Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
481 messages Options
1 ... 78910111213 ... 25
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hendriks1
The air changes look good to me now. As long as tacs cannot bomb production facilities, but only trucks and materials. Bomber should be able to do both.

The australian caps need to be corrected then, it now states its new zealand and new south wales, I think that's safe and ok, but right now australia does not lose it's PU as perth is considered the underlying 2nd cap. New Zealand is a good choice as it also has a barrack, just make sure its technically correctly set up.

Italy should really have a 2nd capital in north italy asap.

I'm confused about improved (not advanced) rockets. They can be intercepted now with the full interception of fighters, I thought this should be only @1? I find it weird advanced rockets can be intercepted, there was no interception possible against them, but some V1's were driven off course by tipping the wings. But now improved rocktes are fairly useless, as they can be killed by a fighter @ full defence capacity, is that not a bug?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

lalapalooza
Late to the game here, just had my first chance at playing the game. Echoing the concerns already stated, the problem of aircraft being overpowered seems pretty big on both the European and Pacific theatres.  I think the edits you are making will be good though, but we'll have to see. The problem lies in their versatility, as German fighters with advanced range (6 total) can hit very nearly every spot in the EF and still threaten sz25 from Leningrad, or even Finland. So in terms of bang-for buck, they are heads and tails over the competition.

An extreme solution could be to keep what you originally had, but give all units an inherent AA capability (1/12) that does not stack like AA. AA would remain the same. With this you could even make aircraft cheaper to make up for the inherent riskiness.

From some of the complaints I've heard, the Axis just pursue inf + fighters and win pretty handily. Perhaps instead of just increasing the fighter cost, you increase the cost of all units by 1 (or something similar)? Smallman did a similar thing to the inf in his mod of NWO (made them cost 3), which meant that it was harder to spam those units and created conditions for a much faster flow of the game instead of massive infantry stacks.

I haven't seen this in the discussion yet, but I wanted to know: is Russia able to convert allied aircraft through lend-lease? I haven't seen that yet, and it appears not to be the case in the manual. If so, is there a reason for this? I know Russia produced most of its own fighters during the war, but perhaps this fast-track allied help could do much to help the Eastern Front balance, where people mentioned they were having trouble with balance. Might have to manage it so only one air unit can be converted a turn, but it could help with balance issues. Since none of the Russian lend-lease areas start with airfields, russia would have to spend capital to make it work on the next turn.

Apologies if some of this has already been noticed/mentioned. In my game many techs weren't used, so I might have missed something.

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hendriks1
I find it already very challenging for Germany do break russian lines, witout huge japanese help it's not possible as it takes very long for germany to build up infantry in the east, and russia usually focusses on large production of infantry, with some tacs or tanks sometimes enough to counter some german advances. Leningrad is always lost, but this doesn't significantly change germany's chances in the east. After those rounds, the UK has usually build enough transports to be a threat everywhere, it can land huge stacks of infantry in 1 turn in northern finland and threaten helsinki, I find this a weakness of the current layout. A UK airfield in Oslo gives with advanced airrange such large penetrations into practically all german industrial centers that bombing is becoming a real threat, combined with american advanced bombers this spells certain doom, so I don't want to see aircraft being passed to the USSR.

Fighters are a must for germany, and are the weapon of choice. I think reducing their range is necessary to make them less of a weapon of choice.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hepster
Ok.  A few things here...

1)  Personally I don't think allowing Lend & lease of Aircraft to Russia would be the right solution.  This idea will simply result in the Allied forces landing in L&L territories with huge numbers of aircraft to protect them (even if only one were to change per turn, as once you set aircraft up to be eligible to land in L&L territories it would be all but impossible to set other restrictions for landing).  Even if only one changes per turn, it means that The Allies (predominantly Britain in Murmansk & States in the Soviet Far East) can simply land "boat loads" of fighters in L&L territories with any available Inf. and use them as a staging platform to bring the fight to the Axis.

2)  I really think that once the vast majority of aircraft are no longer capable of getting +2 movement the issue will be well corrected.   Combine that with the increased costs and I think that it should make most of the other units comparatively valuable. I don't have an issue with how valuable aircraft are as units.  Air superiority was a huge factor of WWII, but making the proposed changes should bring them more in line with other units.

3)  The only other concern I have is that Tact. Bombers might just be a tiny bit too powerful.

Currently they are...

11 P.U.  Attack 7,  Defend 3,  Move 5, with Air combat 4

I think it might be advisable to change them to....  

12 P.U.  Attack 7, Defend 3,  Move 5,  with Air Combat 3

This is in addition to limiting the scope of their bombing capabilities as I mentioned in my previous post.  Because currently they provide great support functions,  have an exceptional attack value of their own and the 1 additional movement.  That is just my feeling on them.

@ Hendricks.  As far as Norway I find that you can pretty much shut the British down immediately if they choose to land.  When I play, I normally focus on ensuring that Norway is kept safe never allowing the Brits to establish a permanent foothold.  They may be capable of landing on B1, but steps can be taken to ensure that that is a temporary situation.

From my vantage point I think giving the Russians a slight boost at the start of the game would provide the necessary balance to the Eastern Front.  Just a few additional units in the backfield behind Moscow.  Then re-strengthening China, India and Australia slightly or making some slight adjustments to Japan.  ie. -1 or 2 aircraft (fighters) from Japan.  

Lastly is the States.  While I am comfortable  with where they are currently (generally speaking overall),  I personally think the the right way to solve the issue for them is to give them a +15 P.U. bonus for turn 1 (end of Americas turn so the P.U. is available for Turn 2 purchases) and turn 2 (same as previous, so P.U. is available for turn 3 purchases)  if Japan Attacks Pearl Harbour on J1.  If Japan opts out of the sneak attack then the States retain a B.B., 2 cruisers, a D.D. and the fighter on Hawaii (64 P.U. worth of units) but get no bonus income on turn 1 and 2.  This would accurately reflect the massive shift of America to a war economy immediately following the attack, but not change what we have currently setup where the States is relatively unprepared to enter the War (as this is historically accurate).  In my opinion simply setting the States up ready to go to war detracts from the game and is highly unrealistic.  

Then the game should be fairly well balanced IMO.
“A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition”― Rudyard Kipling
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hendriks1
Sounds all fine to me, I like the Japan round 1 idea of attacking or not attacking Pearl.

Tac bombers ARE powerful and so are planes still with their advanced range. Expensive but a solid investment, why ever buy tanks/art/etc when you can get a plane for it that can attack everywhere. I think their attack power should be reduced even more, they should be much more for defending airspace and give a boost to attacking units, but tac should be the choice for combined operations.

Advanced aircraft are just too powerful I think, expensive but unbeatable, mass produce in USA, fly to Europe, hassle germany and italy.

I still await your anwer about improved (not advanced) rockets. They can be intercepted now with the full interception of fighters, I thought this should be only @1? I find it weird advanced rockets can be intercepted, there was no interception possible against them, but some V1's were driven off course by tipping the wings. But now improved rocktes are fairly useless, as they can be killed by a fighter @ full defence capacity, is that not a bug?

We want to start a new game, this one ended in a draw, with japan owning half the world and germany crumbling. Japan and USSR are fighting now instead of Germany-USSR :)

So, can we expect a new version with the improved air tech soon?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

Rolf Larsson
For rockets: Nothing changed here, you are not allowed to intercept them and it doesn´t matter, whether those are basic, improved or advanced. Fighters have an AA attack vs. rockets which reflects the small chance to shot them down or get them off course.

The question about when there will be updates depends on some factors:
- will tww be played as a tiebreaker in the Bota tournament
- when will triplea be upgraded to include full airbattles before groundbattles start and will it be possible to govern:
1. amount of interceptions by airfields(i.e. "allows x units of type y to intercept")
2. intercepting vs. sbrs in adjacent territories (simple scrambling to every adjacent territory that contains enemy airunits)
3. first strikes for attackers (AA like).

Just because I would like to set everything only one time and not go on improving a system on and on, that is changing dramatically with full airbattles anyway, later on and allow us to set airunits in the only way those should be set imo, which means fighters will intercept and escort and have nearly no effect on ground units, tacticalbombers and probably then navalbombers, will have a huge impact on ground-/seaunits (high normal attack and defensevalue) with a low aircombatvalue and strategical bombers will be only good with sbrs, with a low ground and airvalue.

Plus this is a hobby, since we have founded L&H Studios and are about checking options of our fist commerical project, I don´t know if this will remain a top priority, cause we probably want to turn this into a real game of its own later on.

We now have custom dice!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hendriks1
Hi Rolf, thanks, I understand and agree, that would make a huge and very welcome change.

I'm afraid we've discovered another bug so far in 2.5.4; The german dock in northern germany cannot be used for naval units in the baltic. We had the issue where germany wanted to place 4 units in eastern germany and complete the battleship in the baltic, this was not allowed and ran into an error while no units where placed in northern germanmy and that dock was unused. Can be correted in edit mode, but not optimal.

Thanks
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hepster
That is not a bug Hendricks.

Since the building of a Battleship now  (covered in the new game manual Page 6) requires the presence of a Docks and a Factory, the only place Germany can place a Battleship out of is Eastern Germany.  Therefore you could only place 3 other units out of Eastern Germany if you intended to complete the Battleship located in S.Z. 27 at the start of the game.

The Docks in Northern Germany functions as intended.  If you wanted for it to produce Hulls, Battleships, Cruisers and Carriers you would need to place a factory in the territory first.  Otherwise the Docks in Northern Germany may only produce Transports, Subs and Destroyers while not accompanied by a factory.

Hope that clarifies the issue for you.
“A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition”― Rudyard Kipling
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hendriks1
Correct, we forgot about that one, problem if you play so often, you get too used to the old situation.

Sorry about the confusion...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

Veqryn
Administrator
In reply to this post by Rolf Larsson
hi rolf and hepster,

I can confirm that TWW will be round 6 of BOTA tournament.  We are currently in round 4, so you can bet on Round 6 starting in 6-10 weeks.

Also, I can also confirm that TripleA 1.7 is a long long way off. Probably 4 months away, if not more.  Plus it would only be an unstable, and may not have all the features you want.
So I would say, definitely balance and make the game for the current 1.6.1.4 engine, since it is going to be "the" engine for a long time.


if it counts for anything, i like the idea of tech making new units purchaseable, instead of upgrading all existing units.  (thinking of air units here)
Please contribute to the TripleA 2013 donation drive:
http://tripleadev.1671093.n2.nabble.com/2013-TripleA-Donation-Drive-tp7583455.html
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

Silberfalke
Dear Team of TripleA

First of all I would like to thank all of you for creating such a nice game. In particular for investing so much of your time and give it away for free is more than respectable...

Personal Greetings to Veqryn, who once honoured me by playing his favourite "Napoleonic Empires" one on one with me. Still difficult to spell your username, man

Now to TWW...I've got a big problem. I use the latest engine for tripleA (1.6.1.4) and the latest game version (2.5.4). The problem is the placement of troops in a local game. Noo...not my own, although it's complicated. It's the AI which simply seems unable to place what it purchased. Sometimes its purchase isn't placed correctly and sometimes the whole placement phase is missing in history and doesn't occur.
The AI is continously buying more units of a certain kind which could afterwards not be placed after game rules and therefore ARE not placed.

Smells like reinstall everything but I wonder if the problem is known at all.

If I may state here a small suggestion... An alternative map of TWW for beginners with faaar less units on the map (no changes to rule structure) would be very cool to learn the new rules. Even I, knowing already a lot, spent more than 2,5 hours for my first move with Japan in the local game I started, but wasn't able to complete because of the problematic shown above. Well, another one, not so small would definitely be a free for all version, maybe with Brazil, Spain or Turkey as independent and playable and the possibility for them to survive by temporary alliances...

Thanks for reading this looong text and for your help in particular and in advance
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hepster
Silberfalke,

This game cannot be played by the A.I.

The game is far to complex for the A.I. to handle.  This game was and is intended to be played by human players.  Realistically the A.I. will never be capable of playing T.W.W.

So I suggest you join the lobby and find human opponents if you enjoy the game concept and want to play it.  Otherwise it will likely be of little use to you.

To your second point,  while a "Beginners" game would be nice, I am almost certain that neither myself or Rolf have any interest in making a new version.  T.W.W. was never meant to be a beginners game.  Aside from tweeking and balancing the present game there is not likely to be any new variations of it being created in the near future by either of us.

Thanks for your comments and input.

Hepps
“A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition”― Rudyard Kipling
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

Silberfalke
Thanks very much hepster. I will do as you say and try my luck in the lobby, although I think that there might not be enough people to stand someone playing so dead slow as I still do. I think, before I try that, I have to get much more practice.

Thanks anyway for your quick reply and all the good work!

Silber
 
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hepster
Don't beat yourself up.  The first round of the game is a lengthy one, even for those of us that have played repeatedly.  While 2 + hours is a bit long for any one turn, you may find it helpful to watch a few games on the lobby to see some of the more standard opening moves (there are still a variety as T.W.W. offers a wider array of possible opening moves than any other game on Triple A).

From my stand point, I personally don't mind new players taking their time planning out their moves as we all had the experience of the same learning curve.

Hope to see you around the Lobby.  Feel free to give me a slap at any time if you want to take T.W.W. for a test drive.

Hepps
“A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition”― Rudyard Kipling
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

Dima
In reply to this post by L & H Studios
Good job on the upcomming balance of the Air tech tree, but is ther any chance that the Mech Inf gets a small buff? I meen 1 att or 1 def or to recive att/def support from Art? Cuz Mech Inf is 1 of the most avoided units in the game specialy cuz you need to spend 4 techs on it to make it a good combat/economical efficient versus all the other units that get fully upgraded by only 1-2 techs. ( Or maybe compress the techs in only 2 Mech Inf techs realated)

A other unit that i my opinion needs a upgrade is the Mobile Art, plus maybe a info upgrade on it cuz i think Rolf told me that M. Art has a AA strike vs Mech Inf/ Tanks or something like that.

A other unit that maybe needs a +1 def should be the DD , and maybe it recives it via Imp. DD in the Naval tech Tree.

Great job guys, cheers
Why stay and die, when you can retreat and fight a other day when the odds are favorable to you?
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

sonrix
In reply to this post by Dima
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

Boom
Hi All-
This is my 1st post, I've been playing 2.5.4. I've researched Improved Special Warfare with both Germany and Japan. One of the advantages this research brings is the ability for minor belligerents to construct all infantry unit types. Once researched, I am able to build marines, paratroopers, etc. with Vichy France, Manchuria, etc. However, although I can place the units I am unable to select them for any action. I haven't yet seen if they are still able to defend, but basically due to the inability to select the special infantry units they remain in the province they were initially placed in for the remainder of the game. Has anyone had similar experience? Will this be resolved in the upcoming patch? Thanks for your help and fantastic mod by the way.
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hepster
Thanks for pointing that out.

I will double check it immediately.  what may be happening is that because this feature was added in the last release we may have forgotten to add that trigger to switch the units from the Minor to that associated Major at the end of the turn.  So whats probably happening is that the units you have purchased with the Minor are most likely staying as "Manchurian" or "Vichy",  when they should be changing to Japanese and German respectively at the end of the turn.

For the time being you can simply edit those units.  

But be assured that we will fix it for the up-coming release.

Glad you like the game.  
“A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition”― Rudyard Kipling
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Total World War:December 1941 Version 2.5

Rolf Larsson
 New version 2.5.5 available for 12$ only from www.totalworldwar.com, soon.

All those who played the map intensely and made suggestions/ gave feedback get it for free, as well as those who are going play it in the BotA tournament, Triplea developers ,too, of course.

2$ of each purchase go directly to tripleadonation.

You have to register with your Lobbyaccount and be online to play.

We now have custom dice!
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Total World War: December 1941 Version 2.5

hendriks1
In reply to this post by hepster
Hi Heps,

We have completed a great 2.5.4 game in which an overwhelming victory for the axis was achieved even after the fall of Tokyio.

On balance, not much to say, I'd say it's pretty balanced, USSR has a tough time defending and germany can build 2-3 factories/barracks in the east in R2. If the russian counter in R1 goes anywhere wrong as it can with I'd say a 10% chance, the allies will lose quickly because of the loss of russia. Allies are unable to do much in the west the first few rounds, as subs are the main danger and the UK fleet is mostly lost in R1 apart from the scotland force. Cairo is also difficult to hold in 50% of the games. A loss there is a loss of the middle east, india and the game for the allies. I'd say the middle east is just slighly underpowered for the allies and the extra divisions for germany in syria and iraq in my view should be removed. Too easy to para, land there and get extra units that open up a whole new front in the middle east impossible to defend with egypt/india. An extra possibility besides the Congo to build up some troops would be welcome in the middle east. India is mostly lost in our games, japan going for them and ignoring for a while china. The key often lies there, as when india falls and japan takes that PU and builds factroies/buildings, the game is also almost lost. With the USA now not in a prime position anymore but needing many rounds to even build up production facilities, things are wide open to the axis the frist 5 rounds I'd say. But, still pretty balanced so no great changes required, a unit here and there, I'd say and extra unit or 2 far away for russia, infantry, and 1 extra infantry or a fortification in calcutta for india.

Bugs;
- Spanish tanks cannot move in non combat for 2 spaces, this is when they are neutral.
- Russian trucks to China should be unlimited as the guide states, but it's not, still restricted to 1 in that province of Altay. Haven't tested matrials, but probably also restricted, which should also be open.

Rest seems to work fine. Planes still the weapon of choice, manouvreable, agile and retreatable. If the engine would permit for air battles to be fought first and ground combat after supported by air if they win the battle would be an owesome expansion to this game!

Thanks for giving us HOURS of fun! :)
1 ... 78910111213 ... 25