland, soon reaching zero, whether or not you have repaired the rail hexes.

Even so, the German pushes the Brits around, as their proficiency is so much higher.

So although a lot of work went into this modification of an older scenario, it's basically broken. There are
probably several ways to fix it, but I wouldn't play it again as is, unless Antoni wants to switch sides for
a rematch! The fix should probably involve fixing the German supply sources by bringing them onto the English
coast, keeping "high supply" off, turning off "borders", and using the new "intermediate supply state",
then re-balancing all by tweaking the proficiencies.

Does anyone know where to locate the designer, James A Mathews? He didn't put an email address in the designer
notes.

[Dr. Foo]

You could turn off New Supply Rules and turn on High Supply. That might help you at least play the game.

[currahee55]

OK, Sealion has a bug, and if you trip it it’ll crash the game, but I think one can play through it if he's careful. I reloaded several times trying to figure out what happened. What happens ( you can check this yourself by loading a new move 1, just as if you were starting a new game) is that at the end of two British formations, Home Guard 1 and Home Guard 2, there is a GERMAN unit, the 78th Infantry Division! If you click on it, or just go to it as the “next” unit while you’re scrolling thru your Brit units, it flips you to the German side, as if it were the previous German turn, and you can’t get back! At first I had no idea what had happened, and reloaded several times to figure it out. The game works fine if the Brit player is careful to not access that unit, ie, just skips over it. So that’s what I did so I could complete my move. I suspect the game will play fine, as long as the Brit player is careful not to access this German unit, which appears twice in his OB!!

I'll try to find JAMIAM and report this. He put a lot of effort into that scenario, and I'm sure he'll want to fix it.

[sPzAbt653]

This one has already been reported, thanks.
tm.asp?m=4399606

[JAMiAM]

Hi all,

Long time, no see. I haven't been involved with TOAW for several years now, and am not sure what might have caused the issues that Currahee notes with respect to the Sealion 1940 scenario. I don't know if the TOAW IV team did any testing with the scenario prior to its inclusion in the new release, and I wasn't consulted about its inclusion in TOAW IV (though I certainly have no objection). I don't recall these issues ever being raised with the scenario in TOAW III. There might have been some 'under the hood' changes to TOAW IV that breaks the way that the supply sources worked in TOAW III.

[JAMiAM]

Currahee, are you occupying the sea supply sources with your German naval units? IIRC, you needed to do that to maintain control over the hexes. I just installed TOAW III and checked the scenario and they are giving 52 supply to the Dover hex - even with a broken rail hex in that hex. Once the rail is repaired, full supply traces inland. I didn't patch up TOAW III to check anything further and I noticed that the Sealion 1940 doc seems to be missing from the initial release installation. I don't recall whether we included that in a post release patch.

With respect to the side flipping issue, I checked this scenario in TOAW III and don't see anything like what you are describing happening. Don't know if there is an incompatibility between the scenario and TOAW IV, or if anything happened to the scenario file since it was released in TOAW III, so I'm afraid I'm not of much help here.

[secadegas]

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

Hi all,

Long time, no see. I haven't been involved with TOAW for several years now

Hey James


It's a great pleasure to hear from you again... [&o] You can be sure some of us really missed you.

Perhaps this is a good time to return to the "Game". TOAW IV is a true upgrade.

Give it a try...

[Curtis Lemay]

ORIGINAL: secadegas

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

Hi all,

Long time, no see. I haven't been involved with TOAW for several years now

Hey James


It's a great pleasure to hear from you again... [&o] You can be sure some of us really missed you.

Perhaps this is a good time to return to the "Game". TOAW IV is a true upgrade.

Give it a try...

Speak of the Devil and He shall appear.

[r6kunz]

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM

Currahee, are you occupying the sea supply sources with your German naval units? IIRC, you needed to do that to maintain control over the hexes. I just installed TOAW III and checked the scenario and they are giving 52 supply to the Dover hex - even with a broken rail hex in that hex. Once the rail is repaired, full supply traces inland. I didn't patch up TOAW III to check anything further and I noticed that the Sealion 1940 doc seems to be missing from the initial release installation. I don't recall whether we included that in a post-release patch.

With respect to the side flipping issue, I checked this scenario in TOAW III and don't see anything like what you are describing happening. Don't know if there is an incompatibility between the scenario and TOAW IV, or if anything happened to the scenario file since it was released in TOAW III, so I'm afraid I'm not of much help here.

Welcome back, James!
Looking forward to your expertise and experience. Do you have TOAW IV loaded?
The Sealion 1940 in the latest IV patch has the six-page document included. Nicely done! Note that there is a disclaimer with all TOAW III scenarios ported over to IV that they may not function as designed.

Also, anyone looked at this scenario, note that the designer notes state "the scenario is intended for PBEM only", which could account for some of the apparent imbalance.

cheers,
RAK