Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Suggestions for next update

 
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 >> Suggestions for next update Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Suggestions for next update - 7/2/2019 2:36:16 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
The point of this thread is to suggest easy to make changes to the developers.

1. French units along the Maginot start at full entrenchment.
2. Increase the max fortification level of Metz and Strabourg to 6. Perhaps by converting them to Fortified Towns if necessary.
3. Have Russia start with a chit in Infantry Weapons instead of Industry (or perhaps Anti-Tank).
4. When France is liberated have their Infantry Weapons, Anti-Air and Mobility Techs set to 1 (or to the same level as the UK).

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft
Post #: 1
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/6/2019 11:42:10 AM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 3991
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Thanks for the feedback

_____________________________


(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 2
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/9/2019 9:49:14 PM   
PvtBenjamin

 

Posts: 927
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline
The sub/supply/air improvements in the new version (1.16) are an excellent step forward.

Unfortunately the slower research, zero supply placement in Neth/Bel/SU reinf have IMO significantly switched the balance significantly towards the Axis and rendered the game unplayable.


To offset the slower SU Ind Prod the minimum mobilization should be much higher. Its currently impossible to do the minimum research necessary and buy corps for basic defense at this point.

When playing the SU I first sell the anti tank and invest in Ind Prod then my next investment is infantry weapons which usually occurs in 4/40. In a recent game infantry wasn't upgraded to lv 1 until July 25, '41. Thats a joke.

The much slower SU catch up to Axis research in "upper right" warfares has also given the Axis an enormous advantage. Probably 6-8 months more before the SU catches up.


Taxman you are correct that the Maginot line also needs to change.



I noticed there was a successful Axis amphibious attack on the US in '41 in a tourney game. Thats an embarrassment.



< Message edited by PvtBenjamin -- 7/9/2019 9:55:31 PM >

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 3
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/9/2019 10:29:54 PM   
El Condoro

 

Posts: 202
Joined: 4/2/2008
Status: offline
It is possible to disembark a unit in the top-left of the map where all the off-map British trade resources are and will capture them (losing the unit and cost of transport but the MPPs - lost to Britain and gained by Germany - more than compensate for that). I assume they are meant to represent international resources, so I suggest they be surrounded by impassable terrain (escarpment) to prevent them being captured. This could be done for all off-map resources.

< Message edited by El Condoro -- 7/9/2019 10:30:42 PM >

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 4
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/9/2019 10:39:30 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
PvtBenjamin,

I have always had Inf Wep as the Soviets 1st Tech investment. This allows lvl 1 before Barbarossa. I typically have lvl 1 AA by that time too by double chitting it.

The problem is that now Inf Wep 2 (and AA 2) will not show up until the middle of summer 42 and that just makes it too easy for the Axis. If they survive that it also means no level 3 until near the end of 1943.
Fortunitly Germans won't be running level 3 tanks in May/June 1941 anymore either. I've been blown out twice by that happening with the old system.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to El Condoro)
Post #: 5
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/9/2019 11:45:20 PM   
PvtBenjamin

 

Posts: 927
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline
My#1 with SU & US is always Ind Prod. Present value of money. Either way I'm selling anti tank and my second research for Inf Weapons (4/40) should happen before Barbarossa. Without lv 1 inf wpns 3 ent corps still drop like flies.

Against a skilled player who keeps mob <30 its impossible to have minimum research and a credible number of corps to slow advance.

Much slower warfare research also huge adv to Axis.

At least the catch up should be much higher.




(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 6
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/10/2019 10:56:54 PM   
El Condoro

 

Posts: 202
Joined: 4/2/2008
Status: offline
I'm not sure if there is a script doing this already but:
There should be some sort of repercussion if the Axis are blockading US ports waiting for the US to mobilize. It's October 1941 and the Regia Marina is waiting at all my US ports with u-boat support and not a word from the US about it! At least the Norwegians get concerned when the Allies straddle their convoy lines. :)
BTW: My Royal Navy has been decimated, which is why they are not able to help. :(

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 7
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/10/2019 11:42:00 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
It's worse. He's really there to declare war on the US a turn before they will enter and then get surprise attacks against the US ships once they deploy.

It's absolutely imperative to not get the RN crushed. It's ok to exchange it for Axis naval units even at a bit of a loss ratio (say 3 RN for 2 Axis), but you can not let it become a non factor. You can not sacrifice it against Axis planes. If you do loose it the game is all but lost as the US will then get her fleet destroyed and then become a non factor unable to ship units to Europe.
The only thing you can do is build Maritime bombers for the US to hope to exact some revenge; but even that is very iffy as the Axis units will smash the US fleet and then flee out to the Atlantic, or perhaps the fickle weather will turn to storms.

< Message edited by Taxman66 -- 7/10/2019 11:55:08 PM >


_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to El Condoro)
Post #: 8
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/10/2019 11:49:12 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
Suggestion:
Change the 'Catch up' bonus from +1% per difference in Tech levels, to 1% + 1% per difference in Tech Levels.

This will shorten the (catch up) research time by approximately 2.5 turns (100/6 = 16.67 turns vs. 100/7 = 14.29 turns).

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 9
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 4:10:48 AM   
Ktonos

 

Posts: 264
Joined: 3/16/2018
Status: offline
1. Have the "supply" bonus for commando units apply to all cases they are found without supply. Would love to see special forces units cut behind enemy lines to able to operate at full capacity for a couple of turns
2. Option for fighters to be set to "intercept only bombers"
3. Choosing "yes" in the German ND for capturing Norway deals random hits (0-2) to all Ger surface ships
4. Soviet winter has all Axis units not in cities/towns drop readiness to 10-25%

(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 10
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 10:26:00 AM   
PvtBenjamin

 

Posts: 927
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline
THESE ARE ALL FANTASTIC IDEAS

quote:

ORIGINAL: El Condoro

I'm not sure if there is a script doing this already but:
There should be some sort of repercussion if the Axis are blockading US ports waiting for the US to mobilize. It's October 1941 and the Regia Marina is waiting at all my US ports with u-boat support and not a word from the US about it! At least the Norwegians get concerned when the Allies straddle their convoy lines. :)




Great Idea - Axis blockading any port in the Western Hemisphere prior to 12/7 should increase mobilization. Also penalty for being within 10 hexes of US prior to 12/7 increased mobilization


quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

Suggestion:
Change the 'Catch up' bonus from +1% per difference in Tech levels, to 1% + 1% per difference in Tech Levels.

This will shorten the (catch up) research time by approximately 2.5 turns (100/6 = 16.67 turns vs. 100/7 = 14.29 turns).




Great Idea - I think "catch up" should be +2% until 1942 or the minimum SU mobilization increased by 10%.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Ktonos

1. Have the "supply" bonus for commando units apply to all cases they are found without supply. Would love to see special forces units cut behind enemy lines to able to operate at full capacity for a couple of turns
2. Option for fighters to be set to "intercept only bombers"
3. Choosing "yes" in the German ND for capturing Norway deals random hits (0-2) to all Ger surface ships
4. Soviet winter has all Axis units not in cities/towns drop readiness to 10-25%



Great Ideas - Also, Long Range Amphib shouldn't be available until research is level 3






< Message edited by PvtBenjamin -- 7/11/2019 10:31:05 AM >

(in reply to Ktonos)
Post #: 11
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 10:41:18 AM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: PvtBenjamin

Great Ideas - Also, Long Range Amphib shouldn't be available until research is level 3




That would force the US to give up another priority research (and/or a built unit) in order to launch Torch.
The US is already trying to play catch up with lots of research (Inf Wep, Adv Tanks, Adv Air, AA, all the Warfare Techs).


_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 12
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 11:07:46 AM   
PvtBenjamin

 

Posts: 927
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline
True thats the one reason. Unfortunately it results in very "gamey" outcomes. LR Amphibious attack on the US in '41? LR Amphibious attack on England from Germany in Spring '40 before France falls? The Germans didn't even have the amphibious capability to cross the channel in '40/'41.


Maybe just not available until level 2 in '42.

(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 13
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 1:05:57 PM   
crispy131313


Posts: 1821
Joined: 11/30/2013
Status: offline
Has research slowed significantly in the newest update? I don't mean breakthroughs I mean turn-by-turn. At the 4% research level, with spying & intelligence II I am seeing increases around only 1% every turn. Is this correct?

_____________________________


(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 14
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 1:38:06 PM   
Sugar

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline
Reading these comments and suggestions I guess the Axis should be forbidden to win at all.

Any suggestions concerning the norwegian convoy? The disadvantging one-way-railroad to Sicily? The ridiculously weak Italians, who had a poorly equipped, but large army and the largest sub-fleet; while now they aren't even able to man the coastal cities?

< Message edited by Sugar -- 7/11/2019 1:48:16 PM >

(in reply to crispy131313)
Post #: 15
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 1:41:58 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
It's not supposed to.
There is the long term effect of not getting the 'old' breakthroughs in not just receiving the Tech early but (obviously) getting started on the next level until later as well.

Maybe you've just had a string of bad luck in one category?

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to crispy131313)
Post #: 16
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 2:06:28 PM   
crispy131313


Posts: 1821
Joined: 11/30/2013
Status: offline
I'm not sure, it's been 23 months and I have only gained 66% in a research category (Soviet Infantry Weapons), had Spying I for about half, and spying II for the other half of the time.

Also I just want to point out this is in a MOD, so don't come down on the developers etc. The only change however is that this research level is set at 4% where as vanilla is 5% per turn.

< Message edited by crispy131313 -- 7/11/2019 2:07:49 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 17
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 2:28:47 PM   
PvtBenjamin

 

Posts: 927
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline
Sugar you said in another post you uninstalled the game. If you have played with 1.16 your comments are welcome if not well..

You will recall I said I thought 1.15 was balanced and was concerned the changes to bombers would help the Allies too much.

Amended: I shouldn't be so harsh, we are really just trying to improve the game. Sugar your outstanding knowledge of the game and ideas are always welcome.



< Message edited by PvtBenjamin -- 7/11/2019 3:08:40 PM >

(in reply to crispy131313)
Post #: 18
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/11/2019 10:41:17 PM   
Ktonos

 

Posts: 264
Joined: 3/16/2018
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66


quote:

ORIGINAL: PvtBenjamin

Great Ideas - Also, Long Range Amphib shouldn't be available until research is level 3




That would force the US to give up another priority research (and/or a built unit) in order to launch Torch.
The US is already trying to play catch up with lots of research (Inf Wep, Adv Tanks, Adv Air, AA, all the Warfare Techs).



Imho Torch should be a ND for USA providing 1 army, 1 corps and 1 HQ all in amphib transports and near W Africa coast. At the same time all LR amphibious transports debuffed.

(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 19
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 2:59:43 PM   
Sugar

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline
quote:

Sugar you said in another post you uninstalled the game.


I uninstalled after V 1.16, the changes were the reason to uninstall.

These changes did indeed penalize the Axis, but other changes like the non existing entrenchlevels at the Maginot-Line were used by some players to shorten their way to Paris.

If now the reaction is to reentrench the frenchmen, the penalties are onesided. Like the degradation of the subs all those changes were completely unnecessary imho, and the concerns in this thread are as nearly always from Allied players, who usually refuse to play the other side or got beaten by better players, without ever asking what they did wrong.

Players like Fafnir will always be ahead, because they're improving their gameplay based on the actual conditions. To get a better chance to beat them, everybody should do the same instead of constantly demanding changes. This game has been very well balanced in V 1.15, every onesided change will destroy this balance.

(in reply to Ktonos)
Post #: 20
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 4:29:45 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
If you take a closer look, 1.16 helps the axis more than you will realize. The reduction of Corps to weak ZOC and the research change allows the axis to keep the tech edge far longer (too long).

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Sugar)
Post #: 21
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 4:55:32 PM   
PvtBenjamin

 

Posts: 927
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline
I agree with Taxman. I initially thought the changes to bombers & subs would sway the game to the Allies but its quite the opposite.

Sugar you are correct v1.15 was perfectly balanced, it would be very interesting to hear your thoughts of 1.16 if you were to play both sides against a good player like Taxman or Ktonos.

IMO v1.16 would have been better served with just the 0 supply & sub changes and a major overhaul to naval. The 0 supply & sub changes are great improvement to the game.

Attacking via the Maginot line is now the standard so it definitely needs to be strengthened. A proper attack via the historic route gives the Axis plenty of time.








(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 22
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 5:08:28 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
I don't consider myself a good player. Just a noisy one. I'm nowhere near Sugar of Fafnir's league.

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 23
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 6:14:58 PM   
PvtBenjamin

 

Posts: 927
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline
The true great ones are always modest Taxman


I'm not in their league either

(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 24
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 7:33:39 PM   
Sugar

 

Posts: 865
Joined: 3/16/2017
Status: offline
It's not the question of the quality of the players, but the general approach. For every issue there's a solution, if someone doesn't get it on its own, he might watch the better players to find out before demanding changes. Of course everyone should report what's remarkable, but should also ask at first how to deal with it. I never made a secret about the tactics I'm using.

I won`t return to this game in the near future, I happily play Breakthrough SoE. This game offers far better combat mechanics, because the attack values are generally higher, thereby offering the Allies far better chances to counterattack (and being able to destroy german units from the start); and the forcepool fits far better with 6 Stukas, 10 tanks, 8 fighters on german side and the whole of the russian units costing 2/3 of the german. I reduced the downsides of this game by editing, but that's of course not the solution for MPPs.

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 25
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 7:39:34 PM   
PvtBenjamin

 

Posts: 927
Joined: 5/6/2017
Status: offline
whats breakthrough SoE?

I just started advanced tactics gold which looks pretty cool, older game is guess

(in reply to Sugar)
Post #: 26
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 8:02:54 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
Have you seen my sub .500 record? :p

_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to PvtBenjamin)
Post #: 27
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 8:50:30 PM   
Hubert Cater

 

Posts: 3991
Joined: 7/22/2013
Status: offline
Just wanted to quickly pop in and once again say thanks for all the feedback, it is always much appreciated.

WWI and a few other items are keeping us quite busy but we have been preparing a patch for WiE as well, and in order to make sure we've included all the changes we would like (need) to make, I just had a few comments and questions to throw out there for everyone.

1) Regarding the Maginot line and the lack of French entrenchment there, this was not actually a change for v1.16, at least as far as I can tell, as v1.15 also has 0 at start entrenchment for units there. Presumably then this goes right back to the release of the game and is just being caught now. This is something we have corrected and are not really considering it a one sided fix as it's just one of those that simply should be corrected.

2) The 0 supply units, especially those in the Low Countries, as well as those that arrive at Barbarossa, and the respective effects everyone has noticed for combat against these units was not our intention and is essentially an introduced error there. This has already been corrected for our World at War release, and is already corrected for the next build of WiE as well.

There might have been a few other key points here, I will have to spend some time examining the research progression concerns, but those two for now caught my eye and I wanted to address those first and foremost.

* * *

There will be a few more changes coming to how supply is handled in WiE, namely the recent changes we also implemented for WaW whereby HQs can act as Mulberries, and the reduced HQ distribution supply that will be in effect when HQs are in low supply. This has been changed to better address the notion that surrounded pockets should have lower supply and should be easier to destroy, but as a result it will require more careful planning on HQ positioning and how to deal with low supply areas for both sides going forward.

Soviet pockets, for example, will be potentially easier to deal with, but overstretched Axis lines will likely require more careful HQ linking and so on. Amphibious assaults will now benefit from increased supply for the first few turns if a resource is not captured but an HQ is employed, and the Malta effect can now be nullified by simply reducing the Malta defender to a strength below 5 and no longer requiring its destruction and assault/capture by Axis forces.

North Africa will be a bit more challenging for both sides due to low supply, and since scorched earth will now be a bigger factor in the USSR, there have been slight changes there to reduce its impact slightly and only due to the recent supply rule changes on our end. We've also slightly reduced the impact of the Malta effect as well, just slightly, as testing indicated it would also be required to balance out the supply changes that are coming.

There is more, but if we've got all the changes just right, it should be just the right amount positives and negatives for both sides while improving the realism just a little bit at the same time.

* * *

All this aside, and before we wrap things up for the next update, would it be possible for those that have issues regarding other changes in v1.16 to itemize them for us and to add any additional notes or concerns for our final review?

It so that would be great, thanks!
Hubert

_____________________________


(in reply to Taxman66)
Post #: 28
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/12/2019 11:36:49 PM   
Taxman66


Posts: 1494
Joined: 3/19/2008
From: Columbia, MD. USA
Status: offline
Hubert, if you haven't already I suggest you look at the following thread where the research change is discussed in more detail. http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=4659126&mpage=1&key=�

I also suggest further testing (with intended patch changes) just how vulnerable Metz and Strasbourg are to an early assault on the Maginot (where all Axis air minus 1 ftr, all HQ except 1 and all Tanks) don't participate in Poland and head for a Maginot assault on Axis turn 3, turn 1 spent upgrading infantry near maginot) Poland will still go down by the end if Axis turn 4.

< Message edited by Taxman66 -- 7/13/2019 12:31:52 AM >


_____________________________

"Part of the $10 million I spent on gambling, part on booze and part on women. The rest I spent foolishly." - George Raft

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 29
RE: Suggestions for next update - 7/13/2019 8:55:27 AM   
sad ham

 

Posts: 183
Joined: 2/17/2004
Status: online
Hubert Cater: Have you fixed the Algerian/Tunisian issue I did send you the file?

< Message edited by sad ham -- 7/13/2019 8:56:34 AM >

(in reply to Hubert Cater)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Strategic Command Series >> Strategic Command WWII War in Europe >> Suggestions for next update 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

0.164