beta 6 First impressions

Adanac's Strategic level World War I grand campaign game designed by Frank Hunter

Moderator: SeanD

Post Reply
Joel Rauber
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Brookings, SD, USA

beta 6 First impressions

Post by Joel Rauber »

Artillery seems a little more lethal and trenches are more expensive.

I'm not sure what I think about the artillery, but I'd rather the trenches go back to obtaining 6 per industrial expenditure; particularly with artillery slightly more lethal look of the artillery.
Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber
FrankHunter
Posts: 2111
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 6:07 am

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by FrankHunter »

The "base" value for artillery now starts at 1 instead of 0.  The reason for this was so that if you're firing a number of 3 strength artillery units at a level 3 or 4 trench you wouldn't cause any casualties at all.  Changing the base number to 1 lets you produce some very minimal results, an average of almost 1 strength per corps being bombarded.

The trench number was increased to 6 then back to 5.

In both cases its a 1 point difference.  I'd be interested in hearing if people would prefer "trench 5" over "trench 6" and whether they would prefer artillery to start at "base 0" or "base 1".
Walloc
Posts: 3143
Joined: Mon Oct 30, 2006 1:04 am
Location: Denmark

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by Walloc »

I'd vote art base 1, trench 6.

Kind regards,

Rasmus
User avatar
esteban
Posts: 618
Joined: Wed Jul 21, 2004 2:47 am

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by esteban »

I'd say art base 1, trench 6 as well.

User avatar
Lascar
Posts: 538
Joined: Sat Oct 07, 2000 8:00 am

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by Lascar »

art base 1 and trench 6 seems best.
alaric318
Posts: 366
Joined: Tue Oct 07, 2003 5:45 am

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by alaric318 »

greetings there, better artillery for 1 over 0 and trenches system that allow some casualties, so, trenches for 5 max over 6, favor the attacker is a must to some degree as the defender allways are to have some advantage and artillery points reserve for barrages i think it is way more expensive than trenches, some 2-1 or 3-1 for each industry point expenditure, so for me at least i find no problem with make artillery slighty more lethal,
 
great game, the exhausted levels and morale system pleased me very much, kind of warfare damage to nations at a pace that be more time on war and suffer casualties, i pleased these type of systems much as in real war and battles, trough all times there are very few cases that some nation fight to the last man, nations have a "casualty tolerance", limited and it is very well featured on the game,
 
best regards,
 
murat30.
There is no plan of battle that survives the contact with the enemy.
Shawkhan
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:45 pm

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by Shawkhan »

...Noone else built trenches to compare with those of the Germans in WWI. Considering the problems they have in the game a few specific rules such as allowing them to have 6 trenches(or even 7) vs 5 for the Allies may be in order. Artillery at a minimum of 'one' seems like a good idea to me as well.
...Playing the latest patch it seems the Allies are generally knocking out my trenches as fast as I can produce them, making trenches beyond '1' or '2' very hard to achieve. More trench points would be a help in achieving more historical trench systems on the Western Front.
Joel Rauber
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Brookings, SD, USA

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by Joel Rauber »

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter



The trench number was increased to 6 then back to 5.


I'm a little confused, in beta.5 the trench number was 6 (One German industrial point bought 6 trenches)

in beta.6 the trench number is 4 from what I can tell (not 5). I.e. The germans expend one industrial point to get only 4 trenches.

As long as we are voting,

IMO, I'd like to see one industrial point purchase 6 trenches. The artillery base of 1 seems OK, if the trench number goes back up.

OTOH, the suggestion that maybe the Germans get 6, everyone else gets 5 may have some merit.
Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber
SMK-at-work
Posts: 3396
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2000 8:00 am
Location: New Zealand

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by SMK-at-work »

Yes they did - the allies buolt very comparable trench systems by 1918....the gErmans just got there first - which is a measure of how much research you do into them - your choice.
Meum est propisitum in taberna mori
Joel Rauber
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Brookings, SD, USA

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by Joel Rauber »

ORIGINAL: SMK-at-work

Yes they did - the allies buolt very comparable trench systems by 1918....the gErmans just got there first - which is a measure of how much research you do into them - your choice.

Good response, as you point out its a measure of the research, so lets leave it the same for all sides.
Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber
MikePalmer
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Jul 20, 2006 8:55 pm
Contact:

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by MikePalmer »

Here's a different issue.
 
Six times I've started games as the Entente and not once have the Germans come through Luxembourg and Belgium.
 
I like the idea that the AI can opt to go the non-historic route. It makes the game more interesting and increases replay value. But it seems strange that the Germans NEVER seem to come through Belgium. In fact, I would think that there should be a slight chance that they even go through Holland.
 
Frank, I assume that there's some sort of percentage calculation for the CP/AI to pick from the different setups. Are my results abberational or reflective?
 
Thanks.
 
 
Mike Palmer
User avatar
adamc6
Posts: 46
Joined: Mon Apr 21, 2003 6:59 pm
Location: Canadensis, PA

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by adamc6 »

Germans through Belgium:

I've only played as TE twice, but same result -- germans don't go through Belgium -- of course, it taught me to go for broke against the Russians early, since I got smashed that way when played my first TE game!
If hindsight is 20/20, what is foresight?
User avatar
EUBanana
Posts: 4255
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:48 pm
Location: Little England
Contact:

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by EUBanana »

Arty seems just about perfect, I think trenches should be back at 6 again though.   Even at 6 I found trenches very much a scarce asset.
Image
Joel Rauber
Posts: 192
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2000 8:00 am
Location: Brookings, SD, USA

RE: beta 6 First impressions

Post by Joel Rauber »

[X(] we'd better be careful, we may be accidentally reaching a consensus on arty and trenches

Any relationship between what I say and reality is purely coincidental.

Joel Rauber
flintlock
Posts: 358
Joined: Sun Oct 08, 2006 12:33 am

Artillery and trench values

Post by flintlock »

I like the base value of one, which artillery currently has. A trench value of six gets my vote.
Shawkhan
Posts: 125
Joined: Wed Mar 01, 2006 6:45 pm

RE: Artillery and trench values

Post by Shawkhan »

...The Germans seem to have the real problem with trenches, as their frontlines are easily twice as long as anyone elses. Getting six trenches would help their industrial production greatly. I think that 4 for 1 is quite sufficient for the allies as NOONE else in WWI ever approached the level of sophistication or the scientific construction, of the German trenchlines. At Verdun, for example, they had underground concrete bunkers that could hold up to a battalion of men in complete safety. During the war in France, the Germans constructed a complete trench system, then withdrew to it after completion, allowing the allies a free advance of some miles into low swampy land, overlooked by the German positions. The only problem in the game is that all nationalities on a side have access to the most advanced technology. Changing the trench production for some nationalities might better reflect historical reality.
...If, and when, the historical anomaly of the British AI failing to protect the North Atlantic is finally fixed, every German production point will become precious, and getting more 'bang for the buck' on the defensive will become necessary.  
User avatar
EUBanana
Posts: 4255
Joined: Tue Sep 30, 2003 3:48 pm
Location: Little England
Contact:

RE: Artillery and trench values

Post by EUBanana »

Thats probably more a matter of R&D, Shawk...  The Entente didn't /want/ deep trenches.  They were perfectly capable of digging better trenches if they wanted to, fact was the generals actually ordered them not to, not wanting them to get too comfy.

The Entente were busy making tanks, not refining trenches.  Summed up by where the R&D goes.  Though trenches at 3 seem a must to cut down on arty casualties.
Image
FrankHunter
Posts: 2111
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 6:07 am

RE: Artillery and trench values

Post by FrankHunter »

Frank, I assume that there's some sort of percentage calculation for the CP/AI to pick from the different setups. Are my results abberational or reflective?

Yes that's what is supposed to occur.  The AI will randomly pick from Moltke the Elder (Russia first), Schlieffen (France first) or Falkenhayn (attrition and knock out minors). 

6 trench and base 1 artillery seems to be the general mood.

Sorry for the long delay in getting back here, was out of town for a few days and then returned to find my internet connection dead for two more.

User avatar
TheHellPatrol
Posts: 1588
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:41 pm

RE: Artillery and trench values

Post by TheHellPatrol »

ORIGINAL: FrankHunter

 
6 trench and base 1 artillery seems to be the general mood.

I agree wholeheartedly
A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone.
Henry David Thoreau

Post Reply

Return to “Guns of August 1914 - 1918”