TRP - World at War Released v0.8.19

[HarrySmith]

Hi Lothos (David),
I am enjoying playing this version. A few things I feel could be better to overall game play.

When a land unit runs into an unseen enemy unit (ambush) both generally take the same losses. With Garrison units this can be a good strategy to do as your losses are often less in mmps than opposition. Reality is the unit running into an unseen unit would take heavier losses. I feel the vanilla method of this is more appropriate or at least to weigh heavier against the unit running into the opposition.

HQ units i do like how they are cheaper but perhaps they are too cheap and defend too well. It is quite good to leave your HQ unit on the front line to block enemy advances as any loss is generally cheaper to replace than the units attacking it. This I feel is not realistic and should be addressed.

Fighter units not being able to fly strike missions except for 2 hexes away. This apparently increases with upgrades but why bother putting Ground attack on them if they cant attack or run strafing missions against enemy aircraft. Again fighters were often used to attack enemy aircraft on airfields.

It does seem defenders have the advantage a bit too much. I feel artillery would be better if they could de entrench and perhaps they are a bit too powerful in damage done. Better to de entrench , de moralize and have slightly less attack.
I do feel also once tactical bombers go up in grade ( level2) they too should be able to de entrench.

Ports should offer protection against attack from naval units like in Vanilla as reality is they had guns in place to attack any enemy ships within range. All the Australian Ports did have fortifications and big guns in place to defend against naval attacks in WW2 and I am sure this was universal.

Anyway just a few suggestions. I do like a lot of things you have done and the scale is fantastic.

[AlbertN]

I definitely agree that ports should protect naval units from other ships.
I was quite astonished to realize that Mers El Kebir can be replicated anywhere anytime.
Tenfold so as airpower from the ground is scarce and weak VS ships. The royal navy can happily camp anywhere around Germany or Italy early war without much fear. Which is absurd.

[Lothos]

Hi Lothos (David),
I am enjoying playing this version. A few things I feel could be better to overall game play.

When a land unit runs into an unseen enemy unit (ambush) both generally take the same losses. With Garrison units this can be a good strategy to do as your losses are often less in mmps than opposition. Reality is the unit running into an unseen unit would take heavier losses. I feel the vanilla method of this is more appropriate or at least to weigh heavier against the unit running into the opposition.

HQ units i do like how they are cheaper but perhaps they are too cheap and defend too well. It is quite good to leave your HQ unit on the front line to block enemy advances as any loss is generally cheaper to replace than the units attacking it. This I feel is not realistic and should be addressed.

Fighter units not being able to fly strike missions except for 2 hexes away. This apparently increases with upgrades but why bother putting Ground attack on them if they cant attack or run strafing missions against enemy aircraft. Again fighters were often used to attack enemy aircraft on airfields.

It does seem defenders have the advantage a bit too much. I feel artillery would be better if they could de entrench and perhaps they are a bit too powerful in damage done. Better to de entrench , de moralize and have slightly less attack.
I do feel also once tactical bombers go up in grade ( level2) they too should be able to de entrench.

Ports should offer protection against attack from naval units like in Vanilla as reality is they had guns in place to attack any enemy ships within range. All the Australian Ports did have fortifications and big guns in place to defend against naval attacks in WW2 and I am sure this was universal.

Anyway just a few suggestions. I do like a lot of things you have done and the scale is fantastic.

- Ambush is a luck role with a + or - one it is never guaranteed

- HQ This is done on purpose because they can not attack

- Fighters are not designed for ground attack. When they are loaded with bombs their range is shorter (they have more weight). Many games do this, World in Flames the board game as well. The cutting the range down is also to prevent exactly your reasoning which is straffing runs. You need to send bombers with fighter escort to do it or attack units close to you.

- Defenders, it is designed that way but even then its not as strong as you think it is. You must learn combined arms! Watch my training videos on Youtube.

- Tactical bombers will not de-entrench, this is by design. Medium bombers and Strategic do it. This is part of combined arms.

- Ports should not offer any protections, you have the option to build AA at major ports. Majority of small ports had no AA protection and in fact its bad to keep your ships in port as they are easy targets to aircraft.

[AlbertN]

I think both of us spoke of ports about defending against other ships.
Presently they do not offer shelters if a bb or ca or so come and attack your naval unit in the port.

[HarrySmith]

I think both of us spoke of ports about defending against other ships.
Presently they do not offer shelters if a bb or ca or so come and attack your naval unit in the port.

Yes it is not from air attack but naval attack. All ports in WW2 had guns to defend them, strategically located in bunkers. these were designed to attack any enemy ships that came in range. This is why naval ships didnt attack ports as they were well defended. They would sit out of range and blockade ports not try to attack ships in ports without themselves coming under fire.

[Lothos]

I think both of us spoke of ports about defending against other ships.
Presently they do not offer shelters if a bb or ca or so come and attack your naval unit in the port.

Yes it is not from air attack but naval attack. All ports in WW2 had guns to defend them, strategically located in bunkers. these were designed to attack any enemy ships that came in range. This is why naval ships didnt attack ports as they were well defended. They would sit out of range and blockade ports not try to attack ships in ports without themselves coming under fire.

Unfortunately the game engine allows ships to attack a port. I rather not add special defense values into a port because their could be unforseen consequences as those kind of changes are at a global level.

[AlbertN]

Are you sure something was not made though to alter that?
In the vanilla game a BB attacking a port does a form of strategic bombing attack to the port and rarely will damage the unit moored within the port.
In the mod there is a regular attack of the aggressing unit to the naval unit moored in the port.

Thus something must have been donebthat changed that.
What we saying is that vanilla for that is better.

[Lothos]

Are you sure something was not made though to alter that?
In the vanilla game a BB attacking a port does a form of strategic bombing attack to the port and rarely will damage the unit moored within the port.
In the mod there is a regular attack of the aggressing unit to the naval unit moored in the port.

Thus something must have been donebthat changed that.
What we saying is that vanilla for that is better.

They no longer have a Strategic Attack value. This was done on purpose.

BB and Dreadgnaughts can damage soft and hard targets now

[Taxman66]

Can a port be given defensive stats to raise the naval attack/defense (but not vs. air) of the occupying ship/sub?

Looking at the properties of an unoccupied port/major port there is a naval defensive value of 2. Now with the removal of strategic attack values from ships, maybe that doesn't mean anything.

Would giving ports/major ports naval defensive bonus do the trick? +2 would be a pretty significant deterrent to attacking ships in port with surface units.

I would only want to do it to finish off badly damaged ships in port.

[Lothos]

Can a port be given defensive stats to raise the naval attack/defense (but not vs. air) of the occupying ship/sub?

Looking at the properties of an unoccupied port/major port there is a naval defensive value of 2. Now with the removal of strategic attack values from ships, maybe that doesn't mean anything.

Would giving ports/major ports naval defensive bonus do the trick? +2 would be a pretty significant deterrent to attacking ships in port with surface units.

I would only want to do it to finish off badly damaged ships in port.

It can be but their are side effects. You will get things like, the Italian Navy people complaining it cant kill the Yugoslavian navy or the greek navy when they are in port etc.... I just do not think its valid. THe Axis pretty much have the Baltic and the Adrea Sea as their private lakes.

[HarrySmith]

Can a port be given defensive stats to raise the naval attack/defense (but not vs. air) of the occupying ship/sub?

Looking at the properties of an unoccupied port/major port there is a naval defensive value of 2. Now with the removal of strategic attack values from ships, maybe that doesn't mean anything.

Would giving ports/major ports naval defensive bonus do the trick? +2 would be a pretty significant deterrent to attacking ships in port with surface units.

I would only want to do it to finish off badly damaged ships in port.

It can be but their are side effects. You will get things like, the Italian Navy people complaining it cant kill the Yugoslavian navy or the greek navy when they are in port etc.... I just do not think its valid. The Axis pretty much have the Baltic and the Adrea Sea as their private lakes.

I still think you miss the point. Reality is ports did have guns in place to defend them. As in Vanilla you can attack units in ports with BB, heavy cruisers, subs and PT boats but chances are they will take damage in the process. Ports should be able to defend against attack and be up gradable for air defence.

[Lothos]

Can a port be given defensive stats to raise the naval attack/defense (but not vs. air) of the occupying ship/sub?

Looking at the properties of an unoccupied port/major port there is a naval defensive value of 2. Now with the removal of strategic attack values from ships, maybe that doesn't mean anything.

Would giving ports/major ports naval defensive bonus do the trick? +2 would be a pretty significant deterrent to attacking ships in port with surface units.

I would only want to do it to finish off badly damaged ships in port.

It can be but their are side effects. You will get things like, the Italian Navy people complaining it cant kill the Yugoslavian navy or the greek navy when they are in port etc.... I just do not think its valid. The Axis pretty much have the Baltic and the Adrea Sea as their private lakes.

I still think you miss the point. Reality is ports did have guns in place to defend them. As in Vanilla you can attack units in ports with BB, heavy cruisers, subs and PT boats but chances are they will take damage in the process. Ports should be able to defend against attack and be up gradable for air defence.

I cover reasons for AA changes in my Youtube videos.

This has been covered many times as well in this thread and in discord.

AA will not be reintroduced in the manner you are suggesting. You also missed the point that if I change it then all ports in the ENTIRE WORLD will change which is not actually correct.

Also as Taxxman pointed out their already is a native defensive bonus for ships in a port.

[Taxman66]

Sorry, Lothos that port defensive value only applies vs. 'Resource' attacks (via surface ships). So when you removed that ability from surface ships it makes that port defense value meaningless.

You could add a naval defensive 'bonus' that would increase the occupying ship's naval strength.
Maybe +1 for a regular port and +2 for a major port.
That just increases the class of the ship by 1 or 2 spots. Effectively turning a DD into a CL or CA while defending in port, but only vs. surface attacks.

[Lothos]

Sorry, Lothos that port defensive value only applies vs. 'Resource' attacks (via surface ships). So when you removed that ability from surface ships it makes that port defense value meaningless.

You could add a naval defensive 'bonus' that would increase the occupying ship's naval strength.
Maybe +1 for a regular port and +2 for a major port.
That just increases the class of the ship by 1 or 2 spots. Effectively turning a DD into a CL or CA while defending in port, but only vs. surface attacks.

I rather not for the reasons I mentioned above, it is a global effect and would have unforseen circumstances such as Italy getting hammered for trying to sing the Yugoslavia Navy etc....

This is not an issue honestly, I have played PBEM games.

[Lothos]

Started posting this video series about the coming TRP v1.7 Europe release and also talk about the changes in TRP World and to go over the latest AI changes

This is me vs the AI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pZoamOA ... yRbKVwCyTE

[go_rascals]

Would it be possible to build fortifications on sea hexsides of port hexes to simulate shore batteries and such?

Sorry, Lothos that port defensive value only applies vs. 'Resource' attacks (via surface ships). So when you removed that ability from surface ships it makes that port defense value meaningless.

You could add a naval defensive 'bonus' that would increase the occupying ship's naval strength.
Maybe +1 for a regular port and +2 for a major port.
That just increases the class of the ship by 1 or 2 spots. Effectively turning a DD into a CL or CA while defending in port, but only vs. surface attacks.

[Lothos]

Would it be possible to build fortifications on sea hexsides of port hexes to simulate shore batteries and such?

Sorry, Lothos that port defensive value only applies vs. 'Resource' attacks (via surface ships). So when you removed that ability from surface ships it makes that port defense value meaningless.

You could add a naval defensive 'bonus' that would increase the occupying ship's naval strength.
Maybe +1 for a regular port and +2 for a major port.
That just increases the class of the ship by 1 or 2 spots. Effectively turning a DD into a CL or CA while defending in port, but only vs. surface attacks.

Game engine will not allow that.

[wirkey]

I just encountered a strange bug.

trp.jpg (302.63 KiB) Viewed 581 times

My destroyers can't reach the sub, as the hexes around it are blocked. If I use cruise mode I can reach those hexes, but no more attack ofc

[Lothos]

Not a bug, it's the subs ZOC that is stopping you.

[OldCrowBalthazor]

I just encountered a strange bug.

trp.jpg

My destroyers can't reach the sub, as the hexes around it are blocked. If I use cruise mode I can reach those hexes, but no more attack ofc

All subs have a Strong ZOC. You need to be closer and have enough AP (Action Points) to engage them.
All other ships have a Weak ZOC, and are easier to approach to engage with.
Knowing this, subs are useful to block choke points and screen a task force in many cases.