sagji
Lieutenant
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 6:33 pm

Fri Jun 08, 2012 9:48 am

Ilitarist wrote:What about waiting for everybody? I sometimes play TBS games and waiting even for 1 other player kills me. Can't imagine why anybody will want to play even with 7 other persons.


All the players do their turns at the same time. So we set a deadline and turns are processed once per day. You can do your turn at any time in the day, so you are never forced to sit waiting for another player.

User avatar
Kensai
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:54 pm
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Sun Jun 10, 2012 11:22 am

One thing definitely in need of fixing is the besieging/bombarding of units. Right now, no damage is ever registered on the defenders, even if the system says the attackers have scored some hits.
Care to unify Germany as Austria? Recreate the Holy Roman Empire of the 20th Century:
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)

User avatar
Drax
Corporal
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Jan 14, 2012 6:19 pm
Location: France, Bordeaux

Sun Jun 10, 2012 10:34 pm

Great news indeed! I'm pleasantly surprised. Thanks Phils =)
Les impatients ne savent pas ce qui est bon.

sagji
Lieutenant
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 6:33 pm

Mon Jun 11, 2012 3:21 pm

Kensai wrote:One thing definitely in need of fixing is the besieging/bombarding of units. Right now, no damage is ever registered on the defenders, even if the system says the attackers have scored some hits.

Actually damage is done - but the amount is so low as to be easily missed - 5 hits if you are lucky and have lots of artillery. Given a minimum fort has 4 elements of 32 hits it can take a year to do enough damage if you hit every turn.

Plus any number of defenders can hide in a fortress and gain the full effect of the fortifications.
Also any assault is an all or nothing attack that continues until the attacker either takes the fortress or is driven from the area. Even units with orders not to attack will retreat from the area.

I suspect the besieging hits is just that artillery has a very low chance of hitting. This should to be increased slightly and a new modifier for overfilled forts added leaving large armies very vulnerable.
To fix the assault problem I think simply saying an army that fails an assault reverts to offensive stance - the problem looks to be that units keep attacking, but having failed a first attempt aren't in a state to assault so suffers badly and then take everything with them.
Though it implies that there is also a problem that when an army looses a battle and retreats it takes other armies with it.


There is a similar problem with shore bombardment against areas with coastal guns - this results in the complete elimination of the bombarding fleet, where in reality it would either not happen, or would be quickly called off. The problem is that the game doesn't model the bombarding force suppressing the coastal guns first, that coastal guns can sink any ship including a SoL in one shot, and every coastal gun gets to fire at every element in the fleet.

User avatar
Kensai
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:54 pm
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Mon Jun 11, 2012 7:37 pm

I wonder how this got away in beta testing, especially when in all the rest of AGEOD titles sieges and assault work properly and as advertised, so to speak.

Something else I've noticed: sending my own fleet in bombard mode to help a nearby landing force (in our game a Greek fleet near some Scottish troops in Dodecanese!) they ignore it. There is no bombarding. I find it already disheartening you can't simply bombard without having to move ground units as well (perhaps WAD as to simulate the ground troops pointing the targets), but allies should help each other all the time.

Also, do breaches work properly after all?!
Care to unify Germany as Austria? Recreate the Holy Roman Empire of the 20th Century:
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)

vaalen
AGEod Guard of Honor
Posts: 1229
Joined: Thu Dec 20, 2007 8:48 pm

Tue Jun 12, 2012 1:04 am

Another bug that should be fixed appeared when I tried running the game in 1024 by 768 is this- The build unit interface did not work properly, showing only five units at a time. Every attempt to move it by clicking arrows failed, resulting in no available units. The problem was solved when I switched to 1280 by 1024. Not a gamebreaker, not by any means, but I would like to use the lower resolution, as it gives me a closer view of the beautiful terrain.

User avatar
Surtur
Posts: 39
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2012 9:59 pm
Location: Milano

Tue Jun 12, 2012 10:15 pm

Hi guys,

I registered here to thank the devs for their continued support. Patches are making the game better and I hope that the game will reach it's potential.
Keep on going Ageod :)

Regards,

Surtur

ps. I would buy an expansion/new dlc

User avatar
Kensai
Posts: 2712
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 4:54 pm
Location: Freiburg, Germany

Fri Jun 15, 2012 11:17 am

One other possible improvement could be regarding the popup messages. I suggest you turn all red event message presentations to CMN, meaning that they show up to all players. This is paramount, especially in a MP game where certain events may provide opportunities for intervention and action.

For example in our game Russia just had a Polish revolt (1863) and we only knew about it because the player openly posted á la AAR battle screens. This was a major event that should be known to all nations. Perhaps another nation could find an opportunity to strike Russia the very moment it tries to suppress its internal problems. These things need to be known for more action! :)
Care to unify Germany as Austria? Recreate the Holy Roman Empire of the 20th Century:
Großdeutschland Mod
Are you tough enough to impersonate the Shogun and defy the Westerners? Prove it:
Shogun Defiance Mod (completed AAR)

glennbob
Corporal
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2012 3:33 pm

Fri Jun 15, 2012 2:07 pm

Kensai wrote:One other possible improvement could be regarding the popup messages. I suggest you turn all red event message presentations to CMN, meaning that they show up to all players. This is paramount, especially in a MP game where certain events may provide opportunities for intervention and action.

For example in our game Russia just had a Polish revolt (1863) and we only knew about it because the player openly posted á la AAR battle screens. This was a major event that should be known to all nations. Perhaps another nation could find an opportunity to strike Russia the very moment it tries to suppress its internal problems. These things need to be known for more action! :)


I absolutely agree with this, would be a major improvement and allow each nation to know the news from around the world. One other thing would be if the AI could possibly be made to think about making a strike on a country that may be having problems itself, so if the human player was Russia and it had the Polish revolts, then maybe the AI Turks should think about attacking... Not so every weakened nation gets attacked, but just so the AI considers a course of action down this path. :D

Ech Heftag
Sergeant
Posts: 70
Joined: Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:11 pm
Location: Japan

Sat Jun 16, 2012 5:53 pm

Hello,

I've just read this topic and registered here to share some of my wishes for an upcoming PoN patch. It's very nice to see the continuing support by the devs!

1) Necessary bugfixes:

a) Loyalty bug

b) Siege bug (for some reason, units under siege still get supplies, which is in contrast to the manual and the way sieges worked in previous AGEOD titles)

c) Peace bugs (colonial regions and objectives seem to be unclaimable in a peace offer)

2) Rebalancing:

a) There should be a possibility to get more leaders with growing forces, and the command costs of units should be overall reduced

b) The C-in-Cs should be 4-star-generals, to make this role more distinct from the "normal" field officers. It's also easier to keep track of a distinct 4-star general and -admiral than to scroll through all your 3-star generals to find out who's the current C-in-C. The special C-in-C ability should only appear on the 4-star level (currently, most C-in-C abilities for 3-star generals are effectively wasted abilities). It should not be possible to manually upgrade a 3-star to 4-star level (only one 4-star at a time for each branch, promoted automatically by the program according to seniority).

c) The development level of a province should influence the size to which a structure can be expanded. For example, a well-developed province in Europe can support a large factory (in game terms, a lvl. 2 or lvl. 3 factory, once the respective techs have been researched), while a province with thick jungle and few roads in Africa can just barely support a small farm (in game terms: economic structures limited to lvl. 1 , even if better tech has been researched). To make matters easy, maybe just choose 25%, 50% and 75% as the thresholds. With 25% development, you can start to build structures in a province. 50% allows for lvl. 2 structures, while 75% lets you upgrade to the final lvl. 3 structures.

d) To balance this effect even more, the development level should no longer increase by itself over time. Instead, the player should have to use cards (colonial or regional decision cards) to increase the development level of provinces.

e) Major colonial rebalancing: The average requirements for protectorates, colonies, dominions and vassals should be higher. Furthermore, there should be possibilities to contest or lift the protectorate as a player of a third country (currently, once you've established a protectorate, the area is basically yours, in my opinion, for historical and gameplay reasons, only a real colony should have this definite effect). Also, in general, there should be more options to reduce or contest the colonial penetration of a rival player. This is especially interesting and important for MP games.

sagji
Lieutenant
Posts: 148
Joined: Sat Apr 03, 2010 6:33 pm

Sat Jun 16, 2012 6:49 pm

Ech Heftag wrote:
2) Rebalancing:

a) There should be a possibility to get more leaders with growing forces, and the command costs of units should be overall reduced
I think this was supposed to be in. The official database includes numbers for increases to the leader limit over time, but there are no events to actually change them.

b) The C-in-Cs should be 4-star-generals, to make this role more distinct from the "normal" field officers. It's also easier to keep track of a distinct 4-star general and -admiral than to scroll through all your 3-star generals to find out who's the current C-in-C. The special C-in-C ability should only appear on the 4-star level (currently, most C-in-C abilities for 3-star generals are effectively wasted abilities). It should not be possible to manually upgrade a 3-star to 4-star level (only one 4-star at a time for each branch, promoted automatically by the program according to seniority).

You get one C-in-C per theatre not just 1. At the moment it is very hard to identify the theatre's C-in-C. you have to look at every 3-star general in the theatre. I think that simply showing them as 4-star would help. The alternative is to strip the whole concept from the game.

c) The development level of a province should influence the size to which a structure can be expanded. For example, a well-developed province in Europe can support a large factory (in game terms, a lvl. 2 or lvl. 3 factory, once the respective techs have been researched), while a province with thick jungle and few roads in Africa can just barely support a small farm (in game terms: economic structures limited to lvl. 1 , even if better tech has been researched). To make matters easy, maybe just choose 25%, 50% and 75% as the thresholds. With 25% development, you can start to build structures in a province. 50% allows for lvl. 2 structures, while 75% lets you upgrade to the final lvl. 3 structures.
I like the idea, however the problem is that level 2 structures replace level 1 structures in the force pool. So there are no level 1s to build.

d) To balance this effect even more, the development level should no longer increase by itself over time. Instead, the player should have to use cards (colonial or regional decision cards) to increase the development level of provinces.
Then you will need to add more decisions to do this. You may also run into problems when the dev level drops. one potential issue is that if the dev level is too low you can't raise it.

e) Major colonial rebalancing: The average requirements for protectorates, colonies, dominions and vassals should be higher. Furthermore, there should be possibilities to contest or lift the protectorate as a player of a third country (currently, once you've established a protectorate, the area is basically yours, in my opinion, for historical and gameplay reasons, only a real colony should have this definite effect). Also, in general, there should be more options to reduce or contest the colonial penetration of a rival player. This is especially interesting and important for MP games.

I disagree about raising the limits, I think the root problem is that CP accumulates far too quickly. The naval decisions look to be the worst offender here - it is easy to go from unclaimed to being able to play protectorate in a few months - this should take years. Colonisation in our MP have is massively ahead of schedule. So much so that France is running into problems with events that convert areas into protectorates that are converting colonies back to protectorate.

User avatar
Jim-NC
Posts: 2981
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:21 pm
Location: Near Region 209, North Carolina

Sat Jun 16, 2012 11:45 pm

Welcome to the forums Ech Heftag. May you enjoy your stay here.
Remember - The beatings will continue until morale improves.
[SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25673
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Mon Jun 18, 2012 8:58 am

Lot of remarks, sound remarks. You guys find in one day more than a week of work for us :)

A PON patch is definitively planned, we have to see what is the most important things to do.
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
Sir Garnet
Posts: 935
Joined: Sat Jul 16, 2011 8:23 pm

Mon Jun 18, 2012 1:56 pm

sagji wrote:You get one C-in-C per theatre not just 1. At the moment it is very hard to identify the theatre's C-in-C. you have to look at every 3-star general in the theatre. I think that simply showing them as 4-star would help. The alternative is to strip the whole concept from the game.


I think 4 stars is a bad idea since it is not a permanent rank - maybe a baton with a mouseover and a line in the officer description saying he is CiC in that theatre.


sagji wrote:I disagree about raising the limits, I think the root problem is that CP accumulates far too quickly. The naval decisions look to be the worst offender here - it is easy to go from unclaimed to being able to play protectorate in a few months - this should take years. Colonisation in our MP have is massively ahead of schedule. So much so that France is running into problems with events that convert areas into protectorates that are converting colonies back to protectorate.


The problem with things as they are is keeping track - I'd like the Colonial Office screen to flash areas that are finished or nearly finished with the last colonial action, as well as areas lying fallow when something might be done. A table listing actions, locations, completeion dates, rival actions, and province stats would also be quite nice for a very convenient overview. Add a tickbox to have a reminder/alert sent on completion, and then it is easy to devote proper attention over longer time periods using the overview table rather than checking around the map every turn or few

Return to “Pride of Nations”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 8 guests