Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed

 
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] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 4/21/2019 10:38:01 AM   
mussey


Posts: 639
Joined: 12/2/2006
From: Cleve-Land
Status: offline
quote:

If they exist at all they should spawn in the saves directory. There's a "before" one and an "after" one.
The crash log and toaw_log files should be found in the directory where the game engine lives. The root directory for TOAW IV.

< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 4/20/2019 10:16:05 PM >


Thanks Larry. I was wondering about that. They 'spawned' in a 2/4/19 CTD, but not my recent one last night. I'm going to post last night's episode with the crash log toawlog and see what the guys come up with. Thanks for all your help!

_____________________________

Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 91
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 4/21/2019 2:19:37 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 447
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
Might be useful to have the computer play itself with the -original- Next War scenario to see if CTDs occur. I may be wrong, but the impression is that a lot of CTD activity is happening with the .21 version. If that is the case, these CTDs may not be specific to Next War Expanded.

Cheers

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 92
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 4/22/2019 11:54:02 PM   
Hellen_slith


Posts: 287
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
I have not yet done any "scientific" studies, but for me, TNW (Expanded) seems to crash more often than, say, D21.

Not sure what is going on, but I did have two CTDs during my NATO turn 2 to Larry.

Turning off mini-map and air report seems to help, but that is just me, perhaps. I thought it was my CPU over heating, but it seems to occur more often when scrolling around the "small" map....

Not a game killer, but it is something that I keep aware of, so I just "save" a lot ;)

The naval still seems very herky jerky to me on my end, so I have not been using naval.

Otherwise ... tons of fun!!! Great scene!!!!
D

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 93
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/6/2019 9:21:46 PM   
Hellen_slith


Posts: 287
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
Some observations:

Great scene for PBEM!!

Also,

Since the map and the OOB have been expanded, the number of turns should (I think) also be expanded.

As it stands, the game calculates VP and ends the game at the end of 17 turns of hostility (up to a max of 34 turns, iirc, if you play Tension full out Iron Man style).

I think it would be cool to EXPAND that :) and make an option, some sort of game event, whereby instead of that, NATO (and WP) must CHOOSE a theater option of "continue hostilities?" If both players agree, then they can keep playing the game.

Not sure the logic of it, but wouldn't it be something like,
IF both Player 1 and Player 2 choose "continue" theater option, the game will continue, OR game ends.

IOW, both players must vote "YES" to continue, otherwise the game ends like it normally does now.

And maybe make it a "house rule" that it works like Turn 1, an "inter-turn" type event that would allow more gaming action.

Ok, well, that was my thought and there you have it.

Can't wait for the Alpha! I hope it is soon!

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 94
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/6/2019 9:39:01 PM   
mussey


Posts: 639
Joined: 12/2/2006
From: Cleve-Land
Status: offline
quote:

the number of turns should (I think) also be expanded.


That thought has crossed my mind as well, especially since adding a few more NATO goodies that arrive later in the game. Since Beta, a few US Natl Guard formations and the 12th USAF joined the orbat. So the US air forces presently in WG and UK (17th USAF, 3rd USAF) will be joined by the 9th and 12th. Both of these have about 500 aircraft each.

_____________________________

Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"


(in reply to Hellen_slith)
Post #: 95
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/7/2019 11:12:30 AM   
Shadrach


Posts: 482
Joined: 10/16/2001
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: online
Just a small thing: It would be nice if you could get the place-names correct for Norway (and Germany as well for that matter), with the use of the proper letters, æøå/öü.

For instance
Bodo = Bodø
Tromso = Tromsø
Vardo = Vardø
Dombas = Dombås
Röros = Røros (we don't use the umlauts in Norway after we threw out the Swedes )
Kragero = Kragerø
Tonsberg = Tønsberg
Floro = Florø
Maloy = Måløy
Honefoss = Hønefoss
(I think that's all of them)

In Germany there is for instance:
Lubeck = Lübeck
Gottingen = Göttingen
Saarbrucken = Saarbrücken
(and probably a lot more)

You have them correct for Sweden - and I can't just let that pass

You can get the letters to just copy and paste from here:
https://www.rapidtables.com/code/text/ascii-table.html

Also IMO it looks better on a map to use the local names instead of the "englishified" names, like:
Cologne = Köln
Turin = Torino
Or at least be consistent in the the usage, so if you must use Turin, also use Milan, Venice etc. But the local names are better I think.


< Message edited by Shadrach -- 5/7/2019 11:20:25 AM >

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 96
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/7/2019 12:00:16 PM   
mussey


Posts: 639
Joined: 12/2/2006
From: Cleve-Land
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shadrach

Just a small thing: It would be nice if you could get the place-names correct for Norway (and Germany as well for that matter), with the use of the proper letters, æøå/öü.

For instance
Bodo = Bodø
Tromso = Tromsø
Vardo = Vardø
Dombas = Dombås
Röros = Røros (we don't use the umlauts in Norway after we threw out the Swedes )
Kragero = Kragerø
Tonsberg = Tønsberg
Floro = Florø
Maloy = Måløy
Honefoss = Hønefoss
(I think that's all of them)

In Germany there is for instance:
Lubeck = Lübeck
Gottingen = Göttingen
Saarbrucken = Saarbrücken
(and probably a lot more)

You have them correct for Sweden - and I can't just let that pass

You can get the letters to just copy and paste from here:
https://www.rapidtables.com/code/text/ascii-table.html

Also IMO it looks better on a map to use the local names instead of the "englishified" names, like:
Cologne = Köln
Turin = Torino
Or at least be consistent in the the usage, so if you must use Turin, also use Milan, Venice etc. But the local names are better I think.



I continue to agonize over this. My ancestry is half English, quarter German, quarter Polish, so I am all mixed up on this. As an early design decision I went with mostly anglicized versions to allow me to quickly learn place names in conjunction with most American publications. But as I continue to tweak, I will revisit this my earlier decision.

_____________________________

Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"


(in reply to Shadrach)
Post #: 97
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/7/2019 1:08:21 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 447
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
Mussey,

If you decide to do this. German umlauts can also be shown with an "e" following; thus, ae = ä.

One thing to be sure of is how it displays. Older versions of TOAW had issues with accented characters in placenames on the map display. May be fixed by now.

Cheers

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 98
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/7/2019 1:26:01 PM   
Shadrach


Posts: 482
Joined: 10/16/2001
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: online
quote:

I continue to agonize over this. My ancestry is half English, quarter German, quarter Polish, so I am all mixed up on this. As an early design decision I went with mostly anglicized versions to allow me to quickly learn place names in conjunction with most American publications. But as I continue to tweak, I will revisit this my earlier decision.


Sure, that's perfectly OK. Besides, if taken too far you'd also need to use the special Polish characters like 'ł'

Not sure if using 'e' for replacement is good though, it would turn Köln to Koeln, Bodø to Bodoe, which just looks strange in my opinion, better to stick with just Koln then.

Yeah how the game displays stuff might be an issue, I've seen it doesn't handle all characters too well, but these are mostly extended ASCII.

(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 99
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/9/2019 3:45:10 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 37651
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: online
I've got bad news. I was almost done with my moves when the game went CTD. I lost all that work, a couple of hours worth. I was so discusted that I reloaded the moves and just ended the turn and sent that to Damon. The wind has gone from my sails. How about we start over or something? Got a new version for us to use?

_____________________________

Apparently there are three levels of brain activity. Level 1 is the lowest level - the amount of concentration required to, say, delete emails or serve in congress.
- Bruce Cameron

(in reply to Shadrach)
Post #: 100
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/15/2019 1:44:36 PM   
mussey


Posts: 639
Joined: 12/2/2006
From: Cleve-Land
Status: offline
While Larry & Hellen battle it out in their AAR I've tweaked some things that will be included in the next release. I do not want to post too many refinements in their thread (as I've done in the past), so I will continue here. But I do have to acknowledge how important their feedback has been to me. A few changes that will be in the new release would have greatly changed the direction of their war, and I give my profound kudos for them for continuing under these circumstances.

Several changes have already been mentioned in their thread, and another one now:
- addition of Warsaw Pact paramilitary units to guard their cities, and border guard bn.s on the border roads.
- a new Event sequence for Warsaw Pact countries depicting the possibility they will not participate at the onset of hostilities, and for the possibility for revolt if NATO were to occupy one of their cities.

Chance of Non-Participation:
Upon open war, each Non-Soviet Warsaw Pact country has a chance their formations will not move (be garrisoned). E. Germany 5%; Hungary 10%, Czech. 15%; Poland 20%. If this triggers, then each of their Formations rolls a die to see if it is affected. The odds are somewhere between 10-50% (some formations are more loyal then others, like Airborne). If this happens the formation will either be permanently garrisoned, or garrisoned for 2-turns, or not affected at all. Thus, none, some, or all will be affected.

Chance of Revolt if NATO occupies a city:
- 50% chance the country revolts
- if so, Warsaw Pact suffers Shock -25% for 2-turns
- NATO receives 50 VP's
- Guerrillas will occur
- chance that each formation will be garrisoned similar to Non-Participation above. No unit will be disbanded leaving gaps in the Soviet lines.

Below is a crude flow chart. Any feedback will be greatly appreciated, especially the sequence logic as well as the percentages:






Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"


(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 101
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/15/2019 5:01:04 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 447
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
The political events look really interesting. Suggest one for NATO as well; not all members were equally enthusiastic.

Cheers

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 102
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/16/2019 2:04:40 PM   
mussey


Posts: 639
Joined: 12/2/2006
From: Cleve-Land
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: cathar1244

The political events look really interesting. Suggest one for NATO as well; not all members were equally enthusiastic.

Cheers


With the introduction of WP paramilitary, NATO will need to use more force to occupy a city. Another thought to make it more interesting is if I set the radius x1 hex of an occupied city, thus NATO doesn't need to actually take the city, just a surrounding hex. But balance this by having a 2-turn delay so that WP has a turn or two to counter-attack.

As for NATO, thus far:
- Norway: a chance a liberal government does not invite NATO forces into country, with another smaller chance it will become neutral.
- France: a chance it will not join NATO.
- Italy: a chance it will quit NATO.

Are there any others for NATO that are plausible?

_____________________________

Col. Mussbu

The long arm of the law - "The King of Battle"


(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 103
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/16/2019 3:08:09 PM   
cathar1244

 

Posts: 447
Joined: 9/5/2009
Status: offline
quote:

Are there any others for NATO that are plausible?


Canada perhaps. PM Trudeau (senior) got up to arbitrary and uncoordinated changes to the Canadian brigade structure in the 1960s. The result was that the Canadian brigade got so weakened that British Army of the Rhine had no suitable mission for it in the terrain the Brits were tasked with defending.

That is how the Canadians ended up in SW Germany, how NATO ended up feeling shorted in north Germany, and how the Second Armored Division got tasked with sending BRIGADE 75 as a reinforcement that eventually became Second Armored Divison - Forward, based in ... you guessed it ... north Germany (Garlstedt).

I think all the smaller members had potential to be shaky. A situation like the one D wargamed with the invasion of Austria may have offered loopholes for countries to "sit it out". I've also wondered what would have happened if the Soviets had stage managed an incident between the two German armies, and then let the DDR army invade Germany while warning the rest of NATO that it was a purely German affair and any interference would result in the use of nuclear weapons ... high risk but perhaps high reward as well.

Cheers

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 104
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/17/2019 7:40:01 AM   
StuccoFresco

 

Posts: 191
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Italy
Status: offline
France not partecipating doesn't seem likely to me, honestly. Also, it would damage NATO side too much in case of unfortunate roll.

(in reply to cathar1244)
Post #: 105
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/23/2019 1:34:00 PM   
Hellen_slith


Posts: 287
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
I believe this is called the KIEL canal.

SUEZ canal is in, like, California.






Attachment (1)

(in reply to StuccoFresco)
Post #: 106
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/23/2019 1:46:12 PM   
btd64


Posts: 5739
Joined: 1/23/2010
From: Mass. USA. now in OHIO
Status: offline
Suez canal is the name of the terrain type....GP

_____________________________

Intel i7 3.4GHz,8GB Ram,1920x1080 rez

AKA General Patton

WPO,WITP,WITPAE-Mod Designer/Tester
DW Series-Beta Tester
TOAW4-Alpha/Beta Tester

I don't like paying for the same real estate twice..Gen. George S. Patton

(in reply to Hellen_slith)
Post #: 107
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/23/2019 2:51:01 PM   
Hellen_slith


Posts: 287
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: btd64

Suez canal is the name of the terrain type....GP


Other "canals" have simply terrain type, "canal". Why not these? Is there some special attribute to "Suez Canal" hexes that is different?

It just kills a bit of the immersion factor for me when the Suez Canal gets moved. :)

(in reply to btd64)
Post #: 108
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/23/2019 3:51:23 PM   
Hellen_slith


Posts: 287
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline
Some observations from my and Larry's ongoing game (now in NATO turn 13...almost 2/3 done already!)

RE: Sweden. IIRC, there are quite a few objective point values there in Sweden that are assigned to Pact from the start. Just guessing, but are those points there to offset any NATO objective point values that arose from the addition of Norway and the new northern sector of the map?
If so, I think Pact is overbalanced. Perhaps those values are an artifact of map addition, but I would suggest looking at those values (for both NATO in Norway, and Pact in Sweden) to make sure that NATO is not losing too much in the exchange. Just from a glance, it seems to favor Pact, esp. if Sweden is considered "off limits".

RE potential "shock and awe" effects for both NATO and Pact: there has been a lot of discussion about those effects and how they should or might play out. Speaking as a purist, I would like to see this scene stick as much to the original boardgame as much as possible while you are revising the orbat. The Pact's shock and surrender effects can be tweaked later if need be if NATO is truly overpowered.

I don't think they are. In fact, I continue to maintain that NATO already has a hard enough time of it in the original, and by adding more map (more territory to defend for NATO) as well as massively more Pact forces (w/ all the firepower they have at their disposal from the new SSR districts) it is NATO that needs more Irregulars, not Pact. There are just as many (if not more) shock effects that Pact can cause. Will you be adding Irregulars for NATO to help them defend those hexes, too? If not, then I think the game will be tipped even farther toward Pact victories.

Well, that's my two cents!! Also, I'm sure you've seen these, but if not, they are fascinating reads, offering insight into the original designs and rationale for "The Next War" boardgame. Much of the discussion will seem dated, but there are tidbits buried in these articles that have helped my push with NATO so well into the Pact backfield. Interesting to see how some of their comments about strategies and tactics are still applicable to fire and movement in TOAW.

Link to articles about The Next War boardgame: "Moves" magazines volumes 41 and 42 at archive.org is

https://archive.org/stream/Moves39/Moves%2041#mode/2up

the part two of the article talks more about strategy and tactices, that is in issue number 42
Ok, well, back to the board!!

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 109
RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers ne... - 5/23/2019 5:50:54 PM   
Hellen_slith


Posts: 287
Joined: 10/10/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: mussey
Any feedback will be greatly appreciated, especially the sequence logic as well as the percentages:



Not sure of the logic, but it looks very close to the original possibilities. I like that "if units will not move at first" there is chance they WILL activate a few turns later. Maybe an "on going" dice roll every turn, to see if garrisoned units activate later?

Seems pretty complicated to me. Maybe roll out Beta 2 under current logic, with only the new orbat changes, then tweak the logic after a few tests of that? :) that Beta 2, that is? :)

A guy can hope. :)

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 110
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> Mods and Scenarios >> RE: Next War 1979 - Expanded (Beta 1.0) play testers needed Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4]
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

0.145