Thoughts on 1.64

[operating]

Here's a stat I have not seen in a year to a year and a half for entrenching (pillbox) 12. Funny how the game has come full circle from when it first was released.

[operating]

Kirk, if you are reading this: Where did your screenshot TUTORIAL go that was in the top forum subsection (I think)? One of the members wants to know how to do ss. I searched back quite aways but could not find it...

Thanks, Bob

[Hellfirejet]

ORIGINAL: operating

Kirk, if you are reading this: Where did your screenshot TUTORIAL go that was in the top forum subsection (I think)? One of the members wants to know how to do ss. I searched back quite aways but could not find it...

Thanks, Bob

The thread you are looking for is here.[;)]

tm.asp?m=3558344

[stockwellpete]

I have just finished my first full solo game for perhaps a year or so now. The game played very well and appears stable - and there are a lot of new features to add to the overall interest. I played as Central Powers on the middle level of difficulty and I achieved an ultimate victory by late 1918 (the USA did not enter the war).

Initially I was held by both the French and the Serbs, but I made more progress against the Russians and eventually encircled and destroyed their army in Poland. I then destroyed their fleet as well. The Italians joined the war in 1915 so the western front was fairly well deadlocked, but I continued to make progress against the Russians and finally forced them out of the war in the spring of 1916 after capturing Moscow. The Turks were able to hold the Russians in the Caucasus and once the Russians had surrendered they were able to move units to Palestine. The next breakthrough was against the French in late 1916 and the Germans took Verdun then broke through completely and took Paris. By early 1917 the French surrendered, then the Italians did as well after losing Milan. The Romanians surrendered when facing total encirclement shortly afterwards and the Portuguese capitulated without firing a shot! The war continued against the British who were all alone now - but once Germany began a massive naval building programme they too surrendered in the autumn of 1918 (the Turks, with German assistance, were pushing them back in Palestine too).

I think this was a very plausible alternate history. There were just a few oddities. Both the Russian Revolution special events appeared on the screen even though the Russians had surrendered; an incomplete Goeben warship message appeared when I moved that unit and a fully complete message appeared about two turns later; the Italians appeared to be mass producing artillery but never got any of it into action (perhaps there needs to be limits on how many units a nation can have at any time?).

Overall, very good though - and I shall try again next week on the hardest level.

[operating]

Kirk

Is there an icon that can be put into the unit information window that would indicate that a unit has a Hood or Gas Mask? Other than a combat prognosis attack by an artillery unit, there is no way to know for certain what a unit's capabilities are. Any thoughts on this?

Bob

Unit information screen:

[operating]

ORIGINAL: operating

Kirk

Is there an icon that can be put into the unit information window that would indicate that a unit has a Hood or Gas Mask? Other than a combat prognosis attack by an artillery unit, there is no way to know for certain what a unit's capabilities are. Any thoughts on this?

Bob
Unit information screen:

Regular view:

[operating]

This is an old map problem with the 1915, 1916 and 1917 scenarios: CP convoys cannot exit Norway because what should be a "sea hex" is now "land hex" as shown in the below screenshot. It's not a problem in the 1914 and 1918 scenarios, for that same hex (where the curser rests) is a "sea hex" in those scenarios, allowing supply convoys to pass through. It's really something that should be cleaned up.....

[Hellfirejet]

The problem was caused because I put a port on the map at Trondheim, which the Convoy can't pass if Norway is neutral, this problem has been solved for any future patches.[:)]

[operating]

ORIGINAL: kirk23

The problem was caused because I put a port on the map at Trondheim, which the Convoy can't pass if Norway is neutral, this problem has been solved for any future patches.[:)]

The port is at the same location in the 1914 scenario, it's the hex above the port anchor that is the problem in later scenarios.. If that is what you mean?

[operating]

Finally we are back to where we started December 2012: Concrete dugouts bring entrenchments to level 16. It's about time, plus it defines an obvious in field improvement from upgraded techs. Take note: Level 16 entrenchment does not happen during the course of one turn. IT takes a unit (that has not moved from a grassland hex) up to about 5 turns to reach the top level entrenchment.

[operating]

Kirk

I'm having a little trouble with CP sinking Entente convoys. I can only safely sink 3.9 convoys without America going on the March to War, for the entire game, plus it get's a little hard to keep track of how many convoy points have been sunk to avoid the thresh-old of 400 losses (of course I could write down # of
losses). After sinking 400 losses America goes to a 25 turn march to war, if I sink more, the 25 quickly goes down to 15 or less. Considering the number of convoys the Entente have during the course of the game (50 to 60 that's a guess-equaling 5000 to 6000 PP + additional MP), sinking only 4 convoys sounds kind of cheap for the snafu it causes compared to the overall # of convoys.

-- USA relationship drops several times when a certain number of convoys have been killed
function ConvoyAttacks(attacker, defender)
if defender.prototype ~= nil and defender.prototype.name == "convoy" then
if attacker.faction.alliance.id == 2 then
if GetEvent("ConvoyAttacks1") == 0 then
local convoyLosses = 0
for faction in game:GetAllianceById(1).factions do
convoyLosses = convoyLosses + faction.luaData.statsCasualties["convoy"]
end
if convoyLosses > 400 then
SetEvent("ConvoyAttacks1", game.turn)
local usa = game:GetFactionById(10)
ChangeFactionAlignment(usa, attacker.faction.alliance, -15)
end
end

if GetEvent("ConvoyAttacks2") == 0 then
local convoyLosses = 0
for faction in game:GetAllianceById(1).factions do
convoyLosses = convoyLosses + faction.luaData.statsCasualties["convoy"]
end
if convoyLosses > 800 then
SetEvent("ConvoyAttacks2", game.turn)
local usa = game:GetFactionById(10)
ChangeFactionAlignment(usa, attacker.faction.alliance, -25)
end
end
elseif attacker.faction.alliance.id == 1 and true then -- Add condition for not in Baltic
if GetEvent("BlockadeEstablished") == 0 then
SetEvent("BlockadeEstablished", game.turn)
game:GetFactionById(2).luaData.blockaded = 1
end
end
end
end

What I'm suggesting: Is that the "Red" influence bar be less favorable to go on the march to war. I'm not sure how that would work, however it might make it a tad more playable in the convoy wars. After-all there is no such penalty for sinking endless amounts of German convoys, unless, of course sinking CP convoys might have the reverse effect on America (or others) entering the war. What do you think?

Bob

[operating]

Kirk

Been thinking about the Constantinople enigma from Russian ambush naval bombardment at turn 10 and blockade of the Bosporus Straits. In the below SS I have indicated a hex in red: What I propose is a restricted sea hex (to Entente) at that location starting at turn 1, for say 15 turns (then it reverts to unrestricted). The light blue circled hexes be restricted (to Entente) for at least 11 turns, starting with turn 1, to at least give Turkey a fighting chance to defend Constantinople and prevent a blockade of the Bosporus Straits (these blue circled hexes then revert back to unrestricted). These numbers could vary as the idea is worked out to a final solution. Turkey's economy is not that strong to begin with and has to compete against 2 powerful neighbors (Russia and England) who can overwhelm it's sovereignty in a short time-period. What I am seeing is: Both English and Russian units of all stripes massing at Turkeys' borders, waiting for Constantinople to be pummeled to "0" PP, as a result, knowing that Turkey cannot build major units, labs or buy ammo. The OE just barely have enough PP to cover upkeep and repair or upgrading, if they have any. There have been some other ideas kicked around about Constantinople, I'd just wanted to see this enigma on the front burner again.

Bob

[AdmiralSarek]

Simple thing for naval bombardments, either remove all strategic attack from the ships or make all cities have coastal defenses which damage the ships.
The current situation is a nonsense, especially for the ottoman empire who can be naval bombarded back into the stone age.



Another thing to consider is the German convoy in the Baltic, it is far to easy to stop and far to large a convoy. Entente just has 5-6 subs at a cost of 5-6 pp per turn to stop about 25 German (on average) pp per turn, just silly. Allowing the players to control where the convoys go won't fix this as there is not enough space.

[operating]

ORIGINAL: AdmiralSarek

Simple thing for naval bombardments, either remove all strategic attack from the ships or make all cities have coastal defenses which damage the ships.
The current situation is a nonsense, especially for the ottoman empire who can be naval bombarded back into the stone age.



Another thing to consider is the German convoy in the Baltic, it is far to easy to stop and far to large a convoy. Entente just has 5-6 subs at a cost of 5-6 pp per turn to stop about 25 German (on average) pp per turn, just silly. Allowing the players to control where the convoys go won't fix this as there is not enough space.

Ahoy Admiral!

When the game was first released the only fleets at that time that could bombard was Battleships (BB's), cruisers received that ability some patches later, now of course: Dreadnaughts, Pre-dreadnaughts, Armed-cruisers and Light-cruisers have that ability. To me the game is a lot more enjoyable with these fleets having bombardment capability. Now you made a suggestion that had not been aired before: "Coastal Defense". It's something to ponder.[8|] Could it be a category married to techs in some way? Like: Actually building shore guns or minelaying, maybe anti-ship boom/nets.

Captain Bob[:)]

[Hellfirejet]

ORIGINAL: operating

ORIGINAL: AdmiralSarek

Simple thing for naval bombardments, either remove all strategic attack from the ships or make all cities have coastal defenses which damage the ships.
The current situation is a nonsense, especially for the ottoman empire who can be naval bombarded back into the stone age.



Another thing to consider is the German convoy in the Baltic, it is far to easy to stop and far to large a convoy. Entente just has 5-6 subs at a cost of 5-6 pp per turn to stop about 25 German (on average) pp per turn, just silly. Allowing the players to control where the convoys go won't fix this as there is not enough space.

Ahoy Admiral!

When the game was first released the only fleets at that time that could bombard was Battleships (BB's), cruisers received that ability some patches later, now of course: Dreadnaughts, Pre-dreadnaughts, Armed-cruisers and Light-cruisers have that ability. To me the game is a lot more enjoyable with these fleets having bombardment capability. Now you made a suggestion that had not been aired before: "Coastal Defense". It's something to ponder.[8|] Could it be a category married to techs in some way? Like: Actually building shore guns or minelaying, maybe anti-ship boom/nets.

Captain Bob[:)]

I'm sure I could create a new buildable unit, and call it ( COASTAL DEFENCE OR HEAVY ARTILLERY ) only Countries with a coast line to defend, would be able to build this unit type, it would act just like a Rail Gun, but be fixed unmovable once a player places it on the game map, in fact, I could make it so that every Country could build them, and use them as heavy battery City defence?[;)]

This new unit type, could be used however the player wants, as long as they know that once placed on the map, that's where it will remain for the duration of the game..[:)]

[AdmiralSarek]

Having to create a special unit is no good, to hard, fortifications were already in place
For example the ones near where I live http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Head,_New_Zealand
note the minefields as well.

When you attack a ship in a port you take lots of damage, should be the same as attacking a city.
Coastal defenses where common.

Perhaps the easiest is to just remove the strategic bombardment, ships ability to general land bombardments always seems to be overrated.

[operating]

ORIGINAL: AdmiralSarek

Having to create a special unit is no good, to hard, fortifications were already in place
For example the ones near where I live http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Head,_New_Zealand
note the minefields as well.

When you attack a ship in a port you take lots of damage, should be the same as attacking a city.
Coastal defenses where common.

Perhaps the easiest is to just remove the strategic bombardment, ships ability to general land bombardments always seems to be overrated.

Here we are waddling around with ideas: Where if fact the Turk navy was the first to attack Russia. In this game we have Russia as the "First" to attack Turkey, as stated in the site provided here: http://www.turkeyswar.com/navy/navalops.html [&:]

I'd like to point out that the Turkish navy was doing a raid at Odessa October 29, 1914, yet in this game the Turkish navy was in port at Constantinople on turn 10, October 29, 1914, stated in the above site and pasted below here in quotes:

The first ships to arrive their destination were Gayret-i Vataniye and Muavenet-i Milliye, which entered the port of Odessa at 3:00 am on October 29. There was only minimal resistance by the Russians who were caught the surprise. A Russian gunboat, Donetsk, was sunk with a torpedo fired from Gayret-i Vataniye, another gunboat, Kubanets, was damaged by gunfire, the minelayer Beshtau was set on fire and four merchant ships were damaged. The two Turkish destroyers shelled the port for around one hour, destroying the power station and damaged the oil facilities. Meanwhile Samsun laid a total of 28 mines between Odessa and Sevastopol. All the three ships then returned safely to Istanbul.

[operating]

Kirk, you remember when you suggested doing this?:

kirk23
Matrix Elite Guard





Posts: 2444
Joined: 10/15/2010
From: Fife Scotland
Status: offline quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

quote:

ORIGINAL: suprass81

Ottoman Empire can't save Constantinople from destroing it with russians sea bombsrdment. They can block onlly way in to Black Sea and you can't do nothing. Maybe removing port hex to Black Sea will fix this problem?

Have to admit it's a tough spot for the Turks, however there is an in game solution if a player plans for it, something the AI I doubt would do (AH subs to Black Sea).

kirk wrote:
Central Powers player,can stop Russian warships bombarding Constantinople,just place the Turkish Light cruiser,and the German Armoured cruiser into the green dot area next to Constantinople,the Russian surface fleet can no longer bombard Constantinople,because the Central Powers have a huge defensive advantage within their own GREEN DOT AREA!





In post #17, that suggested site I posted said this:

Souchon's Black Sea Raid

On October 27, battle-cruisers Yavuz and Midilli; cruisers Hamidiye, Berk-i Satvet and Peyk-i ªevket; destroyers Gayret-i Vataniye, Muavenet-i Milliye, Taºoz and Samsun; and minelayers Nilüfer and Samsun assembled off the coast of Kilyos, north of Istanbul and set sail to the Black Sea. It was the first time after almost four decades that the Turkish fleet was entering the Black Sea on a mission.

To be Historically correct: there should be a Turkish fleet on the Black Sea side of Constantinople "before" turn 10 of the game, which in essence would block a player's Russian Navy from blocking the Bosporus Straits and start bombarding Constantinople. The Russians could not be there for the Turk navy was already there (on Oct. 27, 1914)...[;)]

[operating]

ORIGINAL: operating

Kirk, you remember when you suggested doing this?:

kirk23
Matrix Elite Guard





Posts: 2444
Joined: 10/15/2010
From: Fife Scotland
Status: offline quote:

ORIGINAL: operating

quote:

ORIGINAL: suprass81

Ottoman Empire can't save Constantinople from destroing it with russians sea bombsrdment. They can block onlly way in to Black Sea and you can't do nothing. Maybe removing port hex to Black Sea will fix this problem?

Have to admit it's a tough spot for the Turks, however there is an in game solution if a player plans for it, something the AI I doubt would do (AH subs to Black Sea).

kirk wrote:
Central Powers player,can stop Russian warships bombarding Constantinople,just place the Turkish Light cruiser,and the German Armoured cruiser into the green dot area next to Constantinople,the Russian surface fleet can no longer bombard Constantinople,because the Central Powers have a huge defensive advantage within their own GREEN DOT AREA!





In post #17, that suggested site I posted said this:

Souchon's Black Sea Raid

On October 27, battle-cruisers Yavuz and Midilli; cruisers Hamidiye, Berk-i Satvet and Peyk-i ªevket; destroyers Gayret-i Vataniye, Muavenet-i Milliye, Taºoz and Samsun; and minelayers Nilüfer and Samsun assembled off the coast of Kilyos, north of Istanbul and set sail to the Black Sea. It was the first time after almost four decades that the Turkish fleet was entering the Black Sea on a mission.

To be Historically correct: there should be a Turkish fleet on the Black Sea side of Constantinople "before" turn 10 of the game, which in essence would block a player's Russian Navy from blocking the Bosporus Straits and start bombarding Constantinople. The Russians could not be there for the Turk navy was already there (on Oct. 27, 1914)...[;)]

Kilyos

[operating]

Is Turkey going to have destroyers in the next patch?