Veers
Member
If memeory serves it is impossible.
New Bug in TAOW III version???
- Thread starter Killorbekilled
- Start date
Lou
Event Engineer
If what you are trying to do is disband deployed naval ship units,
No, you cannot do a mouse over and have a disband option appear.
If you are trying get minimum replacement ships on selected turns,
When using a replacement unit,
A disband event for the unit concerned should work,
If the unit is scheduled to deploy on that turn.
It is possible to save the event,
(Someday soon 1000 events will not be enough)
By deploying the REPLACEMENT UNIT on map.
Then using a mouse over to disband the unit at the owning players option.
Example - create your unit of ships desired.
Then change the Icon to Marine or Amphibious.
Test deployment locations using both events and or turns.
Lou
----------------------------------
The TOAW is in the details.
No, you cannot do a mouse over and have a disband option appear.
If you are trying get minimum replacement ships on selected turns,
When using a replacement unit,
A disband event for the unit concerned should work,
If the unit is scheduled to deploy on that turn.
It is possible to save the event,
(Someday soon 1000 events will not be enough)
By deploying the REPLACEMENT UNIT on map.
Then using a mouse over to disband the unit at the owning players option.
Example - create your unit of ships desired.
Then change the Icon to Marine or Amphibious.
Test deployment locations using both events and or turns.
Lou
----------------------------------
The TOAW is in the details.
Veers
Member
Mark Stevens
Europe Aflame Forum Moderator
This might be better than what we have at present, which is a sudden burst of naval replacements around turns 150 - 155 ish, and nothing else all game. Reason is that replacements can only start and stop once - you can't set them for, say, one battleship every six months.
What I could have is a small naval disband at the start of every six months, or something similar, obviously larger for the Allies than the Germans. In a stunning new departure for this scenario, I could even base it on the number of vessels that were actually constructed.
And/or allow Germany to double the Kriegsmarine in the 1930s by having a turn one disband, but at what cost? I'd need to remove a similarly high tech piece of production, like the starting panzer corps, or an entire Luftflotte.
But then should the Allies have the chance to match it?
Decisions, decisions...
What I could have is a small naval disband at the start of every six months, or something similar, obviously larger for the Allies than the Germans. In a stunning new departure for this scenario, I could even base it on the number of vessels that were actually constructed.
And/or allow Germany to double the Kriegsmarine in the 1930s by having a turn one disband, but at what cost? I'd need to remove a similarly high tech piece of production, like the starting panzer corps, or an entire Luftflotte.
But then should the Allies have the chance to match it?
Decisions, decisions...
Veers
Member
Options, options, my dear friend. Options, variety, is the spice of life, after all.
viridomaros
Member
that would be interesting if naval combat in toaw was functional to a minimum. as it is it's nearly a waste of time since the persian navy with 2 gunboats can own the us fleet having 20 battleships or so. but coupled to an increased/decreased sea lift that would make sense. If you have some events left what do you think of linking naval units to sea transport. Each naval unit would represent 1000 Transport point (just a number to explain my idea) and if you lose the unit you lose the sea transport points. That would be quite realistic and would emphazise the naval part of the game. To tie the loss of british naval units with a decreased supply would make sense as well.
Veers
Member
Hey, what a great idea.
EDIT: Of course, then you couldn't have reconstituting navies.
viridomaros
Member
navals shouldn't reconstitute anyway. It's boring like nothing else to see the italian navy reconstituting 3 to 4 times wihtin 1 year. It happened to 1 of my game recently.
By the way does someone know if the AA rating of ships have been enhanced/corrected? i seem to lose a lot of planes for just a few light ships sunk.
By the way does someone know if the AA rating of ships have been enhanced/corrected? i seem to lose a lot of planes for just a few light ships sunk.
Veers
Member
A navy evaportaing and reconstituting is a lot different at this scale. When a fleet 'evaporates' it is more realistic to look at it as the fleet taking breaking off contact from the enemy. When it 'reconstitutes' is when it has had time to reorganize to a point where it can be put to sea again.
I believe that since the AA was improved in TOAW III, the Navy got a boost as well as AA guns. I ahev experienced higher losses than in ACoW, as well.
Mark Stevens
Europe Aflame Forum Moderator
Yes, must emphasise that fleets are rarely 'sunk' in a game of this scale. Most took damage to a few capital ships and then broke off to refit and supply.
The Italian navy breaking off from combat, then being completely inactive for a while before returning, albeit weakened, to the fray for another three months is what happened. It wasn't sunk for the whole war in one bloody engagement.
The Italian navy breaking off from combat, then being completely inactive for a while before returning, albeit weakened, to the fray for another three months is what happened. It wasn't sunk for the whole war in one bloody engagement.
viridomaros
Member
because for the most part of the war it stayed in its harbor. What annoys me is the use of the fleets to blockade sea access to particular area, the attacker always lose a lot more than the defenders (especially capital ships) as the allied i have lost ( i mean it, not damaged) most of my battleships, battle cruisers etc....
The german did lose their kriegsmarine twice i think and now it seems to be gone for good and the italians lost 4 time their naval units within a year. Regarding the ships being produced it would be better to have the kriegsmarine reconstituting while the italians don't. That would force the axis player to be somewhat cautious about how he uses the italian fleet.
Mark Stevens
Europe Aflame Forum Moderator
Kesselring, who was the German commander for the Mediterranean area, thought that the Italian fleet could have achieved more if Mussolini could have been persuaded to handle it more boldly - on paper it was pretty strong. Just because it lurked in port historically, I don't want to force players to have to follow suit. In general, I think that it will eventually be destroyed if it repeatedly takes on the Royal Navy.
But I agree that naval warfare in general isn't TOAW's strong point - I'd really like to see it more abstracted over longer distances, like air warfare, but that's another topic.
But I agree that naval warfare in general isn't TOAW's strong point - I'd really like to see it more abstracted over longer distances, like air warfare, but that's another topic.
Veers
Member
True, and agreed.
This would definately be an improvement over the current system.
Lou
Event Engineer
Hey, been meaning to ask you: Do you play TOAW or just work on it?
I play the game, not well I admit. Of the games played, all had specific ending conditions, turn or score, different than as designed, but all went at least 150 turns.
3 EA games, Axis 1.8f?, 2 Allies, 3.0, 3.1.
5 Pony Tracks, 3 Axis 1.00, 1.01, 1.02, 2 Allies 1.02a, 1.04 (never released)
1 American Front 1914, US.
Marginal victories, all for my opponents. The opponents were members of the Old Fogy Group, who play tested Pony Tracks.
And there is just no counting all the play test turns working out bugs for Narvik, BOB, Supply, events, deployments and withdrawals.
The possibility of PBM games with other than the Old Fogy Group is remote. Most players require at least 1 turn a week, time constraints preclude even that. TOAW time comes in 15-minute groups, sometimes 3 times a day, or days of none.
Current games have some PBM turns, but 80% are hot seat with the Old Fogy Group.
EA T-3, Allies, Turn 44, lost Poland, Norway (Narvik is allied again), Denmark, invaded Belgium precluded a 39 Balkin campaign. Russian has Iran, Eastern Poland, and forward deployed. Italy is neutral. Paris will fall within 6 weeks max.
American Front 1914, US, Turn 25, (my modified version) a play test, started in March 06, and restarted twice. Lost Baltimore, Washington DC, and Harrisburg. All divisions are at 50-55% of TO&E, losses have been HUGE.
Current projects active and or on hold are:
50% EA T-3 base for new Matrix Pony Tracks, 780 events tested, 32 more sequence groups to go.
25% Ben Turners EA 2.28 OOB into a version of Pony Tracks using 1.04 events.
60-90% 3 modified versions of American Front 1914. OOB, replacements and events need to be refined further. Not happy with current solutions
60-99% 6 different versions of JR’s .99d Viet Nam 1965-1975. I have an 80 MB hard drive full of tests, OOB’s, scenarios, and saved turns. Will not release, as there are much better scenarios available on the subject now. But I still visit it from time to time, and Elmer may make the solitaire version viable.
90% A map exercise with 100% hidden objective values. Needs reworking with T-3 assigning additional values and hidden (from the opponent) news events.
80% Identify all events that have to be changed to make the TAOW classics viable, providing a list so players can make the necessary corrections themselves. Verification is all that remains, but maybe it can be ready by the next patch.
60-75% 4 outside projects to construct specific event sequence options/results. Although the need for all was canceled with the release of T3, as an exercise they are worthwhile doing.
Much that I want to do is far too time intensive, for the free time available.
Nitpicking appears to be my primary interest if you look at all my posts. I enjoy making things work when an easier way can be found, or trying to find out why things happen that maybe should not.
Lou
----------------------------------
The TOAW is in the details.
Mantis
Member
Mark, you should read over some of the thougths put forth in the discussion we have going on the WWII Dream Game thread I have going in the main TOAW forum.
Link.
There has been talk about 'production' that covers pretty much that type of thing that you are discussing. IF I end up doing/helping with a new WWII scenario, you can be certain that this type of thing will be included. I think it might be along the lines of what you're looking for.
Mantis
Member
You haven't seen my games...
(And notice I didn't say whether I'm talking about being Allied or Axis... :laugh: )
Mantis
Member
This is true, yet doesn't need to be crippling. To be honest, as soon as I got a feel for naval 'combat' (to use the term loosely), I quite quickly came to the realization that I was virtually never (as either side!) going to participate in direct naval combat again. So now, if I cannot do as James has suggested, utilizing a range 2 fleet vs. a range 1 fleet, I will simply move all my naval units that will 'participate' in the combat adjacent to the enemy unit, and then will move all my naval bombers into range. The movement of said aircraft generally means that I have a few that still have 70+% of their movement allowance, while others are around the 50% area, and some with only 30%. The 70's will attack directly, with all other aircraft on CS. The navies will do nothing but sit adjacent to the enemy fleet, and will not attack. (Providing 'indirect' support all by themselves). I keep this up, adding in the other aircraft when the turn % remaining indicates it is time to do so. Most of the time, I can wipe the units right out doing this a few times over the space of a turn.
You will find, however, that typically, you'll do very great damage to the enemy in the first attack or two, but might have to hit it repeatedly to kill the last couple of DDs off. (Shrug). Realistic? No. But I never said it was. All it really is, is me making a nod to the game engine, and going with what works, not what should be. But the effect is one I like. I never lose navy on my own turn, and almost never on my opponents turns. (I don't leave the navies at sea if it can be helped).
The air takes a good beating sometimes, but there always seem to be enough frames to handle the stresses. And it's not like this type of battle happens very often over the course of the war anyways, so the expense can be 'spread out'.