Page 1 of 14
FITE 2
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 4:46 pm
by philippe1968
Hello,
Why "FITE2" is in a directory name "Custom Graphics" and not in "WWII East" ?
Scenario still in working ?
I'm not english reader and I don't understand this case.
Thank's
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 4:49 pm
by cantona2
yes scenario is working. you can find it in hypothetical scenarios driectory or just paste it into wwiieast folder
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Mon Nov 27, 2017 11:42 pm
by jjdenver
How can you tell whether a scenario like this can be played vs the PO? The briefing is only about 10 lines long, doesn't mention PO or PBEM, and there is no documentation button to click on to read more about the scenario.
EDIT I found a .doc file on the filesystem for this scenario and read it to find that it is not for PO play.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2017 3:44 pm
by Teufeldk
Yeah, sorry about that.
We should probably have mentioned the .doc file in the briefing.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:31 pm
by philippe1968
Thank you for these informations.
You said that there isn't PO play, but I see "strategics roads" of IA with objectives for each units.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2017 6:49 pm
by Teufeldk
Yes.
I think they were an early attempt to make it possible to play against the AI.
It means you can play the first few turns against the AI - to get a feeling for it. But not the whole game.
Regards
Kristian
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Wed Nov 29, 2017 6:53 pm
by Teufeldk
It is a huge game so it might be helpful to see how the first few turns play out against the AI before you try it against a human player.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2018 9:24 pm
by Lobster
The bridges at Riga nearest the sea are broken. Even though they get blown up units can cross them at one MP at 184, 266. Makes it kind of pointless blowing the bridges. There have been a couple of other places like this but I didn't make note of the locations. Kind of wonder about the design decision to make major rivers into minor rivers at bridges. That one has me scratching my head.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 2:29 pm
by Lobster
T.O. Trappenjagd. This should have a prerequisite. The Soviets need to be present on the Crimean Peninsula. If they were not there then this operation never would have existed.
T.O. Storfang. This should also have a prerequisite. The Soviets need to control Sevastopol. If the Sevastopol had fallen there would have been no need for this operation and it never would have existed.
These two T.O. should somehow be restricted to the narrow areas where they took place. Otherwise the German player can use them for anything. Very unhistorical since they were created only for the portion of the theater involving the Crimean Peninsula.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Sun Feb 11, 2018 10:57 pm
by Lobster
The Romanians and Finns need to be deployed off the border. If they are deployed directly on the border it can cause them to engage the Soviets in a disengagement attack. This will release the Romanians or the Fins early even though the Soviet player never attacked. If you are playing against someone who does not understand the game mechanics or has not bothered to read the .doc file the game is ruined because they will move the Fins and/or Romanians early.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:46 am
by Teufeldk
ORIGINAL: Lobster
The bridges at Riga nearest the sea are broken. Even though they get blown up units can cross them at one MP at 184, 266. Makes it kind of pointless blowing the bridges. There have been a couple of other places like this but I didn't make note of the locations.
As far as I know, this has nothing to do with the scenario but with the game engine. Most units can cross destroyed bridges (but at a higher movement cost).
ORIGINAL: Lobster
Kind of wonder about the design decision to make major rivers into minor rivers at bridges. That one has me scratching my head.
I am unsure what you mean by making major rivers into minor rivers at bridges?
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Fri Feb 16, 2018 10:53 am
by Teufeldk
ORIGINAL: Lobster
T.O. Trappenjagd. This should have a prerequisite. The Soviets need to be present on the Crimean Peninsula. If they were not there then this operation never would have existed.
T.O. Storfang. This should also have a prerequisite. The Soviets need to control Sevastopol. If the Sevastopol had fallen there would have been no need for this operation and it never would have existed.
These two T.O. should somehow be restricted to the narrow areas where they took place. Otherwise the German player can use them for anything. Very unhistorical since they were created only for the portion of the theater involving the Crimean Peninsula.
Good point. But on the other hand, if Sevastopol had fallen, the Germans might have made an entirely new operation somewhere else. We keep it to not punish the Germans for being good or fast.
Your point about offensives being used where they were not meant to, is also a legit point. It is a feature of such a large scenario - it is not possible to create local offensives. At least we have not found a good way.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Sun Feb 25, 2018 11:23 pm
by Gandalf
The subfolder for Fire in the East 2 in the \Graphics Override\... folder is named \FITE2\...
Shouldn't it be named the same as the scenario file name... i.e. \Fire in the East 2\... or will the scenario still find it as \FITE2\... ?
Incidentally, here's a screenshot of the area around Leningrad in FITE2 using the new
Telu IV Map Mod located here:
tm.asp?m=4442672
I expect this new map mod to explode in popularity quite quickly.
Regards
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 12:35 am
by larryfulkerson
Yep, my understanding is that the scenario name is what the of the folder in graphics override folder should be named. Also, the
EQP filename and the NQP filename.....they should all be the same.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 1:01 pm
by Lobster
ORIGINAL: Teufeldk
ORIGINAL: Lobster
The bridges at Riga nearest the sea are broken. Even though they get blown up units can cross them at one MP at 184, 266. Makes it kind of pointless blowing the bridges. There have been a couple of other places like this but I didn't make note of the locations.
As far as I know, this has nothing to do with the scenario but with the game engine. Most units can cross destroyed bridges (but at a higher movement cost).
This is a tank unit crossing a 'super' river where the bridge is destroyed. It has no engineers at all. This should not be possible. What's more it does it at only one movement point. There were a couple of other places like this but do not recall where. Sorry.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 1:11 pm
by Lobster
ORIGINAL: Teufeldk
ORIGINAL: Lobster
Kind of wonder about the design decision to make major rivers into minor rivers at bridges. That one has me scratching my head.
I am unsure what you mean by making major rivers into minor rivers at bridges?
There are many points where a super river becomes a minor river at a bridge and then becomes a super river again making it more difficult to defend.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 2:15 pm
by Curtis Lemay
ORIGINAL: Lobster
This is a tank unit crossing a 'super' river where the bridge is destroyed. It has no engineers at all. This should not be possible. What's more it does it at only one movement point. There were a couple of other places like this but do not recall where. Sorry.
It's the anchorage tile that does it.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 3:03 pm
by Lobster
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
It's the anchorage tile that does it.
Ah. I don't suppose there's an easy way to make the river act like a river while there is an anchorage located there?
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 5:13 pm
by Teufeldk
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay
ORIGINAL: Lobster
This is a tank unit crossing a 'super' river where the bridge is destroyed. It has no engineers at all. This should not be possible. What's more it does it at only one movement point. There were a couple of other places like this but do not recall where. Sorry.
It's the anchorage tile that does it.
Thank you for your reply.
I was not aware of that. It might be reason to move or delete some of the anchorage in a later version.
RE: FITE 2
Posted: Mon Feb 26, 2018 5:19 pm
by Teufeldk
ORIGINAL: Lobster
ORIGINAL: Teufeldk
ORIGINAL: Lobster
Kind of wonder about the design decision to make major rivers into minor rivers at bridges. That one has me scratching my head.
I am unsure what you mean by making major rivers into minor rivers at bridges?
There are many points where a super river becomes a minor river at a bridge and then becomes a super river again making it more difficult to defend.
Maybe it is because they build the bridge at the place where the river was the most narrow?
I did not draw the map, so I don't really know, to be honest, but I think it is fairly high quality. And I can assure you that is not made on purpose to make it hard to defend. But if you find places that you think are just wrong according to the geography in the 1940's please let us know, and we will look into it.