Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Development

 
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 >> Development Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Development - 1/5/2016 5:55:49 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
Any further development likely ?

_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon
Post #: 1
RE: Development - 1/12/2016 5:09:21 PM   
DonCzirr


Posts: 461
Joined: 10/3/2014
Status: offline
I still have this installed on my PC and would like to finish at some point.

But I think these guys have moved onto greener pastures?

It's a shame too as they came so close.

Anyone know what they're up to?



_____________________________

Man schlägt jemanden mit der Faust und nicht mit gespreizten Fingern !

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100032812112896

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 2
RE: Development - 4/5/2016 11:20:30 PM   
Mantis


Posts: 127
Joined: 9/10/2000
From: Edmonton, Canada
Status: offline
I agree.

The 'perfect' grand strategic WWII game does not exist. But I believe this to be the closest anyone has ever come. I'd obviously love to see further development, but as that's probably not realistic my dream is for one last patch, addressing but a single problem. Correcting the save game/forces maint. cost bug. If this was fixed, at least you could save a game and reload it. (The way it is now, it's not even worth continuing if you are Germany or Russia etc).

As it stands now, when I play I have to be committed to leaving my PC on for the 3 weeks it might take me to finish a game. (Don't get me started on game or PC crashes during that time...)

What would be great is if we could do a mini kickstarter kind of thing and raise enough $ to make a quick patch a viable proposition, so that it would at least be productive for them to consider doing the work. Barring that, would anyone in the community have the knowledge to advise on whether modding would be possible?

I'd hate to see this game just fade away. TOAW (The Operational Art of War) had a rabid fanbase that just would not let that game die. It would be great if there was enough interest for us to move (somewhat) forward. (Or at the very least fix the one issue so the game can be considered 'reload-able').

< Message edited by Mantis -- 4/13/2016 10:39:40 PM >

(in reply to DonCzirr)
Post #: 3
RE: Development - 4/13/2016 3:42:34 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mantis

What would be great is if we could do a mini kickstarter kind of thing and raise enough $ to make a quick patch a viable proposition, so that it would at least be productive for them to consider doing the work. Barring that, would anyone in the community have the knowledge to advise on whether modding would be possible?


It seemed to be that many of the problems came with each succeeding patch after v1.01, as though the developer seemed to have lost the expertise to effectively work on the game. The game is easily modded and many of the problems can be fixed, or moderated, by small text modifications to the data files (mainly consts.ini files), or use of the in-game F12 feature to correct sudden changes in national PP levels. .

Much of this is discussed in the earlier forum discussion. One of the significant errors that came into the game was the failure to apply terrain effects to the combat resolution odds, this can be fixed with additions to the national consts.ini files.

Happy to discuss any mini mods which may help, but it does need manual changes to text in the game data files, I am no expert, but once you see how the various game effects are structured it is not difficult, just small text changes using Windows 'Notepad', or 'Excel'.

I am basing this on v1.05, which has the most features, as STEAM v1.06 introduced more errors ('Armour in City' effects), for which there is only a partial fix.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 4/13/2016 3:53:06 PM >


_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to Mantis)
Post #: 4
RE: Development - 4/13/2016 10:48:53 PM   
Mantis


Posts: 127
Joined: 9/10/2000
From: Edmonton, Canada
Status: offline
Not able to reply in detail at the moment (cooking a turkey dinner for the family), but wanted to mention the Steam release.

I was having problems with the Matrix versions of ToF prior to (and including) 1.05. I would get a crash, after which NONE of the recent saves would load. If I went back a few turns, I could get the game to load, but it would only progress to the same turn in which the crash occurred, and then it would crash again... I played a couple hundred hours and never got a single game to completion, ever.

When the Steam release came out, I never had the issue again, which was very heartening. But then discovering why I was going broke every time I reloaded a game became the next deal breaker.

As mentioned, I won't have much time to go into details at this point, but I would love any info on the best mods to use to correct all these issues, links to any relevant forum threads, as well as discussing anything I might be able to do to help going forward.

< Message edited by Mantis -- 4/13/2016 10:51:09 PM >

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 5
RE: Development - 7/11/2016 5:25:18 PM   
DonCzirr


Posts: 461
Joined: 10/3/2014
Status: offline
I found this comment from Iain interesting on the Slitherine FOG forum:


"The development team for FoG unfortunately left 4 years ago when Newrosoft took over and wrote the game from scratch. There is no support for the old version and hasn't been for 4 years. The only way FoG in its current form can continue is with Newrosoft. The version has been there for some time for..."


Given that there is significant amount of users that feel that TOF was very close to becoming "The" Strategic Game for WWII, I wonder if thought would be given to doing the same here - having another Developer pick up where Wasteland left off. Fix the remaining bugs / put in a few more features and re-release with some additional scenarios etc ....

How do such things come about I wonder?

Petition from the players? Internal initiative within Slitherine? Some Dev coming along with a proposal to do the work ?








_____________________________

Man schlägt jemanden mit der Faust und nicht mit gespreizten Fingern !

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100032812112896

(in reply to Mantis)
Post #: 6
RE: Development - 7/14/2016 10:53:14 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
The potential is certainly in the game, as even in its present condition it can give a good game.

ToF is open to modification and many of the bugs/design issues can be overcome with fixes and tweaks, but the huge failure is the Editor, if only that was more effective and didn't introduce more bugs than it fixes. With a working editor this game could be the greatest.

The CTDs at start-up have been reduced and, on one of my systems eliminated, by using a reduced 'units images' pack. The stock images weigh-in at 90mbs, with a reduced set at 30mbs the CTDs at start-up in Windows 10 stopped. This doesn't mean losing anything, as the stock images can be improved and many listed images are not required, as the countries involved will never get to the tech levels some of the images represent and can default to the basic image for each type of unit and tech level if necessarily.

Less can be more, with fewer, but better quality images




This unit image goes with a Small Harbour mod, but illustrates that there are some good colour images available, but I am travelling right now and don't have access to all my files, more later.

GWGardner found that reducing the number of scenarios in the game folder improves stability on game start, by archiving Tutorials and scenarios you are not using, which will further reduce the amount of data the game has to load on start and seems to resolve the CTDs at start with some systems. It certainly helped with my Windows 7 laptop.

Most of the serious issues are fixable, but it takes work and constant adjustment to keep the game on line. I suspect that many problems lay in scenario design and the triggering of 'events', which cause the game to crash. There is a huge amount of work in checking events and game balance issues, which needs extensive game testing and is no easy task.

If this could be turned over to somebody, or group, that had the skills, this game could fly. However, it would be like 'World in Flames', there would be little to gain and it would have to be a labour of love, because the monetary reward would be negligible.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 7/14/2016 12:09:42 PM >


_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to DonCzirr)
Post #: 7
RE: Development - 7/14/2016 11:36:56 PM   
DonCzirr


Posts: 461
Joined: 10/3/2014
Status: offline


"If this could be turned over to somebody, or group, that had the skills, this game could fly. However, it would be like 'World in Flames', there would be little to gain and it would have to be a labour of love, because the monetary reward would be negligible".


Well - I was thinking that with a bit of polish, new scenarios and marketing - they may draw some of the disappointed HOI 4 crowd.


But then again - they (Slitherine) seem to be all about SC 3 these days - which may turn out to be good.

Based on past history though (SC2), I liked the TOF system quite a bit more.


Who knows - maybe the Slitherine umbrella is big enough for 2 grand strategy WW2 games (or 3 if you count CEAW)





_____________________________

Man schlägt jemanden mit der Faust und nicht mit gespreizten Fingern !

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100032812112896

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 8
RE: Development - 7/15/2016 6:00:46 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DonCzirr

"If this could be turned over to somebody, or group, that had the skills, this game could fly. However, it would be like 'World in Flames', there would be little to gain and it would have to be a labour of love, because the monetary reward would be negligible".


Well - I was thinking that with a bit of polish, new scenarios and marketing - they may draw some of the disappointed HOI 4 crowd.


But then again - they (Slitherine) seem to be all about SC 3 these days - which may turn out to be good.

Based on past history though (SC2), I liked the TOF system quite a bit more.


Who knows - maybe the Slitherine umbrella is big enough for 2 grand strategy WW2 games (or 3 if you count CEAW)



Unfortunately, I think the game needs more than a bit of polish, there are hidden bugs which come out in the scenarios, for instance I have a situation where I suspect the AI controlled US is reaching the point of declaring war, whenever the turn reaches the US, the game crashes. I think it is something to do with the triggering of a DOW 'event' in this scenario and is a problem with the scenario design, I can stop the crash happening by using F12, reducing the US diplomatic points so that there can be no US DOW. Not ideal, it keeps the game going, but the scenarios need a serious overhaul.

The developers created a great game system, but I am not sure that they had the resources, or experience to make the most of the game capabilities.

The polish can be in the many mods already produced, which can transform the 'look' of the game, as noted in the previous post, images can be improved and the game look really good.






Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 7/15/2016 6:04:26 PM >


_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to DonCzirr)
Post #: 9
RE: Development - 7/15/2016 6:58:23 PM   
DonCzirr


Posts: 461
Joined: 10/3/2014
Status: offline
I really never had an issue with the way the game looked even without mods - the mods for me just make it that much better.

The polish I meant (perhaps a bad word) was to fix some of the internal features / editor etc)


As you said - great core system - needs some fixing.

I think a dynamic publisher and a capable Dev Team (picking up the reins) could re-package it / expand it and get it out on STEAM for wider consumption. On STEAM - perhaps intro as a expansion to the original and then the purchase / install of the expansion drives the fixes and enhancements for the core product already on STEAM.


Just idle thoughts though - Slitherine are not going to do this - SC3 is the favored child atm and they dropped this (TOF) hard even when Doom Trader was around it seems.

_____________________________

Man schlägt jemanden mit der Faust und nicht mit gespreizten Fingern !

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100032812112896

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 10
RE: Development - 7/15/2016 8:54:57 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: DonCzirr

I really never had an issue with the way the game looked even without mods - the mods for me just make it that much better.

The polish I meant (perhaps a bad word) was to fix some of the internal features / editor etc)


As you said - great core system - needs some fixing.

I think a dynamic publisher and a capable Dev Team (picking up the reins) could re-package it / expand it and get it out on STEAM for wider consumption. On STEAM - perhaps intro as a expansion to the original and then the purchase / install of the expansion drives the fixes and enhancements for the core product already on STEAM.


Just idle thoughts though - Slitherine are not going to do this - SC3 is the favored child atm and they dropped this (TOF) hard even when Doom Trader was around it seems.


I would also like to see the same treatment of the game, but so far the updates have introduced as many problems as they solve and even the STEAM version (v1.06) has added more errors, still we live in hope.

_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to DonCzirr)
Post #: 11
RE: Development - 7/21/2016 9:14:30 PM   
gwgardner

 

Posts: 5938
Joined: 4/7/2006
Status: offline
The editor. You have it right, there. IF the editor was user-friendly ....

Wastelands a couple of years ago stated that ToF would be revised with a new engine - well that's what I recall from my correspondence - but they have their hands full with Planar Conquest, no only on PC but mobiles. My wish is that they would be so successful with that, that they would indeed make an updated ToF a labor of love.

[By the way, I'm not at all disappointed in HOI4. It's very good in my opinion, if played 'realistically.' The UI and combat systems are excellent. The AI needs work.]

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 12
RE: Development - 7/21/2016 10:49:44 PM   
DonCzirr


Posts: 461
Joined: 10/3/2014
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gwgardner

The editor. You have it right, there. IF the editor was user-friendly ....

Wastelands a couple of years ago stated that ToF would be revised with a new engine - well that's what I recall from my correspondence - but they have their hands full with Planar Conquest, no only on PC but mobiles. My wish is that they would be so successful with that, that they would indeed make an updated ToF a labor of love.

[By the way, I'm not at all disappointed in HOI4. It's very good in my opinion, if played 'realistically.' The UI and combat systems are excellent. The AI needs work.]



I guess you can't blame them - Planar is the first title where they have a positive review rating on Steam so I guess they are making some money there.

Hopefully they make enough for a modest cushion and return to that labor of love you mentioned above.

_____________________________

Man schlägt jemanden mit der Faust und nicht mit gespreizten Fingern !

https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100032812112896

(in reply to gwgardner)
Post #: 13
RE: Development - 7/22/2016 11:17:07 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
I really hope that something happens, because there is so much potential, just to let it fade away.

_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to DonCzirr)
Post #: 14
RE: Development - 12/8/2016 2:52:57 PM   
Razz1


Posts: 2555
Joined: 10/21/2007
From: CaLiForNia
Status: offline
Most stable version is 1.03.

That version has no bugs. Every version after that included bugs that were not fixed. Then team broke up.

This is much better than SC3.

I would gladly join the team to make this the greatest game ever.

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 15
RE: Development - 12/10/2016 2:50:42 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
I am using v1.05 as it has the latest additions, such as the air superiority overlay.

No version since v1.01 has applied the terrain combat odds modifiers, but this can be fixed by moving the text for these modifiers into each country_consts.ini file.

Taken with a series of text modifications a good game can be had, which for me have been based on the 'Fall Gelb' scenario.

I am using 'Windows 10' and, I don't know of it is just my system, but by reducing the number of images in the units_images folder by half and taking out scenario folders I never use, it has practically eliminated the CTDs on start. Reducing the amount of data that the game has to load seems to help.

I have also taken the opportunity to use a new set of colour images to replace the badly cropped B+W images in the stock game.

I still get CTDs during the game, which I think are caused by conflicts in scenario design, but I save often and can usually restore the game.

I have been watching the SC3 forum and I wish the game every success, but TOF works on a better scale and overcomes the lack of stacking by unit split/merge (modded to be easier) and unit exchange, using the SHIFT key.

One SC3 hex is covered by 4 TOF hexes, so in the area covered by one SC3 unit, TOF displays 4, which can represent an army of 4 corps of different types, allowing a real combined arms strategy.

For all its quirks, I think TOF has a better representation of naval action, although there is still room for mods to make it better.



_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to Razz1)
Post #: 16
RE: Development - 12/14/2016 11:26:06 AM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
Here is a Fall Gelb scenario with consts.ini files text modified for a more realistic performance by each nation showing the fall of the Netherlands in turn 1 :







This is an early start 'Fall Gelb', Turn One - 1st January 1940, with historical evidence that Hitler did order the Western Offensive to begin in January 1940, among many dates which were cancelled for one reason, or another.

The German airborne division is modded to be available immediately, rather than waiting for the scenario 'event' which is attached to the capture of the Belgian fortresses. The airborne unit is used in the capture of Rotterdam, which is historical. The Dutch air unit in Amsterdam is exposed by air recon and then destroyed by airfield attack, which is also historical. Amsterdam is taken by a fast moving armoured force. Groningen is taken by conventional attack and the Netherlands is defeated in one turn, which matches the historical record.

The weather is bad in January, rain and snow, so it can take two turns to dispose if Holland, but with more realistic national command and control settings avoiding the tendency for the game to bog down in a more WW1 style. The Blitzkrieg works well against the Western Allies as there is no strategic depth to allow supply difficulties to take effect.

It will be different in the East where, although command and control mods will give the Axis an early advantage, rail repair modded to be slower will bring supply problems after the first major advances.

It takes a lot of work in editing and managing the game against the bugs hidden in scenario design, but the F12 key allows access to fix PP problems and move counties in and out of AI control, still leaving a good game to be had.


Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 12/14/2016 11:47:35 AM >


_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 17
RE: Development - 12/14/2016 12:53:57 PM   
Ostwindflak


Posts: 668
Joined: 1/23/2014
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
How does this compare to the other game this company did, Strategic War in Europe? I have that one and honestly, it stinks something awful. It was one of the worst purchases I ever made.

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 18
RE: Development - 12/14/2016 1:24:01 PM   
Nimrod 9th


Posts: 138
Joined: 9/28/2012
From: Central MO
Status: offline
Same game just more of it. Same basic game play ... production ... moving units ... combat ... etc. Just more units, bigger map, more turns, etc. I disagree with SWiE "stinks something awful." It only stinks a little. I still find myself going back and playing it. My two favorite scens are German in 1941 game and Allies in 1943 game. I do agree it isn't "finished." The developer needed another patch or two. Doesn't have USSR production right (close but not there) and in a PBEM game discovered a Axis Norway convoy issue. Developer gave up too early. Oh, the AI in SWiE is a little better. I haven't played ToF much but when I do the AI doesn't seem to put up much of a fight. SWiE AI isn't great but seems a little better than ToF. Please keep in mind all of my comments and $1US won't buy you a cup of Star Bucks coffee.

(in reply to Ostwindflak)
Post #: 19
RE: Development - 12/14/2016 2:19:19 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
Deleted


< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 12/14/2016 2:34:38 PM >


_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to Ostwindflak)
Post #: 20
RE: Development - 12/14/2016 2:42:22 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ostwindflak

How does this compare to the other game this company did, Strategic War in Europe? I have that one and honestly, it stinks something awful. It was one of the worst purchases I ever made.


I haven't used SWiE, but it looks the same as ToF in a different scale and Wastelands have not been good at supporting these games.

I prefer the scale of ToF, which allows some flexibility, without being over complicated with too many units.

Vanilla ToF has many faults, but with modding most of these can be eliminated, or at least managed.

I am using the Fall Gelb scenario as a basis, because during the early war period alternatives were possible. After 1942/43 the end is predictable, just shovelling units around into an inevitable finale.

The AI is not good in attack, so that means playing as Axis in those early years, but how bad does the AI have to be to represent the Allies and Soviets of that period.

As part of the text modding, I have categorised nations by a command rating and applied mods to suit. This produces something nearer to the Blitzkrieg historical situation, avoiding a WW1 slug-fest, but even then the AI can be smarter than the real Allies.

The game needs constant attention and adjustments to keep on course, for instance whenever the US tries to enter the game it crashes. The fix is to use F12 to keep the US diplomatic points low, or take over manually, as the most the US can do at this stage is provide economic support to the Western Allies and the Soviets. This can be replicated by transferring PPs in F12.

There is a lot more, but with these reservations I can get a good game, sometimes a very good game.

I have reduced the number of images in the units_images pack from over 1000, to less than 700 and substituted colour where possible. I have removed many of the scenario folders which I don't use. All this reduces the amount of data that the game has to load on start, which has stopped the CTDs on start.

The appearance of the game has also been modded, but that is a matter of personal taste and I prefer the board-game 'look'

I am using Windows 10 and by gently starting the game, I have very few CTDs.

< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 12/14/2016 4:57:40 PM >


_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to Ostwindflak)
Post #: 21
RE: Development - 12/14/2016 3:12:10 PM   
Ostwindflak


Posts: 668
Joined: 1/23/2014
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
Thanks for the responses guys. I like the looks of the modded game you have going. My experience with SWiE makes me leery or anything else put out by Wasteland. This of course is just my opinion and I realize many people like their games. I honestly wanted to like SWiE because it has some neat concepts. After many hours with it learning the game, I just couldn't like it enough to enjoy it sadly.

My biggest complaint is the whole time table of the game seems way off. From production times and technology research time to how much time passes each turn, it feels like the games ends way before you have fun in a campaign. I guess to me it feels like the timetable is rushing you through the game.

Anyway I thought the screen shots of this looked nice and had contemplated maybe giving this a go after mods.

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 22
RE: Development - 12/14/2016 4:31:01 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Ostwindflak

Thanks for the responses guys. I like the looks of the modded game you have going. My experience with SWiE makes me leery or anything else put out by Wasteland. This of course is just my opinion and I realize many people like their games. I honestly wanted to like SWiE because it has some neat concepts. After many hours with it learning the game, I just couldn't like it enough to enjoy it sadly.

My biggest complaint is the whole time table of the game seems way off. From production times and technology research time to how much time passes each turn, it feels like the games ends way before you have fun in a campaign. I guess to me it feels like the timetable is rushing you through the game.

Anyway I thought the screen shots of this looked nice and had contemplated maybe giving this a go after mods.


However good 'Wastelands' may have been in game design and ToF does have some good ideas, I am not sure how good they, or any other developer is on WW2 economics and production. At least the game contains the tools to adjust and experiment, not the editor, which is very poor, but in the ease that game files can be adjusted.

The most important feature here is, as you mentioned, to have fun and that doesn't mean you have to have an 'I win' key, that can be set in preferences any time. The object is to get a game which represents the realities of the historical situation as much as is possible.

The way I am looking at production is from a Supreme Command perspective, not interested in the nuts and bolts of production, someone else is doing that. Men are being trained, designers are working on new tanks and planes, as supreme command you call off what you want.

For example the Hurricane fighter was put into production before any orders were made, in anticipation that there would be a need. All through the war equipment was being designed, some was never used, men were being trained waiting to be allocated. So when you call for an armoured division to be activated, the game time is how long it takes to shake out a unit already available, but working up for active service.

The AI will try and keep up the game pace, but if you use house rules you can keep a more realistic pace. Amphibious Operations take months to prepare and you can have rules for that, the AI will drop a landing in any time, so you have to be ready.

Keep all cities in range of an airdrop, naval landing, or partisan attack garrisoned with low tech infantry divisions, which is quite realistic.

Most things can be changed in text files, production can be slowed down if you wish, I sometimes speed up, I have introduced the Italian CV 'Aquila' at minimal cost and time on the grounds that construction started well before the war.

Here is the readme for this mini mod:

.........................................................

Narrative:

During the 1938 Munich crisis Mussolini realises that Hitler will inevitably have a war sooner, or later. Hitler expects to contain any hostilities by continuing to diplomatically outmanoeuvre the democracies, but Mussolini fears that Britain will become involved. There will be great opportunities for Italy from a successful conclusion of a war and Italy must be involved to reap the benefits. However, if Hitler's diplomacy fails, a war with Britain will involve confronting the RN Mediterranean Fleet, which will include carriers. Italy begins work on CV 'Aquila', as an insurance policy against any future major war, good decision. It is expected that the experience gained in building and operating this ship will enable the development of fleet carriers that will permit the Regia Marina to project operations beyond the Mediterranean, to threaten the French Atlantic coast and the RN in its home bases, thereby heading off the vulnerability of the homeland's extensive coastline. Il Duce, in discussion with the Fuehrer, believes that war with not be provoked before 1945, as neither state will be fully ready before that time. However, as an essential first step into naval aviation, the 'Aquila' is be given priority to be operational by late 1941. (Turn 60-70 ‘Fall Gelb’ scenario)


Intent: Set Italian CV cost at 20 PPs in 'consts.ini' file to activate ship (normally 200PP), reduce Italian CV build time, to be available next turn, assuming build commenced immediately after 1938 Munich Conference. This assumes that most of the cost has been expended before the war starts.

Application: in new game - data/scenarios/1940 Fall Gelb/consts_Italy
or, Turn 60-70 in running ‘Fall Gelb’ game - documents/My Games/Time of Fury/game save name/consts_Italy

Add (text change)
[CostOfNavalUnit]
UnitType40 = 20 ....... reset PP cost
UnitType41 = 150
UnitType42 = 70
UnitType43 = 30

[UnitsBuildTime]
UnitType0 = 4
UnitType1 = 10
UnitType2 = 9
UnitType3 = 14
UnitType4 = 8
UnitType5 = 18
UnitType6 = 8
UnitType20 = 6
UnitType21 = 8
UnitType22 = 10
UnitType40 = 1 ........ reset build time
UnitType41 = 96
UnitType42 = 48
UnitType43 = 24
UpgradeCostModifier = 2.0

In-Game Procedure
After applying the above changes, when you want to activate CV 'Aquila', go to unit build during the Italian turn, purchase a CV for 20PP and it should be available next turn, to re-name as you wish.

Note 1: Unit type 40 = CV

Note 2: All files for modification have to be set with a security setting to allow edit and save by your user account

.............................................

With two text changes you can have an Italian carrier in the Med, it can be argued that the Italians could never have operated a carrier, but with enough priority on the project, maybe. I don't want to play the same game over and over, ground hog day, but reasonable what-ifs open up the game.

The appearance of the game can be changed, which is what you are seeing in the screen-shots, some which is not the stock graphics. There is a lot of work in managing the game to get the best out of it.

I can read the history books as well as anyone and the object is to have fun, but realistically as possible, ToF allows this to happen.


< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 12/14/2016 6:18:15 PM >


_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to Ostwindflak)
Post #: 23
RE: Development - 12/14/2016 4:43:37 PM   
Rasputitsa


Posts: 2791
Joined: 6/30/2001
From: Bedfordshire UK
Status: offline
Here is the readme for 'Fall Gelb' starting in January 1940, the game doesn't have to run on rails, there are realistic alternatives to be had.

Readme:

Initially Hitler outlined his requirements for an attack against the Western Allies in ‘Fuehrer Directive No. 6’, dated 9th October 1939 :


………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………
The Supreme Commander of the Armed Forces.

Berlin. 9th October, 1939. 8 copies


Directive No. 6 For The Conduct of the War

1. Should it become evident in the near future that England, and, under her influence, France also, are not disposed to bring the war to an end, I have decided, without further loss of time, to go over to the offensive.

2. Any further delay will not only entail the end of Belgian and perhaps of Dutch neutrality, to the advantage of the Allies; it will also increasingly strengthen the military power of the enemy, reduce the confidence of neutral nations in Germany's final victory, and make it more difficult to bring Italy into the war on our side as a full ally.

3. I therefore issue the following orders for the further conduct of military operations:

(a) An offensive will be planned on the northern flank of the Western front, through Luxembourg, Belgium, and Holland. This offensive must be launched at the earliest possible moment and in greatest possible strength.

(b) The purpose of this offensive will be to defeat as much as possible of the French Army and of the forces of the Allies fighting on their side, and at the same time to win as much territory as possible in Holland, Belgium, and Northern France, to serve as a base for the successful prosecution of the air and sea war against England and as a wide protective area for the economically vital Ruhr Basin.

(c) The time of the attack will depend upon the readiness for action of the armoured and motorised units involved. These units are to be made ready with all speed. It will depend also upon the weather conditions obtaining and foreseeable at the time.

4. The Air Force will prevent attacks by the Anglo-French Air Forces on our Army and will give all necessary direct support to its advance. It is also important to prevent the establishment of Anglo-French air bases and the landing of British forces in Belgium and Holland.

5. The Navy will do everything possible, while this offensive is in progress, to afford direct or indirect support to the operations of the Army and the Air Force.

6. Apart from these preparations for the beginning of the offensive in the west according to plan, the Army and Air Force must be ready, at all times, in increasing strength, to meet an Anglo-French invasion of Belgium, immediately and as far forward as possible on Belgian soil, and to occupy the largest possible area of Holland in the direction of the west coast.

7. These preparations will be camouflaged in such a way that they appear merely to be precautionary measures made necessary by the threatening increase in the strength of the French and English forces on the frontiers between France and Luxembourg and Belgium.

8. I request Commanders in Chief to submit to me their detailed plans based on this Directive at the earliest moment and to keep me constantly informed of progress through the High Command of the Armed Forces.


Adolf Hitler.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………




The strategic problem was to attack, avoiding the fortifications of the Maginot Line, and to organise an advance through the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg to the greatest advantage. It was recognised that the attack would predictably have to be into Northern France, but how to achieve a decisive result. Hitler was anxious to start the offensive as soon as possible, not withstanding the winter weather, this is clearly stated in the Directive.

It should be noted that the intent of this directive is not the destruction of France, but merely to win enough territory to provide bases to attack Britain and to ensure protection for the Ruhr industrial area.

10 days after the issue of this directive, General Franz Halder produced the first ‘Deployment Directive’ to turn the Fuehrer’s requirements into an operational plan, however, Hitler was not impressed as it was judged to be too conservative and merely a re-run of the failed 1914 plan, which itself was an adaption of von Schlieffen’s 1906 theoretical wargame exercise.

The first Deployment Directive was dismissed by Hitler as ‘the ideas of a military cadet’ and to concentrate minds, announced that the invasion should start on the 12th November 1939.

Halder delivered the Second Deployment Directive on the 29th October, which shifted the weight of the attack further into the Army Group B Northern front, with even less emphasis on the AGrpA Ardennes axis. However Hitler was still dissatisfied, as the plan did not promise a decisive result and now he began to show interest in the Ardennes region as a decisive attack route.

Against the fears and complaints of unreadiness from his generals, Hitler was still insisting on an early attack. However, the start date of a proposed Western offensive was postponed 28 times, well into 1940, as there was no agreed plan and there were concerns over weather and resources.

However, on the 10th January 1940 Hitler received a weather forecast of two weeks clear weather, which would start in 5 days’ time, this was the opportunity that he had been waiting for and he immediately gave orders that the offensive would start on 12th January 1940.

The only plan available was the second Deployment Directive, which although it lacked finesse, as an unimaginative drive through Belgium, Luxembourg, into Northern France, if launched at this time of year would catch the Allies by surprise and unprepared. The Netherlands had been included in the plan, as Goering insisted on access to aerodromes for a campaign against Britain and also to avoid the Netherlands being used by the Allies, as a base to attack the flank of the German offensive.

This much is history, but on the same day that Hitler gave the order for the Western offensive, two Luftwaffe officers, on a flight from Munster to Cologne, made an unexpected landing at Vucht in Belgian territory, carrying documents that contained information on the planned offensive.

Jodel’s diary entry of the 12th January reflected the enormity of the event – ‘if the enemy is in possession of all the files, situation catastrophic’ – and the offensive was cancelled.

‘Fall Gelb Mod’, commencing in January 1940, is a viable what-if and it would have become historical fact, but for the miss-directed flight of Major Helmuth Reinberger and his incompetent pilot, reserve officer Major Erich Hoenmanns.

END


< Message edited by Rasputitsa -- 12/14/2016 5:10:23 PM >


_____________________________

"In politics stupidity is not a handicap" - Napoleon

“A people which is able to say everything becomes able to do everything” - Napoleon

“Among those who dislike oppression are many who like to oppress" - Napoleon

(in reply to Rasputitsa)
Post #: 24
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Time of Fury >> Development 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

0.539