Patch 1.1 requests

[Regent9]

1. TCP/IP/LAN multiplayer option, please!.

Thanks!

[aletoledo]

4)
Give me a button in the production screen to set the rest for supply.
You can already do this to some extend in the research screen where it show how much you have left and can then allocate acordingly, but with no choice as to where you produce the research.
Its ok that we have to build supply but make it a bit easier.

i second this one. I conquer too many countries and its hard for me to cycle through all of them just to set supplies.

[solops]

I have discovered a serious problem with Manchurian and Korean ownership that verges on being a "bug".

It is Spring 1948. Japan was conquered by WA in Fall 1947. Germany took Vladivostok in Winter 1947 leaving USSR with only the two Iranian provinces. When WA took Tokyo the Manchurian and Korean provinces became "Green" WA territories with the Japanese surrender. Now, when Germany attacks and captures these WA provinces they immediately revert to being unoccupied Japanese territories and the victorious German units disappear! Since there is no hope of Japan generating an army to hold these provinces the WA can back jump in and stage into German held USSR territories with impunity, since Germany cannot counterattack and make Manchuria/Korea German and will lose more armies if they try.

This is a major problem.

[solops]

OK, a reply about this "sanctuary" and an unpleasant truth concerning it can be found here:

tm.asp?m=834643&mpage=1&key=?

[BlackVoid]

Send 2by3 to an interface design training. Interface is cumbersome in ALL of their games.

For sequel: make a more intuitive game, in WAW if you do not read the manual you will never understand the game.

For WAW: partisans should be toned down.

[solops]

A HIGHLY desired feature omitted from the original game is unit counters with info.

I really, really want NATO counters with current unit ratings in the corners.

Land units: Air attack, Land Attack, Evasion
Air units: Air attack, Sea attack, Land attack, Evasion
Naval units: Air attack, Sea attack, Sub attack, Evasion

Some things may have to be left out, such as range and sub attack, but this is better than what is available now.

[willgamer]

1. Jumping on the option for NATO standard icons.

2. How about adding another button to the battle results mini-screen to play the battle animation. Since most all experienced players leave this turned off in the options, it would allow individual battles of interest/confusion to be examined.

3. Instead of/in addition to the See AI battle results option, how about a see all battle results that involve my troops option.

[jgonzo]

ORIGINAL: solops

1. The Neutrals color is too close to the same as Germany's. I'd like to see more color differentiation between ALL of the countries.

Pretty good looking effort, guys. And the manual is a delight after suffering through some other poor offerings recently.

I changed mine to a light purple and now they are very visable

I went to the art.txt file in C:\Matrix Games\Gary Grigsby's World At War\dat

and change this line

from

PLAYER_COLOR,NEU,fffbf4cd,fffbf4cd

to

PLAYER_COLOR,NEU,ffffa0ff,ffffa0ff

Hope this helps

[EspenJ]

I would only like to have one thing fixed. The F$#"ing CTD, i have not been able to play even a single turn yet. Iv'e done all i can short of reinstalling my computer.

[solops]

ORIGINAL: jgonzo

I changed mine to a light purple and now they are very visable. I went to the art.txt file in C:\Matrix Games\Gary Grigsby's World At War\dat

and change this line

from

PLAYER_COLOR,NEU,fffbf4cd,fffbf4cd

to

PLAYER_COLOR,NEU,ffffa0ff,ffffa0ff

Hope this helps

This is one of the most helpful things I've seen posted since the game came out. GREAT!!!
Thanks, jgonzo!!

[carnifex]

The Exit To Main Menu and the End Phase buttons are right next to each other.

When pressed, both offer similar warning pop-ups. At a quick glance, it's easy to confirm the wrong choice.

Request different color and font for Exit pop-up.

[solops]

ORIGINAL: carnifex

The Exit To Main Menu and the End Phase buttons are right next to each other.

When pressed, both offer similar warning pop-ups. At a quick glance, it's easy to confirm the wrong choice.

Request different color and font for Exit pop-up.

Yeah, I've lost quite a few turns by hitting the wrong buttons as I zip through turns.
Separate the Exit To Main Menu and the End Phase buttons, please.

[Willy Liao]

For the love of Dog, please change the popup on the Resource screen to DELETE the words "rail net"--newbie players are being fooled by this. Change it to something like "resources reachable by friendly/neutral land regions and sea transports" or something suitable, so that anyone using the screen knows that resources do not require rail to be in your network for use by factories.

[oldtimer]

What is it with the Winter month being a year a head. It makes it confusing. If you hadn't notice you can be going through the year Spring 41, Summer 41, Fall 41, then its Winter 42, Spring 42, Summer 42, Fall 42, then Winter 43, Spring 43, etc...

This makes for confusion believe it or not. You're thinking okay I am safe until fall 41 and it is only fall 40. Then then next turn is winter 41 and you think you missed something.

It just doesn't feel right.[:-]

[Graymane]

ORIGINAL: oldtimer

What is it with the Winter month being a year a head. It makes it confusing. If you hadn't notice you can be going through the year Spring 41, Summer 41, Fall 41, then its Winter 42, Spring 42, Summer 42, Fall 42, then Winter 43, Spring 43, etc...

This makes for confusion believe it or not. You're thinking okay I am safe until fall 41 and it is only fall 40. Then then next turn is winter 41 and you think you missed something.

It just doesn't feel right.[:-]

Would be nice to have something like 4 boxes that light up as each turn in the year progresses.

[Graymane]

Some fixes that I would like to see:

1. If a CAG with speed 4 attacks a fleet with CAG of speed 2 from further away than 2 movement points, surviving attacked CAG should NOT be allowed to attack the attacking CV fleet. The way the game is now, they can do this and it takes away a big advantage for researching speed/range.

2. Prioritize CAG attacks. In a mixed fleet of light, heavy, transports and CV, the order of attack should be CV, BB, light fleets, transports.

3. Please check retreat logic in general about naval combat. There seems to be some questions about whether retreating naval units can be destroyed simply by surrounding a sea area with single subs.

4. Please add some kind of better visual indicator to point out where a supply net is broken and/or which resources are unlinked. Like if I'm trying to move supplies from Canada to London and I can't, I'd like to quickly know where the break is.

[willgamer]

Offered just as input/discussion on these fixes:

1. If a CAG with speed 4 attacks a fleet with CAG of speed 2 from further away than 2 movement points, surviving attacked CAG should NOT be allowed to attack the attacking CV fleet. The way the game is now, they can do this and it takes away a big advantage for researching speed/range.

I think there shouldn't be guarantee of no counterattack (as in the case above) because I'm not sure what was intended to be abstracted into speed. How about a 30% reduction in the counterattack probability per speed difference; or how about a reducing the size or the counterattacking force?

2. Prioritize CAG attacks. In a mixed fleet of light, heavy, transports and CV, the order of attack should be CV, BB, light fleets, transports.

My recollection of history books was of much confusion in pilots choice of targets, including their inflated aar's. I know what you're requesting is what these pilots were all told to do, but I wonder how often it worked out.

3. Please check retreat logic in general about naval combat. There seems to be some questions about whether retreating naval units can be destroyed simply by surrounding a sea area with single subs.

agree...

4. Please add some kind of better visual indicator to point out where a supply net is broken and/or which resources are unlinked. Like if I'm trying to move supplies from Canada to London and I can't, I'd like to quickly know where the break is.

It seems really easy right now to mouse over areas and observing the blue stat move arrow and where it stops appearing that's the break. What am I missing?

Unlinked resources is much harder. I'd settle for just having them specifically identified on some report.

[Graymane]

ORIGINAL: willgamer

Offered just as input/discussion on these fixes:

1. If a CAG with speed 4 attacks a fleet with CAG of speed 2 from further away than 2 movement points, surviving attacked CAG should NOT be allowed to attack the attacking CV fleet. The way the game is now, they can do this and it takes away a big advantage for researching speed/range.

I think there shouldn't be guarantee of no counterattack (as in the case above) because I'm not sure what was intended to be abstracted into speed. How about a 30% reduction in the counterattack probability per speed difference; or how about a reducing the size or the counterattacking force?

I understand what you are saying but the problem is the logic of it all. If I cannot attack that stack on my turn, why should I be able to attack that stack during his turn? Even the reduced chance of your suggestion is better than nothing though.

2. Prioritize CAG attacks. In a mixed fleet of light, heavy, transports and CV, the order of attack should be CV, BB, light fleets, transports.

My recollection of history books was of much confusion in pilots choice of targets, including their inflated aar's. I know what you're requesting is what these pilots were all told to do, but I wonder how often it worked out.

Fletcher and Spruance to Nimitz: "Have sunk a few transports and DD off Midway, went ahead and just ignored all those CV though." I also understand what you are getting at as well, but the way that naval combat is modelled seems to through it all off. Why are transports even being targetted at all? From reading the manual, it seems they are only included in combat if there are not enough covering vessels to complete all the matchups. But sending in CAG alone seems the more historical approach. I prefer to look at it this way: Air combat over land is able to exactly target artillery pieces above all else. If that is possible, then telling the diff between a CV and a transport seems ok too It just seems inconsistant to be that accurate in one area and less accurate in another. I don't even mind some random in there, but I'd like to see a higher percent chance of targetting higher value targets (doesn't have to be 100%).

3. Please check retreat logic in general about naval combat. There seems to be some questions about whether retreating naval units can be destroyed simply by surrounding a sea area with single subs.

agree...

4. Please add some kind of better visual indicator to point out where a supply net is broken and/or which resources are unlinked. Like if I'm trying to move supplies from Canada to London and I can't, I'd like to quickly know where the break is.

It seems really easy right now to mouse over areas and observing the blue stat move arrow and where it stops appearing that's the break. What am I missing?

Unlinked resources is much harder. I'd settle for just having them specifically identified on some report.

Well, that is what I do now, but if I'm pulling from London to Guam, it can be a pain in the butt I'd rather just see an overlay or schematic wiring diagram with a big red indicator where things are broken. Same with ability to fix the hole. Right now I just have to experiment finding and moving transports around that can fix it. Kinda time consuming.

[PeterF]

What is it with the Winter month being a year a head. It makes it confusing. If you hadn't notice you can be going through the year Spring 41, Summer 41, Fall 41, then its Winter 42, Spring 42, Summer 42, Fall 42, then Winter 43, Spring 43, etc...

Hmmm.... January, February, March. Now which of these is a Spring month?[;)]

[solops]

ORIGINAL: PeterF

What is it with the Winter month being a year a head. It makes it confusing. If you hadn't notice you can be going through the year Spring 41, Summer 41, Fall 41, then its Winter 42, Spring 42, Summer 42, Fall 42, then Winter 43, Spring 43, etc...

Hmmm.... January, February, March. Now which of these is a Spring month?[;)]

Pretty much depends on where you live. What latitude or hemisphere? For that matter it gets even more problematic when addressing a WORLD war.

I agree with the original poster...change the dating system.