Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available

 
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] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/20/2017 5:11:11 PM   
Benedict151

 

Posts: 596
Joined: 3/4/2016
Status: offline
EDIT - Strategic Command v1.01 has now been officially released and it replaces the patch. The official release also fixes a couple of issues found in the beta patch (e.g. units disappearing when being 'swapped')


Hello everyone
The first patch for Strategic Command is now available as beta version
I'm afraid that it does not include PBEM which is not quite ready but we didn't want to delay the many improvements and fixes that Hubert and Bill have made any longer. The full change list is below
You will note that several of the changes made have been as a result of your suggestions so please do keep them coming (as of course further updates are planned)

Rest assured that we are continuing on PBEM as our top priority and at the risk of jinxing Hubert its now close (I saw the lobby working this morning) and we hope it will not take much longer. Thank for your patience and understanding

To download the v101 beta please go the Strategic Command Public Beta forum (which should now be open for all forum members) and view this post 'How to download the v1.01 Beta update'. Be aware that it is a beta patch so there may be the odd unexpected issue

We'd appreciate it if you could post any feedback or reports of issues with v1.01 patch on the beta forum rather than on this main forum

Regards
Ben Wilkins

STATEGIC COMMAND v1.01 CHANGE LIST

- fixed a black band display error for very wide screen display setups when viewing the world map in game.
- fixed AI retreat logic for air units when set to GUARD and HOLD in position.
- fixed an AI friendly major controlled units error that had the AI moving units not under its control on your turn.
- fixed a Reports and War Map resource listing that was incorrect as it was not including Major Cities and Major Capitals in the totals.
- fixed a password storage and retrieval error that was causing some issues with Hotseat games when using the 'password' option.
- fixed a rare disappearing Capitals error.
- fixed a Primary and Secondary supply issue for situations such as when Italy is surrendered and then subsequently liberated. An occupier would gain the Primary and Secondary supply centers of Italy once Italy had surrendered, but it would then subsequently automatically lose them once Italy is liberated. This is no longer the case and an occupier would have to physically lose those locations after an Italian liberation to permanently lose them as supply locations.
- fixed several 'on_left_button_down' errors related to unit selection and movement.
- fixed an 'animate_sea_transport' error.
- fixed an ESC key error that would cause some sub windows to CTD.
- fixed a returning capital error where the re-captured capital had a low supply causing a drop in strength in connected resource calculations.
- fixed a UNIT script error that was not having some unit events trigger when the AI was controlling friendly majors on your turn.
- any unit that is using Cruise mode will no longer find or be stopped by a Sub in Silent mode, including Destroyers.
- subs that are completely surrounded now have a chance to dive and retreat but in this case may still end their dive next to an enemy unit if no other escape option is possible for it.
- ANNEXATION events now transform the former Capitals, Primary Supply Centers and Industrial Centers to Secondary Supply Centers only.

CAMPAIGNS (AI)
- fixed a UK build up of units in Canada error that did not see them transported back to the UK home island after a capital move to Toronto, and when the UK home island had been subsequently liberated.

CAMPAIGNS
- Reduced experience gains from Convoy Raiding by air units and surface vessels from 0.2 to 0.1 per raid.
- Increased experience gains for all land units from all infantry (Garrison -> Pill Box/Shock Army; Reconnaissance -> Heavy Tanks), all air units, and for all naval units (Dreadnoughts -> Motor Torpedo Boat) for an Attack (Defending Unit) and Attack Victory (Defender Destroyed) from 0.1 to 0.15.
- Soviet Shock Army’s Retreat chances set to match that of a normal Army. 30 10 1
- The chance of rain in the British Isles in Fall reduced from 35 to 25% (johnvmcnichols).
- The Italian navy now has the Lampo Destroyer in all campaigns from 1939-42, with it deployed at Brindisi (Klydon).
- Map text for Loops changed to white (sPzAbt653).
- Loops from the Red Sea to North Atlantic, and from the US East Coast to the Red Sea reduced from taking 4 to 3 turns (The Land).
- In the 1939 campaign, French starting naval dispositions and strengths have been amended with the BB Provence at Marseille and BB Paris at Bordeaux being reduced to strength 8, while in January 1940 the DD Jaguar now deploys at Casablanca and the BB Dunkerque at Brest.
- Railways added in the USSR from Guryev to Aktyubinsk to hex 261,79, and also linking Astrakhan to Grozny (sPzAbt653).
- The ports of Ajaccio (163,101), Le Havre (146,82) and Charlottetown (31,91) have had their names added.
- Even numbered US Army IDs replaced with odd numbered ones (Steely Glint).
- German Special Forces Build Limit increased from 1 to 2.
- Spain's starting pro-Axis leaning reduced from 20% to 12% in the 1939 and 1940 campaigns, and from 40 to 32% in the 1941; 1942 and 1943 campaigns.
- Advanced Aircraft research limited to 1 chit (ILCK).
- Removed the mention of Finland joining the Axis when Germany declares war on the USSR from the German advice pop ups (ILCK; Scook_99).
- Italy’s starting National Morale has been increased by 10,000 so that a capture of Rome will generally be necessary to make the country surrender.
- Fixed two dummy DECISION scripts (DE 451 and DE 452) that had the potential to fire if players switched between human and AI control of the USSR.
- Italy can now purchase a Maritime Bomber.
- Hungary and Romania can now purchase 2 Garrison units, while Germany’s limit has been increased from 25 to 30.
- Soviet Shock Army Build Time increased from 1 to 4 months (Zagys).
- Gave Germany five more Garrison unit names.
- Labels added for Terceira, Pico and Flores (all centred vertically and horizontally) and São Jorge (100 vertically, centred horizontally) on the Azores (sPzAbt653).
- Lerida renamed as Lérida.
- The cost of investing in Diplomacy against neutral Majors on the opposite side has been increased from 125 to 150 MPPs (Polonthi).
- Mechanized; Special Forces; Paratroops; Tanks’ Air Attack Values increased from 6 to 8; Partisans increased from 2 to 4; Reconnaissance and Anti-Tanks from 3 to 6; Light Tanks from 4 to 6.
- HMS Indomitable added at Gibraltar to the 1942 campaign (Mithrilotter).
- De Lattre de Tassigny and de Gaulle added as French HQ names for the 1941 to 1944 campaigns (Patrat; Hartmann).
- Destroyers can now upgrade to level 5 Anti-Submarine Warfare (Caladan; Mithilotter).
- Pinsk and its road connection removed from the map.
- Supply script Pop Up texts amended for the St Nazaire raid in the 1939; 1940; 1941 campaigns (warspite1; Benedict151).
- Convoy route added from Norfolk (USA) to Yarmouth in Nova Scotia for when the UK has transferred its capital to Canada and the USSR has surrendered, and #MAP_POSITION= 25,96 added to the Surrender_1 script #NAME= DE 105 - UK Moves Government To Toronto (sPzAbt653).
- Increased the cost of DE 204 to send the Anglo-French Expedition to Finland from 100 to 150 MPPs, split equally between the UK and France, and if the Anglo-French Expedition is successful then it will now swing the USSR 8-12% towards the Axis (previously this was 4-6%).
- If Iraq has been conquered by the UK then Basra will now transfer back to Iraq via a Territory script so that the convoy from the Middle East can resume (Crispy131313).
- DE 406 spelling of fulfill corrected (sPzAbt653).
- Disabled the Pop Up script entitled German/Soviet Front Garrison Report 1941 which showed german_report_1941_1.png.
- Removed the need for the USSR to be Allied and 100% mobilized from DE 625’s Unit script, replacing it with a German Variable Condition (sPzAbt653).
- Added text to the Borders and Friendship Treaty Decision Notes to highlight when Germany would have the opportunity to annex Lithuania in the 1939 campaign (Arne Beruldsen; ILCK; Hartmann).
- Removed duplicated Soviet Partisans at #MAP_POSITION= 225,88 in all campaigns (steelwarrior).
- War Entry script added to mobilize Czechoslovakia for the Banská Bystrica uprising in all campaigns (Xwormwood).
- DE 100 Decision script & Strategy Guide: changed the description of the Lorraine from a Cruiser to Battleship for the 1939 and 1940 campaigns (warspite1).
- Notes to the Polish DE 500 for the 1939 campaign amended to correctly reflect that if Polish soldiers head for France then the UK will only subsequently have a chance to form the I Polish Corps if France didn’t (Zagys).
- Increased the pro-Allied mobilizations of all three French colonies if the Axis declare war on Vichy France in the 1939 to 1942 campaigns (Hartmann).
- Vichy Mobilization 1 scripts corrected to remove duplications when the Allies declared war, which should have applied when the Axis declared war in the 1939 to 1942 campaigns (Zagys).
- DE 416 will now only fire when the USSR is at 100% Mobilization in the 1939, 1940 and 1941 campaigns (dhucul).
- The presence of an Allied unit in Rhodes will now swing Turkey by 15-25% towards the Allies (sPzAbt653).
- Increased the pro-Allied swing of an Axis declaration of war on Latvia (Mobilization 1) to 25-35%.
- Amended the starting positions and Decision train leading to the deployment of Red Army forces in the North West (Bo).
- Vichy France will now deploy its navy if it joins the Axis or Allies for the 1939 to 1942 campaigns (Mountaineer).
- US and Soviet Dummy Decisions for sending supplies via Vladivostock to the USSR amended so that when the USA is fully Mobilized it will fire at the start of the turn. This is to prevent double the usual number of MPPs being sent on the turn the USA enters the war, in all campaigns (sPzAbt653).
- Notes to DE 204 regarding Finland swinging towards the Allies corrected (sPzAbt653).
- Pop Up for DiMaggio’s Hitting Streak corrected (sPzAbt653).
- French Strength scripts corrected as they were using Afghanistan’s Country ID rather than France’s (ericdauriac).
- Yugoslav HQ Simovic now deploys at Valjevo 185,95 rather than at Belgrade (ILCK).
- Hidden Attacker Readiness Bonus for surprise contact at sea reduced from 25 to 15% for all surface vessels (sPzAbt653).
- Cost of Amphibious Transports increased from 20 to 25% of the Unit Cost.
- Spying & Intelligence Research capped at level 3.
- Canada’s starting Amphibious Transport Build Limit reduced from 2 to 1.
- 104,36 north of Reykjavik changed to a land hex, number 455 (oxford_guy).
- DE 126 no longer checks for an Axis unit in the port.
- Delayed the British occupation of the Faroe Islands with the Operation Valentine event, so as to prevent the Islands transferring back to Germany (Boonierat1972).
- In Multiplayer, a Mobilization 3 script added for Italy so that if it reaches 90% by the start of the Allied turn then it will reach full mobilization at the end of that turn (PdL).
- Four Soviet Resources have been moved from the RESOURCE script #NAME= Soviet Industrial Mobilization (1) to #NAME= Soviet Industrial Mobilization (2) These are: 233,64 Gorky; 243,66 Kazan; 245,72 Kuybyshev; 237,77 Saratov. The duplication of 243,66 has also been removed from the first script.
- Additionally, the failsafe date for the RESOURCE script #NAME= Soviet Industrial Mobilization (2) has been changed from 1st January 1941 to 1st January 1942.

< Message edited by Benedict151 -- 2/28/2017 8:46:05 AM >
Post #: 1
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/20/2017 8:38:17 PM   
Steely Glint


Posts: 580
Joined: 9/23/2003
Status: offline
Thank you thank you thank you!

And thank you for the credit.

_____________________________

“It was a war of snap judgments and binary results—shoot or don’t, live or die.“

Wargamer since 1967. Matrix customer since 2003.

(in reply to Benedict151)
Post #: 2
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/20/2017 9:48:08 PM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7749
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Italy's national morale was fine as it was and they did not require the Allies to fight all the way to Rome in real life. Bad change.

This is going to encourage Allied players to skip the med entirely (aside from securing North Africa) and focus on an early landing in France. Italy isn't worth it without a quick surrender possibility.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to Steely Glint)
Post #: 3
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/20/2017 10:38:51 PM   
Patrat


Posts: 107
Joined: 11/17/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Italy's national morale was fine as it was and they did not require the Allies to fight all the way to Rome in real life. Bad change.

This is going to encourage Allied players to skip the med entirely (aside from securing North Africa) and focus on an early landing in France. Italy isn't worth it without a quick surrender possibility.





I agree entirely. Italy's morale was fine.

As I was reading thru the changes, I suddenly said out loud, WTF, WHY?


In the game I'm currently playing, with myself as Axis against the AI set to expert, Italy is doing fine, it's the Germans who are getting their butt kicked! The Allies took North Africa and Sicily, and landed at Salerno and Bari and advanced up the toe. But despite all that Italy is still at NM of 25%, which isn't bad considering. Italy also has a huge Army in Russia holding a big chunk of the line, so i have been doing a lot of fighting with them. I have just been careful with the Italian fleet. Since I didnt upgrade them I didn't waste them fighting the Brits in a hopeless fight.

I really see no need for the change. If players were having trouble with Italy folding to soon, it was probably because they were being careless with the Italian fleet.

Maybe just give AI Italy a little extra morale. A player doesn't sure doesn't need it.

As Flaviusx stated, you shouldn't have to reach Rome for an Italian surrender.

< Message edited by Patrat -- 2/20/2017 11:55:01 PM >

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 4
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/20/2017 11:34:00 PM   
MemoryLeak


Posts: 451
Joined: 12/4/2000
From: Woodland, CA USA
Status: offline
Downloaded 99% and after 35 minutes a message. . I can't tell you how much I hate this ****. Something goes wrong EVERY TIME.
Is there only one source for this file?

_____________________________

If you want to make GOD laugh, tell him your future plans

USS Long Beach CGN-9
RM2 1969-1973

(in reply to Patrat)
Post #: 5
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/20/2017 11:43:43 PM   
OxfordGuy3


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/1/2012
From: Oxford, United Kingdom
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Italy's national morale was fine as it was and they did not require the Allies to fight all the way to Rome in real life. Bad change.

This is going to encourage Allied players to skip the med entirely (aside from securing North Africa) and focus on an early landing in France. Italy isn't worth it without a quick surrender possibility.




Agreed!

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 6
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 12:08:48 AM   
James Taylor

 

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Corpus Christi, Texas
Status: offline
Now that we have anti-sub tech level 5 for destroyers, is anything being done about the "corral" move for surrounded subs?

_____________________________

SeaMonkey

(in reply to OxfordGuy3)
Post #: 7
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 12:31:09 AM   
Flaviusx


Posts: 7749
Joined: 9/9/2009
From: Southern California
Status: offline
Also: not understanding why Pinsk and its road connection were removed.

Pripyet marshes shouldn't be a complete supply black hole. The guy in my picture didn't find it to be so in 1944 -- 1. Belorussian Front launched its bit of Bagration from those swamps. That won't be possible anymore in all likelihood.



_____________________________

WitE Alpha Tester

(in reply to James Taylor)
Post #: 8
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 2:08:12 AM   
Birdw


Posts: 195
Joined: 3/21/2007
Status: offline
Where is the download located? The check for updates on the game launch doesn't see it.

_____________________________

Birdman

It's just like shooting squirrels, only these squirrels have guns

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 9
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 2:15:10 AM   
Patrat


Posts: 107
Joined: 11/17/2016
Status: offline
It's here birde http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4240178

I guess because it's a beta is the reason its not available thru the games updater.

< Message edited by Patrat -- 2/21/2017 2:16:23 AM >

(in reply to Birdw)
Post #: 10
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 2:47:50 AM   
Birdw


Posts: 195
Joined: 3/21/2007
Status: offline
Thanks!


_____________________________

Birdman

It's just like shooting squirrels, only these squirrels have guns

(in reply to Patrat)
Post #: 11
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 5:59:42 AM   
Kursk1943

 

Posts: 445
Joined: 3/15/2014
From: Bavaria in Southern Germany
Status: offline
Memory Leak

I had the same issue with an update für WITE. I got the hint just to do nothing with the computer for about 15-20 min after I received that dreadful message (Can't...) after downloading 99%. That worked, the message was still there, but in my download file the patch was completely there. Seems to be a Windows problem.

(in reply to Birdw)
Post #: 12
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 6:56:04 AM   
OxfordGuy3


Posts: 986
Joined: 7/1/2012
From: Oxford, United Kingdom
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Patrat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Italy's national morale was fine as it was and they did not require the Allies to fight all the way to Rome in real life. Bad change.

This is going to encourage Allied players to skip the med entirely (aside from securing North Africa) and focus on an early landing in France. Italy isn't worth it without a quick surrender possibility.





I agree entirely. Italy's morale was fine.

As I was reading thru the changes, I suddenly said out loud, WTF, WHY?


In the game I'm currently playing, with myself as Axis against the AI set to expert, Italy is doing fine, it's the Germans who are getting their butt kicked! The Allies took North Africa and Sicily, and landed at Salerno and Bari and advanced up the toe. But despite all that Italy is still at NM of 25%, which isn't bad considering. Italy also has a huge Army in Russia holding a big chunk of the line, so i have been doing a lot of fighting with them. I have just been careful with the Italian fleet. Since I didnt upgrade them I didn't waste them fighting the Brits in a hopeless fight.

I really see no need for the change. If players were having trouble with Italy folding to soon, it was probably because they were being careless with the Italian fleet.

Maybe just give AI Italy a little extra morale. A player doesn't sure doesn't need it.

As Flaviusx stated, you shouldn't have to reach Rome for an Italian surrender.


I think this would be a better solution - just give AI Italy a little more morale, but they should still fold before Rome is reached if they have lost a ton of national morale through losing badly in North Africa and losing a chunk of their capital ships

< Message edited by oxford_guy -- 2/21/2017 7:06:07 AM >

(in reply to Patrat)
Post #: 13
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 2:27:10 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4779
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: James Taylor

Now that we have anti-sub tech level 5 for destroyers, is anything being done about the "corral" move for surrounded subs?

quote:

- subs that are completely surrounded now have a chance to dive and retreat but in this case may still end their dive next to an enemy unit if no other escape option is possible for it.


Yes, surrounding subs in future will not necessarily stop them escaping.

That's what this one means:
- subs that are completely surrounded now have a chance to dive and retreat but in this case may still end their dive next to an enemy unit if no other escape option is possible for it.



_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to James Taylor)
Post #: 14
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 5:39:43 PM   
Amadeus

 

Posts: 181
Joined: 4/16/2005
Status: offline
It is so difficult to register my game and getting a serial number.
How could I get the new patch? Please help.

_____________________________

"You have to practice what you preach"(RONALD BELFORD SCOTT)

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 15
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 7:17:38 PM   
sapper32


Posts: 1197
Joined: 5/7/2007
From: Warminster England
Status: offline
Not sure if this question has been asked already what im wondering is this patch/update compatible with old saved games ?thanks

(in reply to Amadeus)
Post #: 16
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 7:41:51 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4779
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sapper32

Not sure if this question has been asked already what im wondering is this patch/update compatible with old saved games ?thanks


Hi

Saved games won't be compatible so they'd need to be finished first.

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to sapper32)
Post #: 17
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/21/2017 8:05:13 PM   
sapper32


Posts: 1197
Joined: 5/7/2007
From: Warminster England
Status: offline
Thanks Bill ive seen the other thread now Doh

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 18
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 12:51:36 AM   
Steely Glint


Posts: 580
Joined: 9/23/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Italy's national morale was fine as it was and they did not require the Allies to fight all the way to Rome in real life. Bad change.

This is going to encourage Allied players to skip the med entirely (aside from securing North Africa) and focus on an early landing in France. Italy isn't worth it without a quick surrender possibility.




I just played a game and this is exactly what happens. I have decided to lower Italian morale by 10,000 points in every scenario in order to to fix the problem.

< Message edited by Steely Glint -- 2/22/2017 3:54:40 AM >


_____________________________

“It was a war of snap judgments and binary results—shoot or don’t, live or die.“

Wargamer since 1967. Matrix customer since 2003.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 19
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 12:52:53 AM   
Steely Glint


Posts: 580
Joined: 9/23/2003
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Also: not understanding why Pinsk and its road connection were removed.

Pripyet marshes shouldn't be a complete supply black hole. The guy in my picture didn't find it to be so in 1944 -- 1. Belorussian Front launched its bit of Bagration from those swamps. That won't be possible anymore in all likelihood.




Same question. Why?

_____________________________

“It was a war of snap judgments and binary results—shoot or don’t, live or die.“

Wargamer since 1967. Matrix customer since 2003.

(in reply to Flaviusx)
Post #: 20
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 1:51:36 AM   
Ancient One

 

Posts: 170
Joined: 7/1/2000
From: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Patrat
If players were having trouble with Italy folding to soon,


The extra 10000 NM isn't ideal, but it's better than leaving it as it was. I think the problem was not so much that Italy folded too soon, but what happened when they did. The massive plunder and territory the Allies get from the surrender is sharply at odds with what happened historically, and it's not reasonable to make the Germans have a unit in every city and town in Italy and Albania to mitigate this.

A better solution may be an event when Italy reaches 0 NM to make Italy/Albania into German occupied territory, but I think I remember being told that the game engine can't handle alignment changes of major powers.

(in reply to Patrat)
Post #: 21
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 2:10:23 AM   
James Taylor

 

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Corpus Christi, Texas
Status: offline
Sorry Bill, I missed that on my first read through the fixes.

Brings up another question though. I'm assuming that since the sub goes into "silent" mode after a dive that if it ends up adjacent to an enemy naval unit it will again be spotted.

Would this only be true for destroyers or all enemy naval units including transports and amphibs?

_____________________________

SeaMonkey

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 22
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 2:34:52 AM   
Patrat


Posts: 107
Joined: 11/17/2016
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zagys


quote:

ORIGINAL: Patrat
If players were having trouble with Italy folding to soon,


The extra 10000 NM isn't ideal, but it's better than leaving it as it was. I think the problem was not so much that Italy folded too soon, but what happened when they did. The massive plunder and territory the Allies get from the surrender is sharply at odds with what happened historically, and it's not reasonable to make the Germans have a unit in every city and town in Italy and Albania to mitigate this.

A better solution may be an event when Italy reaches 0 NM to make Italy/Albania into German occupied territory, but I think I remember being told that the game engine can't handle alignment changes of major powers.



It should be easy to adjust the plunder if that is the problem. As far as territory go, if your playing Axis, its easy to garrison key city's, especially ports. You don't have to garrison every city, just the key ones. That's exactly what the Germans did in real life.
It's not that hard, just keep an eye on Italy's morale and if it starts to get low, shift German troops and garrisons to the key city's. If I can do it on expert, others should be able to do it on easier settings.

If it's an AI issue, I don't know what to say. I just don't want multiplayer screwed up because the AI can't garrison city's in Italy with German troops.

Anyway, all this change is going to do is delay Italy's surrender. Your still going to have almost the same loss of territory problem you mentioned. Once the ALLIES take Rome, everything North of Rome will suddenly be Allied territory, unless the Germans have troops there. Your just delaying the problem and moving it a little bit north, your not solving it.


< Message edited by Patrat -- 2/22/2017 2:50:53 AM >

(in reply to Ancient One)
Post #: 23
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 2:48:45 AM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 5126
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
By default if a sub ends up next to any naval unit it is automatically spotted no matter what mode it is in and no matter what naval unit type is adjacent.

This is just a function of the current game mechanics and would be the same in any other situation where a naval unit is next to a sub, i.e. for whatever reason they end up adjacent to each other.

Ideally this occurrence will be limited in game as the engine really does prioritize not having the sub end next to another naval unit, but in a worst case scenario where there is no other choice then it will play out as described in the above notes.

(in reply to James Taylor)
Post #: 24
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 3:19:28 AM   
James Taylor

 

Posts: 630
Joined: 2/8/2002
From: Corpus Christi, Texas
Status: offline
I understand Hubert and I'm hoping the sub will be able to dive and move a number of hexes(>2, better 4 or 5)) away from its previous position.

Here's the reason, since garrison units are cheap to transport, its pretty easy to saturate an area with naval units around a sub's position especially with hexes over tiles, the density of units is not as great.

Obviously this is a gamey move, but I've used cheap units, AT, AA, and garrison transports to sweep areas ahead of my main naval combat units ever since SC2 Pacific with great success.

It is of course a tragedy for the AI as it loves to target those cheap kills and somewhat of a dilemma for my human opponents as well until they catch on.

So I'm here to solicit, "Destroyers Only" for spotting adjacent subs in "silent mode".

_____________________________

SeaMonkey

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 25
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 7:38:01 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9443
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

just keep an eye on Italy's morale and if it starts to get low, shift German troops and garrisons to the key city's.

I can agree with this, but the computer doesn't handle it well. When Italy surrenders, all the unoccupied ports become Allied friendly and the Allies have a free pass, while historically they still had to fight all the way up the boot.
I don't really agree with making Rome fall for the Italians to surrender. Historically, all the Axis Minor's wanted out as soon as they knew they weren't going to win, and none of them wanted fighting in their home country.
In most Axis computer games, it let's the Italians have Paris, which isn't a bad move, but when Italy surrenders you get weird situations like that in the screenshot. Suddenly, lots of computer Germans are faced with being cut off and having to reconquer France.
It must be in the program somewhere that when a country surrenders, all of its' occupied territory transfers to the conqueror.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Patrat)
Post #: 26
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 10:04:23 AM   
Boonierat1972


Posts: 84
Joined: 11/17/2016
From: France
Status: offline

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 27
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 3:13:26 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4779
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Steely Glint


quote:

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Also: not understanding why Pinsk and its road connection were removed.

Pripyet marshes shouldn't be a complete supply black hole. The guy in my picture didn't find it to be so in 1944 -- 1. Belorussian Front launched its bit of Bagration from those swamps. That won't be possible anymore in all likelihood.




Same question. Why?


Hi

Pinsk was never in our previous versions from which this campaign was built, and as far as I'm aware, it wasn't missed.

But for completeness when building the campaign afresh for SC3 I decided to include it, and wait for feedback to see if it caused any issues.

Reading many of the forum threads since release, I came to the conclusion that its presence on the map was one of the factors slowing the Axis advance into the USSR during Barbarossa. One player reported having struggled to capture it for quite a long term (maybe six months of game time) and that was far from ideal and it was certainly never intended to be that way.

In some cases players diverted significant resources to its capture, and given the geography of the region it wasn't a quick conquest. Thinking of the speed of the historical Axis advances in 1941, it seems wrong in the game that the diversion of any significant combat units should be required for such a minor target.

So while in an ideal world it would be there, the diversion of effort that it caused in some games, including but certainly not only for the Axis AI, seems to me to outweigh the benefit to having it on the map.

Removing it, coupled with the engine change that will turn the Baltic capitals into Secondary Supply Centers rather than Industrial Centers when the USSR annexes them, should assist the Axis invasion of the USSR, and this is an area where these small changes should make some difference, especially for the AI and new players.

Bill

_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to Steely Glint)
Post #: 28
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 3:37:33 PM   
BillRunacre

 

Posts: 4779
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sPzAbt653

quote:

just keep an eye on Italy's morale and if it starts to get low, shift German troops and garrisons to the key city's.

I can agree with this, but the computer doesn't handle it well. When Italy surrenders, all the unoccupied ports become Allied friendly and the Allies have a free pass, while historically they still had to fight all the way up the boot.
I don't really agree with making Rome fall for the Italians to surrender. Historically, all the Axis Minor's wanted out as soon as they knew they weren't going to win, and none of them wanted fighting in their home country.
In most Axis computer games, it let's the Italians have Paris, which isn't a bad move, but when Italy surrenders you get weird situations like that in the screenshot. Suddenly, lots of computer Germans are faced with being cut off and having to reconquer France.
It must be in the program somewhere that when a country surrenders, all of its' occupied territory transfers to the conqueror.



This is true. Some reports also suggested it was surrendering earlier than one would have liked, so although our notes say that a capture of Rome will generally be necessary to make the country surrender, it isn't essential.

Italy's National Morale starts now at 40,000.

Her National Morale scripts for locations that were historically lost prior to her surrender amount to a deduction of 21,000, so it only requires a further 19,000 NM points to be lost to bring about her surrender.

Factor in that every Resource has an NM value and every turn that the Allies hold it, including all of those in North Africa, Italy will be losing NM points, then something less than 19,000 points of unit strength actually need to be lost to bring about her surrender.

Unit casualties count on a 1 MPP = 1 NM basis, and therefore sinking their fleet, and defeating their armed forces in North Africa and Sicily will reduce their NM even further.

The capture of Naples will take away 10,000, and any of Tirana, Venice, Bologna, Milan, Genoa or Turin would deduct 5,000 apiece, so potentially the capture of Naples might be enough to finish Italy off, assuming everything else proceeds as it did historically.

I don't think it would be very hard against the AI to launch amphibious assaults or use Paratroops to capture some of these, and while it may be harder in Multiplayer, the gain from sacrificing a Paratroop unit or two to push them over the edge would be far outweighed by the benefit of knocking Italy out of the war.

If we find from playtesting and further feedback that the 10,000 is too much then it can be stepped back. There's really only one way to find out, and I will listen and react accordingly.

Bill

< Message edited by Bill Runacre -- 2/22/2017 3:41:25 PM >


_____________________________

Follow us on Twitter: https://twitter.com/FurySoftware

We're also on Facebook! https://www.facebook.com/FurySoftware/

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 29
RE: Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available - 2/22/2017 3:57:04 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 9443
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
Pinsk - I was sad to see it go after getting thru the learning curve on how to eliminate it as a thorn [one German tank unit near Brest-Litovsk can grab Pinsk on turn one of a Barbarossa, as the computer generally does not garrison it initially]. But after reading your comments on it, and the difficulty it may pose for the computer, I'll wait and see how it plays out before saying anything else about it. [Soviet 5th Army was a pain in the ass to the Germans and operated out of the Pripyet for some time].

Italy - I feel like some players jumped to the conclusion that Italy was surrendering too early. Every game I've played Italy has either gone out at a reasonable point, or actually held a little too long. But same as above, we'll see how it plays out, either way it's not the end of the world.

(in reply to BillRunacre)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Strategic Command v1.01 beta now available Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
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

0.460