Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61)

 
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 >> Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 9/11/2018 8:47:25 PM   
TPOO

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 11/15/2007
From: Garden Grove, CA
Status: offline
Corrected a couple of events

Attachment (1)
Post #: 1
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 9/14/2018 3:17:07 AM   
Meyer1

 

Posts: 876
Joined: 2/9/2010
Status: offline
Thanks man.

(in reply to TPOO)
Post #: 2
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/25/2018 2:03:22 AM   
Journier

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 3/28/2010
Status: offline
Hi im sorry to bother you but some of my german infantry on the initial turn have a piece of equipment i dont remember them having before, called spare equipment, is this correct? These units, every time i try to move them alert me that they are a FIXED UNIT, Abandon all fixed weapons to move? with a yes or no selection. At that point i select yes, move, and they promptly do the same thing again next turn...

Any thoughts I dont remember this issue on the early versions of directive 21. Any guidance would be a great help

(in reply to Meyer1)
Post #: 3
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/25/2018 2:49:52 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 38211
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Journier
Hi I'm sorry to bother you but some of my german infantry on the initial turn have a piece of equipment i dont remember them having before, called spare equipment, is this correct? These units, every time i try to move them alert me that they are a FIXED UNIT, Abandon all fixed weapons to move? with a yes or no selection. At that point i select yes, move, and they promptly do the same thing again next turn...

Any thoughts I dont remember this issue on the early versions of directive 21. Any guidance would be a great help

The presence of "spare equipment" may be a symptom that you're using the wrong equipment file. I have attached here below the EQP and NQP files for D21. Run this scenario through the editor and save it with the same name and the problem should go away with the correct EQP and NQP files. Lemme know if it doesn't help.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

As of January 2014:
7,362 RQ-11 Ravens;
990 AeroVironment Wasp IIIs;
1,137 AeroVironment RQ-20 Pumas;
306 RQ-16 T-Hawk small UAS systems and 246 Predators and MQ-1C Grey Eagles;
126 MQ-9 Reapers;
491 RQ-7 Shadows;
33 RQ-4 Global Hawk

(in reply to Journier)
Post #: 4
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/25/2018 3:14:13 AM   
Journier

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 3/28/2010
Status: offline
Ok i placed your .eqp and .NQP files into the graphics override folder under directive 21 (same name as scenario) then loaded it into the editor which alerted me that I have the wrong .EQP files for the scenario, I hit ok, then saved the scenario to the same name, and loaded a fresh game of D21 back up. and still have spare equipment... I dont quite understand how this issue is occurring.

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 5
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/25/2018 3:19:08 AM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 38211
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Journier

Ok i placed your .eqp and .NQP files into the graphics override folder under directive 21 (same name as scenario) then loaded it into the editor which alerted me that I have the wrong .EQP files for the scenario, I hit ok, then saved the scenario to the same name, and loaded a fresh game of D21 back up. and still have spare equipment... I dont quite understand how this issue is occurring.

Okay....we've exceeded the extend of my knowledge. I'm at a loss as to the problemo. Can you disband that unit?

_____________________________

As of January 2014:
7,362 RQ-11 Ravens;
990 AeroVironment Wasp IIIs;
1,137 AeroVironment RQ-20 Pumas;
306 RQ-16 T-Hawk small UAS systems and 246 Predators and MQ-1C Grey Eagles;
126 MQ-9 Reapers;
491 RQ-7 Shadows;
33 RQ-4 Global Hawk

(in reply to Journier)
Post #: 6
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/25/2018 3:35:20 AM   
Journier

 

Posts: 53
Joined: 3/28/2010
Status: offline
Its fixed larry! You actually helped me think about it, and i was playing around in my folders, and my game from the original release! still had old folders it was referencing on my computer. I deleted those folders from 2017, in a place called my games, and boom, loaded up the new version of scenario and EQP and NQP files no problem. Thank you for the assist!

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 7
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/26/2018 6:30:18 PM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 851
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
quote:


The presence of "spare equipment" may be a symptom that you're using the wrong equipment file. I have attached here below the EQP and NQP files for D21. Run this scenario through the editor and save it with the same name and the problem should go away with the correct EQP and NQP files. Lemme know if it doesn't help.


A couple of questions:

1) The files in your attachment seem to be older than those in the original post, any reason why you use these?

2) Regarding the sub folder that contains the equipment files (in the in the original download by TPOO) where do i place this folder? Only i have tried various locations and i still get an error message about old equipment files when i load the scenario in the editor?

Many thanks

< Message edited by sanderz -- 10/26/2018 6:31:31 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 8
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/26/2018 7:03:22 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 38211
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz
quote:


The presence of "spare equipment" may be a symptom that you're using the wrong equipment file. I have attached here below the EQP and NQP files for D21. Run this scenario through the editor and save it with the same name and the problem should go away with the correct EQP and NQP files. Lemme know if it doesn't help.


A couple of questions:

1) The files in your attachment seem to be older than those in the original post, any reason why you use these?

2) Regarding the sub folder that contains the equipment files (in the in the original download by TPOO) where do i place this folder? Only i have tried various locations and i still get an error message about old equipment files when i load the scenario in the editor?

Many thanks

They may be older files but they may contain the same info that the newer files contain. Use the newer files in any case. Reguarding the sub folder that contains the equipment files....place that bad boy in the Graphics Override folder.

The data in the equipment file(s) are stored in the SCE file now so to associate the files with the scenario you must load the scenario in the editor and then save it with the same name and when the scenario gets written all the equipment file info is written too. That way there's no need for an equipment file unless you're editing the scenario.


< Message edited by larryfulkerson -- 10/26/2018 7:04:17 PM >


_____________________________

As of January 2014:
7,362 RQ-11 Ravens;
990 AeroVironment Wasp IIIs;
1,137 AeroVironment RQ-20 Pumas;
306 RQ-16 T-Hawk small UAS systems and 246 Predators and MQ-1C Grey Eagles;
126 MQ-9 Reapers;
491 RQ-7 Shadows;
33 RQ-4 Global Hawk

(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 9
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/26/2018 8:07:53 PM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 851
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
quote:


They may be older files but they may contain the same info that the newer files contain. Use the newer files in any case. Reguarding the sub folder that contains the equipment files....place that bad boy in the Graphics Override folder.

The data in the equipment file(s) are stored in the SCE file now so to associate the files with the scenario you must load the scenario in the editor and then save it with the same name and when the scenario gets written all the equipment file info is written too. That way there's no need for an equipment file unless you're editing the scenario.



so i save the scenario even when it says there is an error and that corrects the error and all is good - i can then delete the equipment folder as its no longer needed


< Message edited by sanderz -- 10/26/2018 8:08:09 PM >

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 10
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/26/2018 10:09:47 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 38211
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: sanderz

quote:


They may be older files but they may contain the same info that the newer files contain. Use the newer files in any case. Reguarding the sub folder that contains the equipment files....place that bad boy in the Graphics Override folder.

The data in the equipment file(s) are stored in the SCE file now so to associate the files with the scenario you must load the scenario in the editor and then save it with the same name and when the scenario gets written all the equipment file info is written too. That way there's no need for an equipment file unless you're editing the scenario.



so i save the scenario even when it says there is an error and that corrects the error and all is good - i can then delete the equipment folder as its no longer needed


You are 100% correct, except that you may want to keep the equipment files just for giggles.

_____________________________

As of January 2014:
7,362 RQ-11 Ravens;
990 AeroVironment Wasp IIIs;
1,137 AeroVironment RQ-20 Pumas;
306 RQ-16 T-Hawk small UAS systems and 246 Predators and MQ-1C Grey Eagles;
126 MQ-9 Reapers;
491 RQ-7 Shadows;
33 RQ-4 Global Hawk

(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 11
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/27/2018 5:11:32 AM   
sanderz

 

Posts: 851
Joined: 1/8/2009
From: Devon, England
Status: offline
many thanks Larry, much apppreciated

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 12
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/28/2018 4:46:51 PM   
winkr7

 

Posts: 52
Joined: 1/9/2015
Status: offline

Does the axis AI function all the way to 1945? IE can I just play the russians?

thanks

(in reply to sanderz)
Post #: 13
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 10/28/2018 6:15:53 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 38211
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: winkr7
Does the axis AI function all the way to 1945? IE can I just play the russians?

thanks

All the way to 1945, yes, and the balancing isn't adjusted properly for a
person to play the Soviet side. There's no AI tracks for the Axis side
is my understanding so it's pretty much designed for the human to play
the Axis side.

_____________________________

As of January 2014:
7,362 RQ-11 Ravens;
990 AeroVironment Wasp IIIs;
1,137 AeroVironment RQ-20 Pumas;
306 RQ-16 T-Hawk small UAS systems and 246 Predators and MQ-1C Grey Eagles;
126 MQ-9 Reapers;
491 RQ-7 Shadows;
33 RQ-4 Global Hawk

(in reply to winkr7)
Post #: 14
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 11/7/2018 4:28:59 PM   
winkelried


Posts: 42
Joined: 8/10/2007
Status: offline
There a a few init.xxx (where xxx is a number) units in the soviet OOB. does anybody know what does units do?

_____________________________

Honneur et Fidélité

(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 15
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 4/25/2019 4:19:00 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8770
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
Hey guys, sorry I somehow missed these posts back when they were made.

The file structures were changed with TOAW IV but hopefully everyone is up on it by now. If not, here are blanket Install Instructions that cover everything. Don't be like me and assume that you know better, follow the damn instructions!

The init.xxx units were an attempt to circumvent double turns. This process worked in other scenarios, but not so much in D21. Luckily, we now are able to turn off Initiative Switches, and you really should when playing this scenario. In newer versions, those units will have been removed

Attachment (1)

(in reply to winkelried)
Post #: 16
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 4/25/2019 12:44:41 PM   
mussey


Posts: 650
Joined: 12/2/2006
From: Cleve-Land
Status: offline
quote:

The data in the equipment file(s) are stored in the SCE file now so to associate the files with the scenario you must load the scenario in the editor and then save it with the same name and when the scenario gets written all the equipment file info is written too. That way there's no need for an equipment file unless you're editing the scenario.


This greatly clarifies some questions I had in another post. Thanks Larry!

_____________________________

Col. Mussbu

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


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 17
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 7/23/2019 6:45:36 PM   
larryfulkerson

 

Posts: 38211
Joined: 4/17/2005
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline
Fairly popular scenario. Of those downloaded I wonder how many games are going on.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

As of January 2014:
7,362 RQ-11 Ravens;
990 AeroVironment Wasp IIIs;
1,137 AeroVironment RQ-20 Pumas;
306 RQ-16 T-Hawk small UAS systems and 246 Predators and MQ-1C Grey Eagles;
126 MQ-9 Reapers;
491 RQ-7 Shadows;
33 RQ-4 Global Hawk

(in reply to mussey)
Post #: 18
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 7/31/2019 8:33:05 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1917
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Some points:

1. The Directive 21 1941-1945 scenario briefing.pdf should be named Directive 21 1941-1945.pdf so it can be opened from within the game.

2. Neither the in game nor the pdf scenario briefing mentions the rules that should be set for the game. Are the rules at least set in the scenario file so that any divergence is reported by the game to the player?

3. Are graphic files in the D21 folder still used?
Those BMPs are from 2010 what is pretty dated with PNG being the norm now. Besides not blending in with the rest of the graphics the old BMP files like the s_tiles_misc and tiles_misc differ considerable from the current stock files and at some spots even seem to miss graphics needed for game functions. For example the timestamps used on the stock PNG file are missing on the old BMP, can't imaging that is is good or wanted.

_____________________________


(in reply to larryfulkerson)
Post #: 19
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 7/31/2019 10:17:33 PM   
Shadrach


Posts: 546
Joined: 10/16/2001
From: Oslo, Norway
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66
3. Are graphic files in the D21 folder still used?
Those BMPs are from 2010 what is pretty dated with PNG being the norm now. Besides not blending in with the rest of the graphics the old BMP files like the s_tiles_misc and tiles_misc differ considerable from the current stock files and at some spots even seem to miss graphics needed for game functions. For example the timestamps used on the stock PNG file are missing on the old BMP, can't imaging that is is good or wanted.


They won't be used by the game. None of the files in the "<Game folder>\Graphics Override" are actually read. This is a bug and will apparently be fixed in the next release. You can make the game read them by copying the D21 directory to "<My games>\Graphics Override".

And yes they look pretty bad, very pixellated, and don't fit the rest of the map style, like the pine woods. Scenario designers should stay away from modifying map graphics, unless needed for stuff like the mapOptional files, as preferred map style is a personal opinion.

It will be interesting once the patch is out and those playing will see the old custom graphics

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 20
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 8/1/2019 5:50:17 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8770
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
Guys, I am lost on these newer versions as I was not involved and don't have any of the files on my computer, so I can't be of much help. I can tell you that Rick had made custom terrain for Finland - Deep Forest and Wilderness. They functioned well and looked very good in III, but sadly they were not supported by IV. Therefore, for the newer version [not yet released] I have had to remove all that stuff, which is a real shame. So we go back to using Badlands and Major Escarpment. As far as I can tell, there are no graphics files used for D21 by IV, so I think you can delete them all if they look wonky.

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 21
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 8/30/2019 2:20:11 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8770
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
I think it's too early to start a new thread on what is being worked on, but I wanted to ask opinions about something. I am playtesting and in this version by May 1943 all of the Shock Levels are equaled at 100%. For the purpose of this scenario, Shock is used to reflect different levels of effectiveness. For example, the Soviets were more effective in winter combat than the Axis, therefore the Soviets get Positive Shock during the winter. Another example is the Soviet Airforce, it was never as effective as the Axis Air Forces, so the Axis gets positive Air Shock.

So having all Shock Levels equal by May 1943 [or ever for that matter] seems a little off. Does anyone else have an opinion?




Attachment (1)

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 22
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 8/31/2019 11:24:34 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1917
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Well according to the readme Soviet Air Shock will go up to 110, and the Axis suffers shock penalties in Winter. That is not that much for the rest of the game but at least something. What other shock should be depicted?

_____________________________


(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 23
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 9/1/2019 12:24:15 AM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8770
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
I'm spitballing the thought that if the Luftwaffe is 100% Effective, at what level is the Red Air Force? And if the Wehrmacht is 100% Effective, at what level is the Red Army? That is with respect to all else being equal, or rather unequal at times.

So the Red Air Force and Red Army at at low Shock Levels at the start of Barbarossa, but these levels rise as the scenario progresses. The Red Air Force does reach 110% by the end of the scenario, while the Luftwaffe is at 100% at the same time. I think that raises the question 'Was the Red Air Force 10% more effective than the Luftwaffe in 1945?'.

Along the same lines, at the first winter the Wehrmacht was markedly less effective than the Red Army, but was the Red Army equally effective as the Wehrmacht from 1943 on?

The Shock Settings are used in this scenario to reflect Force Effectiveness, so these settings are necessarily scrutinized.

(in reply to BigDuke66)
Post #: 24
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 9/1/2019 8:48:15 AM   
Edwire

 

Posts: 138
Joined: 1/12/2012
Status: offline
Personally, I think "Shock level" should only be used for global event, such as Winter Offensive, opening Case Blau, etc. But to reflect "effective", that should be in the proficiency of each unit. So in normal circumstances, both side should have 100% shock level.

CMIIW lower proficiency also make units prone to "re-organizing"

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 25
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 9/1/2019 12:27:13 PM   
Zovs


Posts: 3777
Joined: 2/23/2009
From: United States
Status: offline
CMIIW means ?

_____________________________


War in the East/War in the East II - Alpha Test Teams
WarPlan Beta Tester
DG CWIE2 tester/SPWW2 and SPMBT playtester/scenario creator

(in reply to Edwire)
Post #: 26
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 9/1/2019 2:03:28 PM   
Edwire

 

Posts: 138
Joined: 1/12/2012
Status: offline
correct me if I'm wrong

(in reply to Zovs)
Post #: 27
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 9/1/2019 3:11:36 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8770
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
quote:

lower proficiency also make units prone to "re-organizing"

Yes it does, along with other things, so that is why I am trying to keep the Shock as the separate measure of Effectiveness. There are also Force, Formation and Unit Proficiency's, which have their separate usefulness. I agree with you on the 'global event' thought, and the thinking is that Effectiveness is a Global Event.
quote:


So in normal circumstances, both side should have 100% shock level.

This is part of what I am reviewing here, because the overall [global] Effectiveness is something in addition to the various Proficiency Ratings.

(in reply to Edwire)
Post #: 28
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 9/1/2019 3:38:08 PM   
sPzAbt653


Posts: 8770
Joined: 5/3/2007
From: east coast, usa
Status: offline
Let me add some stuff to clarify, and so that we are all on the same page as far as looking for the proper way to gauge Effectiveness.

In reference to a 400 turn scenario with quite heavy combat activity, Unit Proficiency is good for about the first couple turns only, by turn 20 all units are up to 100% anyway. Plus take into account the proficiency of reconstituted units and Unit Proficiency hardly means anything.

Formation Proficiency is a gauge on how long a Formation will stay in combats [how many rounds] before it could go into re-organization.

Force Proficiency is a gauge on how long before a Force will end the turn [after how many rounds].

(in reply to sPzAbt653)
Post #: 29
RE: Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) - 9/1/2019 4:02:36 PM   
Curtis Lemay


Posts: 11433
Joined: 9/17/2004
From: Houston, TX
Status: online

quote:

ORIGINAL: Edwire

Personally, I think "Shock level" should only be used for global event, such as Winter Offensive, opening Case Blau, etc. But to reflect "effective", that should be in the proficiency of each unit. So in normal circumstances, both side should have 100% shock level.

CMIIW lower proficiency also make units prone to "re-organizing"

But only due to combat reorganization - troops are so beaten down that they have to reorganize.

Shock reorganization, however, can represent C&C issues - crummy commanders or disrupted communications, etc.

_____________________________

My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site

(in reply to Edwire)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> The Operational Art of War IV >> Mods and Scenarios >> Directive 21 1941-1945 (V4.61) 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

0.156