Matrix Games Forums

Civil War II Patch 1.4 public BetaHappy Easter!Battle Academy is now available on SteamPlayers compare Ageods Civil War to Civil War IIDeal of the week - An updated War in the East goes half Price!Sign up for the Qvadriga beta for iPad and Android!Come and say hi at Pax and SaluteLegends of War goes on sale!Piercing Fortress Europa Gets UpdatedBattle Academy Mega Pack is now available		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

1.04 Good and the bad

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Time of Fury >> 1.04 Good and the bad Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
1.04 Good and the bad - 4/14/2013 5:51:32 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1657
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		I have to say the new supply system is great. I have been very critcal about the game in the past and this was one of my major issue. Units in cities can actually be killed now . Plus surrouding then in a seige also seems to work much better too if you do not want to fight them.

So with the 1.04 patch, the land and air system seems to be working really well.

I have been complaining about the naval system since the beginning and, unfortunately, looks like I still will be . The air/naval does work much better as sometimes you can hit something and sometimes you can't. CVs/landbased fighters can intercept. So this all seems to work well now. However, naval movement/combat is just bad.

In 1.04, I have had the entire Germany navy sitting in the English Channel for months. While they do get attacked, it is piecemeal and I have yet to see any planes attack. Of course I do have a number of fighters around to intercept so that may be ok.

I also seem to be able to sail unescorted TRs through areas where there are enemy fleets with no issue. But as each turn is a week and they are very short runs (Italy to NA), this also maybe ok too. I have not tried Sealion yet, mainly because the cost to do so is much higher than it used to be (APs cost more now).

So as long as you are willing to accept the naval system as being something you do not want to be accurate, then the game is really a lot of fun.
Post #: 1
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/14/2013 5:53:31 PM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 3209
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline 		Do an experiment, and one turn take control of the UK from the AI, and move your fleets to more realistic positions. Then release back to the AI and see what happens.

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 2
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/14/2013 6:44:06 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1657
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		If I can stop playing the land/air game I might lol.

Thinking about this some more, made me realize what the naval/air system needs is a different sequence of events that, while built into the current turn structure, would be a seperate system. So air units (fighters and bombers) could be 'moved' to a sea area to represent a player commiting forces in that sea zone. CVs would automatily do this in whatever sea zone they were in (or moved to). Fleet and sub movement could stay the same. However, when the turn 'ran' all naval and air units committed to an area (or moving through an area) would move and/or search in 'pulses'. Maybe six hour 'pulses'? Don't know.

If one side or the other 'finds' something during a 'pulse' random factors can be determined if combat (air/naval/sub/etc.) actually takes place. Further randomness can determine what damage, etc. occurs. If both sides have air units 'assigned' to a sea area then each pulse can determine if air-to-air combact occurs, losses, etc. also based on randomness. If the strength of the commited air units gets too low (maybe this could be a combination of the strength of the planes and range but this is really getting detailed now lol) the planes return home. This way you can actually acheive air superiority over a sea area.

The same routine for air could be applied to naval forces too. Depending on distance to a port/time at sea/etc. can determine if a fleet will contine to its destination (or simply stay where it is) versus having to return to port, Maybe the player could set a 'defaul' port that the fleet would go to if it lost a battle verus the closest one. I could just see the British navy retrating to Malta versus Alexandria if there was not some way to allow this to be set.

Anyway just some random thoughts on what would could help the naval system out from playing a LOT of naval games . Unfortunately, this type of effort would need an expansion (or new game) to implement. So not likely to happen anytime soon . But if the naval system could be fixed, then this would be one of the best games I have seen.

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 3
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/14/2013 7:37:59 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1657
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

Do an experiment, and one turn take control of the UK from the AI, and move your fleets to more realistic positions. Then release back to the AI and see what happens.


I did as you suggested and found out that almost the entire British navy was split up into very small TFs, many just with one ship and others with SURF and subs combined . I think the biggest one had 5 ships in it. Some of these TFs had been at ses for over a year . You mean they could not find a port to go to as many as the British have in the ETO ? I was really hoping this behavior would have been fixed in the patch as the AI has been doing this with the navies since the beginning.

So I fixed all the TFs as best I could sent them all home to port to reset. I have turned the AI back on and we will see what happens. Maybe the AI wil actually repair some of them too lol.

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 4
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/14/2013 7:48:47 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1618
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline 		Haven't gone far with 1.04 yet, but so far it's working OK.

The Naval game from earlier versions has been operating quite well, with lots of air action, bombardments, amphibious ops (not the AI yet), subs damaging ships and convoys (even sub on sub) and getting sunk themselves. Reading the game reports section there is a lot going on. Air power has been very significant, which is historic, but the big omissions are no fleet to fleet surface action (except fleets attacking convoys) and the convoy routing problem.

Working on detection settings, to see if I can get more surface action, but the AI Allied CVs have been effective in stopping me capturing Malta, if only because I have to deal with them before I can move on and they keep coming back, despite the loses to concentrated air power.

So lots of naval action, but significant elements missing.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 4/15/2013 6:29:18 PM >

_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 5
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/15/2013 3:49:17 PM   
Grimnirsson


Posts: 102
Joined: 12/25/2011
Status: offline 		What's that 'pbem challenge alliances hint' box that I can check/uncheck in the MP? Thanks

_____________________________


(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 6
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/15/2013 4:01:26 PM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 3209
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline 		Did you know ...

that way back in a patch long ago, Doomtrader introduced a feature whereby the AI naval forces would withdraw from a seazone where the enemy had a superiority in land-based air.

This was introduced to keep the AI from parking its fleets like off the coast of Norway, where the Germans could hit the fleet at will from land-based air.

So ... maybe this feature is part of the problem with AI fleet management right now.

Doomtrader, please advise if this feature is still implemented.

(in reply to Grimnirsson)
Post #: 7
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/15/2013 6:55:13 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1618
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner
Did you know ...

that way back in a patch long ago, Doomtrader introduced a feature whereby the AI naval forces would withdraw from a seazone where the enemy had a superiority in land-based air.

This was introduced to keep the AI from parking its fleets like off the coast of Norway, where the Germans could hit the fleet at will from land-based air.

So ... maybe this feature is part of the problem with AI fleet management right now.

Doomtrader, please advise if this feature is still implemented.


In the Mediterranean I have 4 Axis TAC and 1 FTR on Sicily in preparation for an air drop on Malta. I have the Italian fleet out in force. The Allied AI has CV fleets sweeping in through Gibraltar, they air attack North African ports, sink Italian subs and take loses from the bombers. They then withdraw, sometimes as far as the Atlantic, but they come back for further attacks, still in the face of air power. So although AI fleets retreat in the face of superior air power, they do come back and dealing with the carriers has stopped me getting on with taking Malta.

In other sea areas AI Allied CA fleets are operating in many coastal sea zones, if I move in air power to drive them away, they do retreat after air attack, but will come straight back if the air power is withdrawn.


_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 8
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/15/2013 7:43:32 PM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 3209
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline 		That's awesome, Rasputitsa. Way to go, AI.

So the question now is why it's not doing that in the Channel.

< Message edited by gwgardner -- 4/15/2013 7:44:10 PM >

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 9
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/15/2013 8:35:59 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1618
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline 		Still the problem of surface action, with all that heavy metal rolling round the Med, there is still no surface action, almost all the losses are inflicted by air attack, including 'Queen Elizabeth' sunk in Malta harbour. The Italian fleet has found and damaged an AI Allied convoy, subs have found Allied surface fleets and sometimes caused damage.

Getting fleets are meeting enemy formations, but not sure if any damage is being done (allowing the AI to resolve combat), so it seems to be more an issue of scoring hits, which has been mentioned before. This is from previous reports with 1.04 beta and earlier versions and need some time to see how if official 1.04 changes anything.

I suppose the Channel situation will depend on which side has air superiority, but the way it's working, comparing fighter coverage seems to decide superiority, but it's bombers that have the potential to do the damage to fleets.

Still working on the 'const' file to try and get some surface action.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 4/15/2013 9:43:29 PM >

_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 10
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/15/2013 10:47:01 PM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 3209
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline 		Haha, then we need a scripted AI cheat whereby a new British fighter is produced each week and stationed on the channel. Will keep the Luftwaffe busy.

(Just kidding)

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 11
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/16/2013 6:34:41 AM   
Razz


Posts: 2520
Joined: 10/21/2007
From: CaLiForNia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

Did you know ...

that way back in a patch long ago, Doomtrader introduced a feature whereby the AI naval forces would withdraw from a seazone where the enemy had a superiority in land-based air.

This was introduced to keep the AI from parking its fleets like off the coast of Norway, where the Germans could hit the fleet at will from land-based air.

So ... maybe this feature is part of the problem with AI fleet management right now.

Doomtrader, please advise if this feature is still implemented.


Yes, this is still implemented, but that is only part of the problem.

If you have played Britain before, you should know they are very weak for bombers for along long time. They build fighters first to defend Britain.



(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 12
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/16/2013 6:44:49 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1618
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner
Haha, then we need a scripted AI cheat whereby a new British fighter is produced each week and stationed on the channel. Will keep the Luftwaffe busy.
(Just kidding)


I have left the AI British to stew, while I fight it out in the East and the Med, I have 3 German fighter units on the Channel coast, but it is costly to fight over the Channel, mostly can't break through the FOW because of interception.

With additional fighters I did an 'Operation Bodenplatte' to suppress the RAF, which was quite successful (destroyed several fighter units and damaged bombers), but very quickly the air superiority feature is showing yellow again over Northern France, They're Back !!!

So the AI doesn't need any more help, I actually didn't do as much damage as I could have done to give the AI a chance (should have hit again next turn), won't do that again.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 4/16/2013 7:00:22 AM >

_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 13
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/16/2013 6:58:52 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1657
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		Well having fleets within enemy air range may be fixed for the Atlantic, but it is sure not that way in the Med. I have Sicily and Crete loadded with almost every bomber the Germans have and the British are still sending their fleets within easy range of my bombers. I have sunk a huge number of ships as they keep sending the fleets in harms way, over and over again.

It is July '41 and i have sunk 101 British ships not counting Troop Transports (about a dozen of these). matter of fact, keeping my bombers active (as they do take losses doing antishipping) is a big challenge lol. But I have sunk CVs BB, CAs, plus a huge number of smaller stuff.

As I own Malta too, the Brits should avoid moving anything East of Sicily since it is suicide. But they keep comming So I keep sinking them At some point they should run out of ships lol. Maybe they will stay out of the Eastern Med then

(in reply to Razz)
Post #: 14
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/16/2013 7:32:10 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1618
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Well having fleets within enemy air range may be fixed for the Atlantic, but it is sure not that way in the Med. I have Sicily and Crete loadded with almost every bomber the Germans have and the British are still sending their fleets within easy range of my bombers. I have sunk a huge number of ships as they keep sending the fleets in harms way, over and over again.

It is July '41 and i have sunk 101 British ships not counting Troop Transports (about a dozen of these). matter of fact, keeping my bombers active (as they do take losses doing antishipping) is a big challenge lol. But I have sunk CVs BB, CAs, plus a huge number of smaller stuff.

As I own Malta too, the Brits should avoid moving anything East of Sicily since it is suicide. But they keep comming So I keep sinking them At some point they should run out of ships lol. Maybe they will stay out of the Eastern Med then


That's more, or less, what I am describing, fleets are retreating in the face of air power, as Gary thought they should, but they come back, take losses and retreat again, but they will return. Historically there were severe losses for the British trying to hold on to Crete and Malta. Sinking ships does cause air losses to the Germans and stops me doing want I had planned, but when should they give up and preservation take over.

Just when I think I have cleared the Med and get ready for the next move and it's quiet for a turn or two, then it all starts again.



_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 15
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/16/2013 6:19:58 PM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1657
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		One good thing from all of this was the Italy AI actually invaded Cyprus and took it . Not if they could just get their act togeather and invade Palenstine we would be good lol.

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 16
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/17/2013 3:24:59 AM   
Razz


Posts: 2520
Joined: 10/21/2007
From: CaLiForNia
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar

Well having fleets within enemy air range may be fixed for the Atlantic, but it is sure not that way in the Med. I have Sicily and Crete loadded with almost every bomber the Germans have and the British are still sending their fleets within easy range of my bombers. I have sunk a huge number of ships as they keep sending the fleets in harms way, over and over again.

It is July '41 and i have sunk 101 British ships not counting Troop Transports (about a dozen of these). matter of fact, keeping my bombers active (as they do take losses doing antishipping) is a big challenge lol. But I have sunk CVs BB, CAs, plus a huge number of smaller stuff.

As I own Malta too, the Brits should avoid moving anything East of Sicily since it is suicide. But they keep comming So I keep sinking them At some point they should run out of ships lol. Maybe they will stay out of the Eastern Med then


It is the same program. The reason you see Naval combats in the Med is the AI has no wear to go.
Sure you may planes to bomb them but there is no where to retreat.


(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 17
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/17/2013 5:00:43 AM   
Numdydar

 

Posts: 1657
Joined: 2/13/2004
Status: offline 		Why don't they go into the Western Med where my planes can't reach. The furthest Sea Area I can get is near Tunisa. So anywhere West of there they will be safe. I do not have any planes on Sardinia as I have enough trouble keeping NA and Crete supplied

(in reply to Razz)
Post #: 18
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/17/2013 12:44:15 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1618
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Numdydar
Why don't they go into the Western Med where my planes can't reach. The furthest Sea Area I can get is near Tunisa. So anywhere West of there they will be safe. I do not have any planes on Sardinia as I have enough trouble keeping NA and Crete supplied


In my current game, you are further on in this situation than me, Malta is still in the AI Allied hands and it is not too surprising that the AI would keep sending fleets into the Central Mediterranean, but if after Malta falls the AI keeps making Kamikazee attacks, losing huge numbers of ships then perhaps something needs to be adjusted. Gary said that an adjustment had been made to stop the AI sending ships into sea zones against air superiority.

So three points, firstly, has that adjustment been applied to 1.04, secondly, how is air superiority measured in this case, as the air superiority display feature you can select is based on fighter coverage, but the damage to ships is being done by bombers and thirdly, how long is the AI strategic memory.

The AI may withdraw fleets in the face of superior air power, but for how long, for me in the Med, they keep coming back, take more loses, then withdraw again. This may not be a bad strategy at this stage of the game (if costly), but if the AI is going to do this mindlessly (I know, it's only the AI), regardless of of any strategic gain, then it's not so good.

Side issue, there are islands off the coast of Turkey, which are in Italian ownership from the start, which is historical, but when I re-based an air unit here, there was no supply. An AI Allied carrier fleet came into the Eastern Med and hit the air unit, which could not reply, so the AI is thinking. There is no port on the islands, only one landing hex (176,151), I put CA fleets in all the adjacent sea zones, but didn't get any 'alternative supply', eventually had to disband the remains of the air unit, which couldn't be moved, nor supplied. It's not the air unit supply bug, as I put the fix in and this effect is still there with 1.04 installed.

I could not land a ground unit on the only landing hex (no port), which means that the enemy can land on your island, but you can't, so another issue, why can't we land ground units on landing hexes in friendly owned territory. If you have a loaded amphibious fleet you should be able to disembark on landing beaches in territory that has always been owned by a friendly nation, not just those where control has changed to a friendly nation.

The Allies have the same problem with the British owned and controlled Channel Islands (no port, just a landing hex), you can land a friendly airborne unit, but not an amphibious landing. So it looks like airborne landings are working better than amphibious landings.



< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 4/17/2013 6:22:43 PM >

_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to Numdydar)
Post #: 19
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/18/2013 5:45:44 AM   
Razz


Posts: 2520
Joined: 10/21/2007
From: CaLiForNia
Status: offline 		1) Yes it is the same
2) it is based upon tactical and strategic bombers
3) it retreats, then goes back to the way it is programmed. That why the ships keep trying enter to control the sea zone

You do not have enough ships to supply the air unit. Ship cancel each other out. You need to have allot more ships than the enemy. Even with no enemy, you need allot of ships.

Those islands are not defined as beaches.

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 20
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/18/2013 7:59:43 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 1618
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Razz

1) Yes it is the same
2) it is based upon tactical and strategic bombers
3) it retreats, then goes back to the way it is programmed. That why the ships keep trying enter to control the sea zone

You do not have enough ships to supply the air unit. Ship cancel each other out. You need to have allot more ships than the enemy. Even with no enemy, you need a lot of ships.

Those islands are not defined as beaches.


Thanks for the response Razz, I understand the supply effect from bombers, not available in this case, I am running a series of test game turns to refine house rules for amphibious operations, to understand the workings of supply in sea operations.

However, when I noticed the effect in a running game, I had fleets in all adjacent sea zones and no indication of enemy fleets in those areas for several turns, all the action seems to be happening at the other end of the Med. I expected to get supply from ships onto the island, which at hex (176,151) has a beach. With an amphibious fleet in the adjacent sea zone I did not get a disembark option onto that hex, although the disembark option showed for hexes on Cyprus (enemy owned and controlled). So I tested the amphibious disembark feature and you cannot land on beaches which are owned by your faction, but you can land airborne on such hexes.

The Allied side has the same effect for the Channel Islands (with landing hex), you can land an airborne unit, but you don't get the disembark option for an amphibious fleet in the Channel sea zone. All this means that the Germans could have an amphibious landing on the Channel Islands, but the British cannot land ground units in their owned and controlled territory in defence.

I have to test further, but I suspect there will be no supply from ships to these islands, however many ships you have there, I should have got supply level 2 for each CA, but got nothing.

This is not necessarily a 1.04 issue as it has probably always be there, but another aspect worth noting is that if you have several amphibious landing groups in the same fleet. If the first landing group to attempt to land get a 'fail to land', then all the other groups in that fleet loose the disembark option, so the whole invasion is off for that turn. Better to sent multiple landing groups out, each in their own fleet, so a failure to land by one unit does not stop the others. Bombardment is the opposite, you only get one fleet bombardment per target hex, so you need to concentrate your bombardment into one fleet, to get the full effect.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 4/18/2013 8:58:00 AM >

_____________________________

"We have to go from where we are, not from where we would like to be" - me

(in reply to Razz)
Post #: 21
RE: 1.04 Good and the bad - 4/18/2013 8:01:32 AM   
Meteor2

 

Posts: 118
Joined: 7/20/2009
From: Germany
Status: offline 		With the new patch I have started FALL GELB again.
What do you think about the following:
1. Partisans in France have divvision size and level 2. They resisted a corps for 2 weeks. Seems overpowered.
2. The British carriers in the Med bombed the Axis troops in NA into the ground. And there are Italien fighters for protection.
Maybe the carriers are way overpowered ?
3. And they seem to remain at their position forever, even with fighter losses. Are they really replenishing in a port ?
4. The transport of troop ships and landings ships through enemy sea zones with fleets seems to be easy. Much to easy ?


(in reply to Razz)
Post #: 22
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Time of Fury >> 1.04 Good and the bad Page: [1]
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

0.110