Matrix Games Forums

War in the West gets its first update!Flashpoint Campaigns: Red Storm version 2.08 is now available!Command gets huge update!Order of Battle: Pacific Featured on Weekly Streaming SessionA new fight for Battle Academy!Buzz Aldrin's Space Program Manager is out for Mac!The definitive wargame of the Western Front is out now! War in the West gets teaser trailer and Twitch Stream!New Preview AAR for War in the West!War in the West Manual preview
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Next Patch

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Commander - The Great War >> RE: Next Patch Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Next Patch - 1/13/2013 3:29:23 AM   
wodin


Posts: 8108
Joined: 4/20/2003
From: England
Status: offline
Mike production issues and usage..they couldn't make the arty quick enough..remember no one expected the war at the start to go on aslong as it did nor have a real idea on the role of Arty. SO both sides didn't plan for the sort of Arty amount that was used. It took awhile for new armament factories to start up and build up steam. There was a massive outcry on the Brit side with regards to the issues at the time..many blamed the government also the factories where plagued by strikes over wages etc etc.

Also remember Britain had had a disarmament policy leading upto the war so they where low on everything from uniforms to ammo to weapons.

Germany also went through far more rounds during the start of the campaign than they had expected leading to severe shortages towards the end of the first battle of Ypres, this lasted well into 1915.

So really neither side should have the ability to stockpile huge amounts of ammo for about 14 months (Germany should have a decent stockpile at first but once it runs out it should take awhile for production to rise enough to stockpile beyond immediate necessity (In 1915 Germany should have enough for two offensives and the allies for two but again the Arty wouldn't be on the scale of Verdun onwards). Britain should struggle with Arty until the winter of '15. I'm not so sure about the French, but they too suffered Arty shortages not long after the war started. from Verdun onwards you should be able to dish out intense Arty barrages and still have enough to last for smaller scale attacks or for defense.

Neither side had the production at the scale it needed to be and it took awhile for it all to start up. As i said no War had ever been like this..infact as far as the British go Arty units had very little training in co operation with the Army and there was even tension between to two services. WW1 was the dawn of Arty working alongside the Infantry.

_____________________________

My Tactical wargame facebook page.

https://www.facebook.com/Tacticalwargame


(in reply to Amaranthus)
Post #: 61
RE: Next Patch - 1/13/2013 7:00:08 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaranthus

Strat bombing seems to me to be the biggest game breaker to fix in this patch. If you get a deadlock by 1916 or so, it's the only thing that ends up counting - a crazy back and forth of fleets of bombers until one side or the other withers away first. The land war ceases to have a meaning. I love the 1914-15 game, but after that, it's broken - and I really want it fixed, because I do love the game. I've just had another game end on an agreed stalemate because of this.

Two possible fixes are to 1) dramatically decrease effectiveness (e.g. only 1 in 5 strikes of a Zepp does -1, and maybe 1 in 3 for a bomber), or 2) impacts NM only, with no effect on PP (and NM impact would have to be low and probably on a diminishing curve).
warspite1

...or better still just remove strategic bombing completely. It wasn't a factor in WWI, its a boring element of the game anyway - as you say its just each side sending waves of planes over - OR if you are to keep it in, make it affect morale NOT production.


_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to Amaranthus)
Post #: 62
RE: Next Patch - 1/13/2013 7:39:44 PM   
Orm


Posts: 6925
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaranthus

Strat bombing seems to me to be the biggest game breaker to fix in this patch. If you get a deadlock by 1916 or so, it's the only thing that ends up counting - a crazy back and forth of fleets of bombers until one side or the other withers away first. The land war ceases to have a meaning. I love the 1914-15 game, but after that, it's broken - and I really want it fixed, because I do love the game. I've just had another game end on an agreed stalemate because of this.

Two possible fixes are to 1) dramatically decrease effectiveness (e.g. only 1 in 5 strikes of a Zepp does -1, and maybe 1 in 3 for a bomber), or 2) impacts NM only, with no effect on PP (and NM impact would have to be low and probably on a diminishing curve).
warspite1

...or better still just remove strategic bombing completely. It wasn't a factor in WWI, its a boring element of the game anyway - as you say its just each side sending waves of planes over - OR if you are to keep it in, make it affect morale NOT production.


Here is a few suggestions to help reduce effectiveness of massive strategic bombing campaigns.

1) After each strategic bombing mission the bombing units gets a loss in efficiency.
2) After each strategic bombing mission during winter there is a risk of loss of strength points in addition to the efficiency loss.
3) Fighters interception range increased.

It is my understanding that the weather was a major threat to zeppelins on bombing missions. I suspect that bombers were affected during bad weather as well.

_____________________________

"It would seem that you have no useful skill or talent whatsoever," he said.
"Have you thought of going into teaching?"

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 63
RE: Next Patch - 1/13/2013 7:46:41 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Amaranthus

Strat bombing seems to me to be the biggest game breaker to fix in this patch. If you get a deadlock by 1916 or so, it's the only thing that ends up counting - a crazy back and forth of fleets of bombers until one side or the other withers away first. The land war ceases to have a meaning. I love the 1914-15 game, but after that, it's broken - and I really want it fixed, because I do love the game. I've just had another game end on an agreed stalemate because of this.

Two possible fixes are to 1) dramatically decrease effectiveness (e.g. only 1 in 5 strikes of a Zepp does -1, and maybe 1 in 3 for a bomber), or 2) impacts NM only, with no effect on PP (and NM impact would have to be low and probably on a diminishing curve).
warspite1

...or better still just remove strategic bombing completely. It wasn't a factor in WWI, its a boring element of the game anyway - as you say its just each side sending waves of planes over - OR if you are to keep it in, make it affect morale NOT production.


Here is a few suggestions to help reduce effectiveness of massive strategic bombing campaigns.

1) After each strategic bombing mission the bombing units gets a loss in efficiency.
2) After each strategic bombing mission during winter there is a risk of loss of strength points in addition to the efficiency loss.
3) Fighters interception range increased.

It is my understanding that the weather was a major threat to zeppelins on bombing missions. I suspect that bombers were affected during bad weather as well.
warspite1

All these would help but I still come back to the same question; why is this a feature of the game when it wasn't (to any material extent) in real life?

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 64
RE: Next Patch - 1/16/2013 10:05:07 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Lord Zimoa - is there anything you can tell us at this stage re the direction that the naval war is heading and your thoughts on what is achievable here - either in this next patch or thereafter?

Many thanks.
warspite1

Anything you can tell us please guys?

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 65
RE: Next Patch - 1/20/2013 1:21:38 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Any news on plans for Strategic Bombardment please in the next patch? I am in the middle of yet another game, totally ruined by this feature?

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 66
RE: Next Patch - 1/20/2013 1:23:45 PM   
Lord Zimoa


Posts: 719
Joined: 10/10/2008
Status: offline
Yes, will be adjusted/re-balanced.

_____________________________



www.thelordzgamesstudio.com
www.panzer-corps.com
www.commander-games.com


(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 67
RE: Next Patch - 1/20/2013 1:44:41 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lord Zimoa

Yes, will be adjusted/re-balanced.
warspite1

Great - thank-you

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to Lord Zimoa)
Post #: 68
RE: Next Patch - 1/25/2013 11:14:26 PM   
Naskra

 

Posts: 313
Joined: 3/12/2005
Status: offline
A fix is needed for the US entering the war. I have never seen it join the Entente. I have never seen , on these pages, any report of it joining the Entente.
If enough convoys are sunk/damaged, the diplomatic status of the US will change to "enemy", but it will not go to war.

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 69
RE: Next Patch - 1/26/2013 6:33:14 AM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Naskra

A fix is needed for the US entering the war. I have never seen it join the Entente. I have never seen , on these pages, any report of it joining the Entente.
If enough convoys are sunk/damaged, the diplomatic status of the US will change to "enemy", but it will not go to war.
warspite1

I have seen it happen in just one game. The British convoys were being splattered by 4-sub wolfpacks and the US did come in very early. However, it takes ages for the US to build up units, research tech, and transport over to Europe so I do not think the Germans have too much to worry about unless the US enters early.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to Naskra)
Post #: 70
RE: Next Patch - 1/27/2013 5:16:41 PM   
Orm


Posts: 6925
Joined: 5/3/2008
From: Sweden
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Naskra

A fix is needed for the US entering the war. I have never seen it join the Entente. I have never seen , on these pages, any report of it joining the Entente.
If enough convoys are sunk/damaged, the diplomatic status of the US will change to "enemy", but it will not go to war.
warspite1

I have seen it happen in just one game. The British convoys were being splattered by 4-sub wolfpacks and the US did come in very early. However, it takes ages for the US to build up units, research tech, and transport over to Europe so I do not think the Germans have too much to worry about unless the US enters early.

I've seen USA enter the war in 1915 and I did not appreciate the experience. But thanks to fleet superiority I managed to sink a lot of US troops before they reached the European shores.

I feel that there is little reason for CP to focus on the navy at this point. If you ignore the navy the CP is stronger at land and no US interference. But if you focus on the sea war then it is likely that US enters the war early to punish you. I would prefer a US entry that didn't depend so much on the convoy war.

_____________________________

"It would seem that you have no useful skill or talent whatsoever," he said.
"Have you thought of going into teaching?"

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 71
RE: Next Patch - 1/27/2013 5:39:24 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Orm


quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: Naskra

A fix is needed for the US entering the war. I have never seen it join the Entente. I have never seen , on these pages, any report of it joining the Entente.
If enough convoys are sunk/damaged, the diplomatic status of the US will change to "enemy", but it will not go to war.
warspite1

I have seen it happen in just one game. The British convoys were being splattered by 4-sub wolfpacks and the US did come in very early. However, it takes ages for the US to build up units, research tech, and transport over to Europe so I do not think the Germans have too much to worry about unless the US enters early.

I've seen USA enter the war in 1915 and I did not appreciate the experience. But thanks to fleet superiority I managed to sink a lot of US troops before they reached the European shores.

I feel that there is little reason for CP to focus on the navy at this point. If you ignore the navy the CP is stronger at land and no US interference. But if you focus on the sea war then it is likely that US enters the war early to punish you. I would prefer a US entry that didn't depend so much on the convoy war.
warspite1

I think it makes sense for US entry to be linked to how Russia/France are doing. But there is another big problem:

If France are taken out what are the British supposed to do? They cannot continue fighting in France - and nor can the Americans - unless they stick to the coast, otherwise they will be on half-supply. How are the British and Americans supposed to recapture Paris - or even Brussels - without supply? There needs to be some means of waging war without a capital.

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to Orm)
Post #: 72
RE: Next Patch - 1/27/2013 5:46:04 PM   
kirk23


Posts: 2261
Joined: 10/15/2010
From: Fife Scotland
Status: offline
If France is defeated,and Britain & America need to try and recapture PARIS for example,then I feel as a supply source,the only alternative has to be done by Naval units,as long as a clear path extends to the land forces,then the Naval units should be deemed,to give full supply!

_____________________________

Make it so!

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 73
RE: Next Patch - 1/28/2013 7:33:29 AM   
Amaranthus


Posts: 48
Joined: 11/29/2012
From: Adelaide, Australia
Status: offline
Yes kirk23, that is a logical solution, otherwise invasion is essentially impossible unless you manage to take Brussels.

(in reply to kirk23)
Post #: 74
RE: Next Patch - 1/28/2013 3:32:08 PM   
billgber

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 1/12/2013
Status: offline
after playing more than 12 game against human player I think it will be fine to have some optional realistic rules.

at least some point
1st - train have nothing to do in a ww1 game, but that really minor as there are not efficiency.

2nd - do not allow landing again port or capital

3rd - perhaps the more important; change the surrender rules. those for Russia are very good, it will be fine to have the same for France, Turkey and Austria and perhaps also Germany. during ww1 none of major country capital was taken as cp country have surrender before.

4th - review strategic warfare

(in reply to Amaranthus)
Post #: 75
RE: Next Patch - 1/28/2013 7:45:02 PM   
Jonathan Pollard


Posts: 481
Joined: 2/25/2007
From: Federal prison
Status: offline
Historically armored trains were very important during the Russian Civil War in the battle for control of the Trans Siberian Railroad. I think the Czechoslovak Legion basically fought its way across the entire length of that railroad using armored trains. I think the most unrealistic thing about them is that they can do amphibious invasions as long as the target hex has a railroad. At first I thought that even allowing them to be moved by sea may be unrealistic, but I found out that some merchant ships of the era did exist that could carry locomotives without disassembling them.

_____________________________

"We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba." "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even Washington." - US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Operation Northwoods, 1962

(in reply to billgber)
Post #: 76
RE: Next Patch - 1/28/2013 8:19:51 PM   
Keke


Posts: 3517
Joined: 3/12/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jonathan Pollard

Historically armored trains were very important during the Russian Civil War in the battle for control of the Trans Siberian Railroad. I think the Czechoslovak Legion basically fought its way across the entire length of that railroad using armored trains. I think the most unrealistic thing about them is that they can do amphibious invasions as long as the target hex has a railroad. At first I thought that even allowing them to be moved by sea may be unrealistic, but I found out that some merchant ships of the era did exist that could carry locomotives without disassembling them.


Now how many army and/or corps sized armoured train units were there? It's another unit type that should be a small support unit, but alas there are none. Yes, the Czech Legion covered a lot of miles by train, but they didn't have huge fleets of them armoured.

_____________________________

Jyri

The eternal privilege of those who never act themselves: to interrogate, be dissatisfied, find fault.

- A. Solzhenitsyn


(in reply to Jonathan Pollard)
Post #: 77
RE: Next Patch - 1/31/2013 10:00:15 AM   
Lord Zimoa


Posts: 719
Joined: 10/10/2008
Status: offline
Some news about the upcoming 1.20 CTGW open Beta patch at our Facebook page or for those who don`t use that, I also posted it on the Commander development diary on the Commander website

http://www.facebook.com/pages/The-Lordz-Games-Studio/162489177110682?v=wall

http://www.commander-games.com/2013/01/little-update-about-the-upcoming-new-patch/

_____________________________



www.thelordzgamesstudio.com
www.panzer-corps.com
www.commander-games.com


(in reply to Keke)
Post #: 78
RE: Next Patch - 1/31/2013 1:57:40 PM   
FOARP

 

Posts: 48
Joined: 12/24/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: kirk23

If France is defeated,and Britain & America need to try and recapture PARIS for example,then I feel as a supply source,the only alternative has to be done by Naval units,as long as a clear path extends to the land forces,then the Naval units should be deemed,to give full supply!



Much more sensible and easier to implement is to make ports deliver full supply - this would prevent the position where units in some parts of the map literally cannot be in 100% supply even if it is their home turf because they do not include a capital. Ireland and Sicily are examples here.

(in reply to kirk23)
Post #: 79
RE: Next Patch - 2/5/2013 7:31:09 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
WHERE IS THE NEXT PATCH!!!!!?????!?!?!?!?!

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to FOARP)
Post #: 80
RE: Next Patch - 2/6/2013 10:08:56 AM   
Iain McNeil


Posts: 2016
Joined: 10/26/2004
From: London
Status: offline
It is with production at the moment and in the process of preparing and building the patch.

_____________________________

Iain McNeil
Director
Slitherine Software
Website http://www.slitherine.com

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 81
RE: Next Patch - 2/6/2013 3:58:36 PM   
parusski


Posts: 4848
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: Wyoming, Even Liberals Welcome
Status: offline
quote:

warspite1:
There needs to be some means of waging war without a capital.


But what kind of war can a nation realistically expect to wage if it loses it's capital?

_____________________________

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."- W.T. Sherman

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 82
RE: Next Patch - 2/6/2013 5:48:38 PM   
Lord Zimoa


Posts: 719
Joined: 10/10/2008
Status: offline
New Open Beta Commander: The Great War v1.20 now available!

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3265366

_____________________________



www.thelordzgamesstudio.com
www.panzer-corps.com
www.commander-games.com


(in reply to parusski)
Post #: 83
RE: Next Patch - 2/6/2013 6:53:45 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: parusski

quote:

warspite1:
There needs to be some means of waging war without a capital.


But what kind of war can a nation realistically expect to wage if it loses it's capital?
warspite1

I was talking specificaly about the ability of the British / Americans to carry on fighting in France if France is defeated. Without a capital they can't - it's game over. Same with Amphibious invasions - you don't need to worry about them - just make sure the enemy can't take a capital (full supply) or a city (half supply) and the enemy is stuck on the coast....

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to parusski)
Post #: 84
RE: Next Patch - 2/6/2013 7:11:25 PM   
warspite1


Posts: 20269
Joined: 2/2/2008
From: England
Status: offline
Bummer...so I can't download the patch until my existing outstanding games have been finished?

_____________________________

England expects that every man will do his duty - Horatio Nelson 1805.




(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 85
RE: Next Patch - 2/6/2013 7:22:24 PM   
Jonathan Pollard


Posts: 481
Joined: 2/25/2007
From: Federal prison
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1

Bummer...so I can't download the patch until my existing outstanding games have been finished?

Not only that, if you decide to do a separate install for the patch, any games started with the patch will probably be impossible to finish if the separate server is closed when the patch stops being beta.

_____________________________

"We could blow up a US ship in Guantanamo Bay and blame Cuba." "We could develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even Washington." - US Joint Chiefs of Staff, Operation Northwoods, 1962

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 86
RE: Next Patch - 2/6/2013 9:29:29 PM   
parusski


Posts: 4848
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: Wyoming, Even Liberals Welcome
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


quote:

ORIGINAL: parusski

quote:

warspite1:
There needs to be some means of waging war without a capital.


But what kind of war can a nation realistically expect to wage if it loses it's capital?
warspite1

I was talking specificaly about the ability of the British / Americans to carry on fighting in France if France is defeated. Without a capital they can't - it's game over. Same with Amphibious invasions - you don't need to worry about them - just make sure the enemy can't take a capital (full supply) or a city (half supply) and the enemy is stuck on the coast....


Right, that does make sense. I was heading down the guerrilla path.

_____________________________

"I hate newspapermen. They come into camp and pick up their camp rumors and print them as facts. I regard them as spies, which, in truth, they are. If I killed them all there would be news from Hell before breakfast."- W.T. Sherman

(in reply to warspite1)
Post #: 87
RE: Next Patch - 2/7/2013 1:24:13 AM   
JeffK


Posts: 5233
Joined: 1/26/2005
From: Back in the Office, Can I get my tin hut back!
Status: offline
Capital cities could be seen as irrelvant in talking about supplying the troops.

Would it be more relevant to use "Resource Centres" representing centres of industry. If these are spread around in accurate positions it may make more sense to capture the Ruhr than Berlin.

The loss of each centre could see a % drop in supplies available for that nation, you could still have a morale % loss for your Capital falling. (And a plus for % the captor.)

As for an "Amphib" landing, a "base" with a very restricted supply range would represent the beachhead and allow a port to be captured which should then allow a supply link back to home ports.
(Dont tell me the game makes the Brits/Yanks trace supply to a French supply point as implied by the previous posts!!)

_____________________________

Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum

(in reply to parusski)
Post #: 88
RE: Next Patch - 2/8/2013 11:00:21 AM   
FOARP

 

Posts: 48
Joined: 12/24/2012
Status: offline
It would be way more realistic for supply to come from ports - so long as you still have a connection to a port, you should receive full supply.

(in reply to JeffK)
Post #: 89
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Commander - The Great War >> RE: Next Patch Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.125