Patch 1.02B things...

[Gregor_SSG]

ORIGINAL: sulla05

Sorry to but in, But , does this mean that in this new patch there will be all the scenarios from the original compilation? Thanks.

No, but there is a brand new scenario, Tarawa, complete with all the mystery variations.

Gregor

[sullafelix]

I saw your mention of a " Matapan " folder and began drooling. I own the newv CAW and have played it many times but I've never read about or opened the editor. Which is really surprising because I spent many many hours fiddling with the original game editor.
 
Now for the shameless plug. I have bought every game except Battles in Normandy you've ever made going back to the commodore and also all the run 5 magazines. The few times I had a problem or question your company has been the nicest and most responsive I've ever dealt with. Keep up the great work. May everyone who bashed the new CAW rot somewhere not nice.
 
 
 

[Gregor_SSG]

ORIGINAL: sulla05

I saw your mention of a " Matapan " folder and began drooling. I own the newv CAW and have played it many times but I've never read about or opened the editor. Which is really surprising because I spent many many hours fiddling with the original game editor.

Now for the shameless plug. I have bought every game except Battles in Normandy you've ever made going back to the commodore and also all the run 5 magazines. The few times I had a problem or question your company has been the nicest and most responsive I've ever dealt with. Keep up the great work. May everyone who bashed the new CAW rot somewhere not nice.

I have used both Editors and the new CAW editor is a vast improvement on the old one. It's even better now in v1.02 as Alex has had a chance to make further refinements. It's so easy to see what forces are in each TG, and what the WarRoom actions are that I would urge everybody with any interest in scenario creation to take a look. In the Cape Matapan tutorial I've added comments to many of the WarCards to explain what the AI actions are intended to do and also referred to the manual for further info, so it's clear to see what the AI plan is.

Gregor

[Unhappy]

I'm sure this is the wrong time to bring it up what with the imminent (?) arrival of the new patch, but I don't suppose there was a chance to add an air attack conditional effect? (For example - to make an air attack on a landbase or port a requirement of victory). It would really come in handy when creating scenarios.

Thanks.

[Gregor_SSG]

ORIGINAL: Unhappy

I'm sure this is the wrong time to bring it up what with the imminent (?) arrival of the new patch, but I don't suppose there was a chance to add an air attack conditional effect? (For example - to make an air attack on a landbase or port a requirement of victory). It would really come in handy when creating scenarios.

Thanks.

It's definitely too late for the next patch and in any case I'm not sure how we would handle it. Missions such as bombardment and invasion/cargo delivery are handed to a TG, and since you can't deliberately split a TG then the whole TG has to be sent on a mission.

The question then arises, what constitutes an air attack. Can I just send a single plane? Does an attack have to do damage or is sending it enough? Is it time limited? Taking Midway as an example, what mechanism would stop me from first crushing the US TGs and then bombing Midway later?

As you can see there are lots of questions to answer, and if its all designed just to recreate one morning at Midway, then I'm not sure its worth the effort. Do you have other situations in mind where it would be useful?

Gregor

[Unhappy]

Well, I think an air attack conditional would be quite useful in many circumstances. For example, I am working on a scenario now where the Japanese go out of their way to bomb Colombo and Trincomalee in Ceylon without even bothering to bring along bombardment or invasion forces...so it really complicates the victory conditions that there is no conditional effect for air attacks. Same could be said of the bombing of Darwin in Feb. 1942, the Doolittle Raid, etc. Suffice it to say I think it would be useful often and its absence makes it more difficult to create realistic and appropriate victory conditions.

As for how to do it...well yeah that would be difficult. I would settle for a conditional that was triggered by inflicting a set level of damage on a landbase (airfield). As it is now landbases possess one of 16 damage states (0-15). So the conditional could be triggered by inflicting enough damage on the landbase (via bombardment or air attack) to reach a specified level. For example, the conditional might require the player to damage the landbase to level 4 (moderate damage) or level 7 (serious damage) or level 10 (critical damage) etc. This would be fun and useful because it would likely require multiple air strikes to inflict critical damage on the landbase. Points could be rewarded upon completion etc. as with existing conditionals.

[Unhappy]

...I'm bumping this because I'm still interested to know whether an air attack conditional is a possibility someday in the future.

Thanks.

[Gregor_SSG]

ORIGINAL: Unhappy

...I'm bumping this because I'm still interested to know whether an air attack conditional is a possibility someday in the future.

Thanks.

I will talk to Ian Trout about it and see what he thinks, he is the ultimate authority on such matters.

Gregor