User avatar
Shri
Posts: 887
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:57 am
Location: INDIA

Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 pm

Ebbingford wrote:Thanks for the reply Shri.
I just think the BEF looks wrong listed as reservists when there are regular infantry elements in play.
I see ammo is getting produced, but is just not shown in stockpiles or getting moved or produced in the supply filter tooltip. These all show 0 for ammo.


A small amount of AMMO will accrue every turn if you play passive.
Also check the experience stars of the start BEF, you will find 4/5 stars, that is a lot of experience, the Best German units have only 2/3 and that is only for a very few of them, most are 1*.
Rascals, would you live forever? - Frederick the Great.

User avatar
Highlandcharge
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 11:44 am

Wed Jul 08, 2015 2:03 pm

So the new heavy munitions rule means that munition trains will go red when they have been used up, then you have to move them to a city with a depot or munitions factory where they will be refilled with ammo, the element will then be full again ready to be shipped to the front?

Am I understanding this correctly?

Thanks:-)

User avatar
Lindi
General
Posts: 510
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 6:21 pm
Location: Province de Québec (Montréal)

Wed Jul 08, 2015 2:16 pm

Because it's the only unit I see in corps with many unit I guess is maybe a forget, so I post.

[ATTACH]34005[/ATTACH]
Attachments
Capture.JPG

User avatar
Ebbingford
Posts: 6120
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Wed Jul 08, 2015 3:05 pm

Playing as Britain.
There seems to be a problem with the 4th Infantry Corps (Sco) in Cairo. It won't take any infantry replacements. It has gained the officers and 2 artilllery elements since the start of the game, but not any infantry.
The other British corps stacked with it has been Ok.
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.

"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.


Image

User avatar
Ebbingford
Posts: 6120
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Wed Jul 08, 2015 3:20 pm

Which VP score is the correct one? The one on the F9 page of the ledger, or the two icons at the top left hard corner of the screen which say "VP (Entent)" and "VP (Central Powers)"?
I'm guessing the F9 page is wrong just from the numbers, eg Britain on turn 9 has 42 VP but gets 49 per turn.......
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.



"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.





Image

Altaris
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:20 pm

Wed Jul 08, 2015 3:53 pm

Ebbingford wrote:Which VP score is the correct one? The one on the F9 page of the ledger, or the two icons at the top left hard corner of the screen which say "VP (Entent)" and "VP (Central Powers)"?
I'm guessing the F9 page is wrong just from the numbers, eg Britain on turn 9 has 42 VP but gets 49 per turn.......


The one on the F9 screen is the nation's individual VP score. Each turn, this VP gets rolled into the Alliance's (Entente or Central Powers) VP score (meaning it zero's out for the nation, and the alliance gets that much VP), which is used at the end of the game to determine the winner. The Alliance VP scores are the ones shown on the main screen underneath the National Morale marker.

VP/turn is important for individual nations later on, though, as it also reduces your per-turn accumulation of War Weariness. So the less VP you have coming in each turn in 1916+, the more quickly war weariness will spike up, and eventually war weariness can kill a nation.

User avatar
Lindi
General
Posts: 510
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 6:21 pm
Location: Province de Québec (Montréal)

Wed Jul 08, 2015 6:41 pm

Altaris wrote:The one on the F9 screen is the nation's individual VP score. Each turn, this VP gets rolled into the Alliance's (Entente or Central Powers) VP score (meaning it zero's out for the nation, and the alliance gets that much VP), which is used at the end of the game to determine the winner. The Alliance VP scores are the ones shown on the main screen underneath the National Morale marker.

VP/turn is important for individual nations later on, though, as it also reduces your per-turn accumulation of War Weariness. So the less VP you have coming in each turn in 1916+, the more quickly war weariness will spike up, and eventually war weariness can kill a nation.


You really have do a big work, when Finish, for me need to add on the true game in other scenario, do same mod scenario for WIA2.

User avatar
BBBD316
Lieutenant
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 3:50 am

Thu Jul 09, 2015 1:17 am

Altaris,

The KonPrinz warplan sees the German 4th stuck in Luxemburg and you have to declare war on them to release them, just a little thing. Also I had my 2 armies in the East go from Posen and the other far eastern city to back to the middle of Germany, when I had asked them to move into Poland. Not sure if this is WAD.

Also in a few tries I have tried to play all my diplomats straight off the bat, but only one seems to stick. Is there a chance for each to stay or I am doing something wrong.

I do like the changes to the plans as some have become much better alternatives, the Austrians finally have some actual choices to make.

Altaris
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:20 pm

Thu Jul 09, 2015 2:59 am

BBBD316 wrote:Also I had my 2 armies in the East go from Posen and the other far eastern city to back to the middle of Germany, when I had asked them to move into Poland. Not sure if this is WAD.


This happens if you move a stack with an HQ attached to the Eastern GHQ for Germany into the Western Front theater. This is to keep the two GHQ and their subordinate HQ attachments in their proper locations. If you want to move units between fronts, do not have them in the stack with an HQ or GHQ which would be moving out of its front. If you want to transfer leaders, detach them from GHQ first before moving fronts, otherwise they'll get transferred back to their proper front.

I'll check the KronPrinz/Luxembourg issue. I haven't tested the alternative plans as heavily as the historical ones.

User avatar
BBBD316
Lieutenant
Posts: 142
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 3:50 am

Thu Jul 09, 2015 4:21 am

So I had of promoted one of the stacks to CiC then this would have not happened I am assuming?

Only wusses go historical :)

User avatar
Shri
Posts: 887
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:57 am
Location: INDIA

Thu Jul 09, 2015 7:47 am

BBBD316 wrote:So I had of promoted one of the stacks to CiC then this would have not happened I am assuming?

Only wusses go historical :)


Historical is the best option for CP, as i have posted several times, CP starts with a 16% deficit in army, 50% in VP and a massive 250% in Navy.
That means unless you spank the French and grab a good amount of NM/VP in 1914-1915, winning is difficult unless you want to go "gamey" and send the HCF to the MED, but beware in this mod doing that is really costly. So Naval game for CP is "HOUSE ARREST" more or less until and unless the EE or WE blunder.
Rascals, would you live forever? - Frederick the Great.

Santini
Conscript
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 11:44 am

Fri Jul 10, 2015 1:57 am

How hard would it be to make a single player submod, ie return to 3 players?

Altaris
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:20 pm

Fri Jul 10, 2015 2:24 am

I'm not converting the mod to 3 player setup, too much work. But you could always have 1 player play multiple factions (i.e., submit orders for each nation they are playing). So, 1 player might take France and England, one might take the Central Powers, and the other Russia + any other Entente that join.

Santini
Conscript
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 11:44 am

Fri Jul 10, 2015 2:50 am

Altaris wrote:I'm not converting the mod to 3 player setup, too much work. But you could always have 1 player play multiple factions (i.e., submit orders for each nation they are playing). So, 1 player might take France and England, one might take the Central Powers, and the other Russia + any other Entente that join.


Summation: it would be hard


Ok, thanks much. I'll take a stab at it time permitting

Scipionminos
Private
Posts: 33
Joined: Mon May 07, 2012 8:55 pm

Fri Jul 10, 2015 7:27 pm

Hello,

I just downloaded the game and did not even tried it but just the fact that now I can choose only one country (for me it's Austro-Hungarian) rather than a bundle is HUGE !!!!!!
I bought the game and did not play more than few hours because of this dilemna. I was prefering PON for that reason.

THANKS AGAIN FOR THAT POSSIBILITY I can finally enjoy this game

User avatar
Shri
Posts: 887
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2013 9:57 am
Location: INDIA

Sat Jul 11, 2015 12:09 pm

@ All,

UK spot open in this BETA game-
http://www.ageod-forum.com/showthread.php?39849-EAW-Ultimate-Edition-Mod-PBEM-Game-2

If interested, go to that link and type in your name. Thanks.
Rascals, would you live forever? - Frederick the Great.

User avatar
Metatron
Posts: 131
Joined: Tue Aug 28, 2012 1:35 pm
Location: Potsdam (Germany)

Sat Jul 11, 2015 4:57 pm

A bug I noticed is the number of prisoners that seems to have a 0 to much (same thing with rifles captured I think). For example taking Liège, 5712 soldiers and 8 guns taken out = 21 000 prisoners and 40 000 rifles captured. Affected all battles as far I can tell.
-There is safety in numbers.
-Well there is also death in numbers. It's called a massacre.

Santini
Conscript
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 11:44 am

Sat Jul 11, 2015 5:24 pm

How did you implement dynamic turn duration?

User avatar
Ebbingford
Posts: 6120
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Sun Jul 12, 2015 1:41 pm

Running a test game as the Brits to be ready for the pbem game.....
Naval resupply of ammo doesn't seem enough to me.
Yes, I have a huge grand fleet that uses 184 ammo per battle according to the tooltip, in fact it uses a lot more than this. Anyway, I have sent the fleet back to port to take on more shells, it is resupplying at only 32 per turn and is now up to 7% of it's capacity. 93 more turns until it is full......
I think the RN would be a bit quicker than this. This seems too slow.
I have also had fleets which need replacements in large naval bases in passive posture for lots of turns now and none have received any replacements.

On a different note the British heavy artillery has in its build costs tooltip "4" instead of what I think should be "artillery".
It is also quite annoying that once the Japanese enter the war they take your hard earned munitions replacements..... I'm going to have to micro manage where replacements go in the pbem, selecting which units get them by putting them into passive posture.

Now that there are no transport ships I think any movement by sea of troops takes much longer. In fact I think movements from Australia or Canada can now only be undertaken in the long turns, through the winter. Any units moving without a supply wagon are starving at sea.
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.



"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.





Image

Nostra
Corporal
Posts: 41
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2014 12:43 pm

Sun Jul 12, 2015 6:04 pm

Playing the Rupprecht plan as Germany leaves one of its armies locked in Luxembourg. Same with Moltke
Swiss territory or atleast Basel is also Neutral and cant be entered thus giving the german player an immediate -10 NM

Altaris
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:20 pm

Sun Jul 12, 2015 8:55 pm

Ebbingford wrote:Running a test game as the Brits to be ready for the pbem game.....
Naval resupply of ammo doesn't seem enough to me.
Yes, I have a huge grand fleet that uses 184 ammo per battle according to the tooltip, in fact it uses a lot more than this. Anyway, I have sent the fleet back to port to take on more shells, it is resupplying at only 32 per turn and is now up to 7% of it's capacity. 93 more turns until it is full......
I think the RN would be a bit quicker than this. This seems too slow.
I have also had fleets which need replacements in large naval bases in passive posture for lots of turns now and none have received any replacements.

On a different note the British heavy artillery has in its build costs tooltip "4" instead of what I think should be "artillery".
It is also quite annoying that once the Japanese enter the war they take your hard earned munitions replacements..... I'm going to have to micro manage where replacements go in the pbem, selecting which units get them by putting them into passive posture.

Now that there are no transport ships I think any movement by sea of troops takes much longer. In fact I think movements from Australia or Canada can now only be undertaken in the long turns, through the winter. Any units moving without a supply wagon are starving at sea.


I'll check the ammo resupply scripts, might have goofed something up there, definitely shouldn't take that long.

For this most recent version, we moved the minors from the ENT faction to the GBR faction (before, minors were processed as a separate faction lumped together as ENT/EN1/CEN), so there may be some balance issues like what you mention with Japan. I'll check this and see if there's a better way to handle it.

I thought I fixed the 4/artillery string issue, I'll have to look into it again to see why it's not showing up right. I might have missed a string.

I also just fine-tuned some of the travel times to make them more realistic, that may be why you're running into issues with unit supply at sea. If nothing else, I can make the units at sea stay in supply (maybe as long as they are in range of a harbor within, say, 2 regions, or something like that).


Nostra wrote:Playing the Rupprecht plan as Germany leaves one of its armies locked in Luxembourg. Same with Moltke
Swiss territory or atleast Basel is also Neutral and cant be entered thus giving the german player an immediate -10 NM


Okay, I'll check it. Also probably linked to have switched Entente minors from ENT faction to GBR, and GBR not having come into the war yet.

Altaris
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:20 pm

Sun Jul 12, 2015 8:56 pm

Metatron wrote:A bug I noticed is the number of prisoners that seems to have a 0 to much (same thing with rifles captured I think). For example taking Liège, 5712 soldiers and 8 guns taken out = 21 000 prisoners and 40 000 rifles captured. Affected all battles as far I can tell.


I've noticed that too, just haven't gotten around to hunting down the issue and fixing it. Not causing any real problems apart from cosmetic.

The Lev
Sergeant
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 10:15 pm
Location: All over the place, Mostly Britian

RE: Historical names

Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:17 pm

Tried my hand at modding the regimental/brigade names into EAW for the Germans as sometimes you'll get a Silesian unit in I Bavarian Corps. Managed to get all the Cavalry, Feldartillerie, FuBartillerie and Infantry units done, but the biggest question has always been whether to name the 6000 man strong elements after Regiments or Brigades, likewise with the 400-500 man strong Cavalry units not to mention artillery. Depending on whether one sees such units as Brigades or Regiments it could really imbalance the game were Russo-French units not bought up to the same standards-attached is the OoB of the 6 Bavarian army to see if it can be of use, sticking it into Events/WW1_Warplans should work

[ATTACH]34068[/ATTACH]

Hope that would help with historical names, also tried to create new generals to replace the generic ones but can't figure out why their name doesn't show up in-game 90% of the time, ah, and single brigade units (Attached cavalry) always seem to expand into full divisions along with artillery unless in a corps element
Attachments

[The extension txt has been deactivated and can no longer be displayed.]


The Lev
Sergeant
Posts: 67
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2012 10:15 pm
Location: All over the place, Mostly Britian

Mon Jul 13, 2015 3:26 pm

For the Shell Shortage, any literature always refers to the allowance per-gun while in-game it pretty much means they'll use up all available shells and go dry until reinforced-comes with the territory i suppose. Would an RGD which would cost shells (Varied for allowance) modify the effectiveness of artillery in the area? I'm an amateur at coding but haven't noticed it being suggested yet, guess a front-wide decision would be possible and if a player sees that they don't have the shells to match the most effective decision it would literally be a shell crisis

Just a thought

User avatar
Highlandcharge
Posts: 701
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 11:44 am

Mon Jul 13, 2015 7:17 pm

Altaris I have a duplicate Austrian general, Otto Meixner, I will move one of them some where obscure so he cant effect the game :)

Altaris
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:20 pm

Mon Jul 13, 2015 11:00 pm

Ebbingford wrote:Running a test game as the Brits to be ready for the pbem game.....
Naval resupply of ammo doesn't seem enough to me.
Yes, I have a huge grand fleet that uses 184 ammo per battle according to the tooltip, in fact it uses a lot more than this. Anyway, I have sent the fleet back to port to take on more shells, it is resupplying at only 32 per turn and is now up to 7% of it's capacity. 93 more turns until it is full......
I think the RN would be a bit quicker than this. This seems too slow.
I have also had fleets which need replacements in large naval bases in passive posture for lots of turns now and none have received any replacements.

On a different note the British heavy artillery has in its build costs tooltip "4" instead of what I think should be "artillery".
It is also quite annoying that once the Japanese enter the war they take your hard earned munitions replacements..... I'm going to have to micro manage where replacements go in the pbem, selecting which units get them by putting them into passive posture.

Now that there are no transport ships I think any movement by sea of troops takes much longer. In fact I think movements from Australia or Canada can now only be undertaken in the long turns, through the winter. Any units moving without a supply wagon are starving at sea.


For next version, land units being transferred over sea will get supply if the faction's alliance has a Sea Control map alea in effect over the zone (i.e. Great Britain would be able to supply troops over the Atlantic where there is an Entente Sea Control alea in effect without losing supply). This should work well to alleviate this issue. I'll implement the script in our current games too so it won't impact your troops.

The issue you reported about the Scottish unit not being able to take replacements is due to missing Roundels for sub-faction GSC (GBR Scottish troops). I'll fix this for next version.

Still researching on the other items.

Altaris
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:20 pm

Mon Jul 13, 2015 11:34 pm

Santini wrote:How did you implement dynamic turn duration?


Through a series of ForceDateTo scripts. Basically, I looked at the turn index and forced the date to the point I wanted it to go.

User avatar
Ebbingford
Posts: 6120
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Tue Jul 14, 2015 10:37 am

I think there is also a problem with how the sea movement times are being handled by the different length turns.
I sent my NZ troops from New Zealand to Suez on the Dec turn. The journey time says 63 days. I watched the turn progress and it only ran through 7 days. The NZ force is still heading to Suez and the journey is now 56 days. Shouldn't 30 days have been taken off the journey time and the unit moved about half way there? It has only moved for 7 days though.
It also applies to land movement times. I sent a force from Port Said to El Arish, the journey said 14 days. That was in the Dec turn. Jan turn and the force is only half way there with a journey time of 7 days still.


Wouldn't it be better to stick with same length turn times. This looks like 7 day turns all year round to me. It would also solve the problem of ammo/munitions/aircraft etc, etc. At present you get the same amount of these each turn regardless of how long the turn represents, 7 days or a month.
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.



"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.





Image

Altaris
Posts: 1543
Joined: Wed Dec 07, 2011 8:20 pm

Tue Jul 14, 2015 11:55 am

You are correct that turns are technically 7 days, the scripts just "skip" some turns to speed things along in late fall/winter. It's mostly to help reduce the number of turns without much to do, as it's almost impossible to campaign during these months. Historically, very little happened during these times as well. You are correct that it causes some discrepancies in income, I could look a modifying scripts to alleviate this though.

Re: movement, I"m hesitant to add modifiers to movement speed, as this could lead to very game situations, and screws up frontages if not done right.

Keep in mind, going this route reduces the number of turns per year from 48 to 30, that's over 35% reduction, and keeps the game moving along. If the game goes to a historical late 1918 period, it reduces the total number of turns from 210ish to 135ish. In my experiences, 135 is already a bit long for an AGEOD game, and anything more over that is going to get tedious. I remember being fairly bored from November-February in my test games of vanilla (and not feeling like I had enough turns/flexibility in the summer), which was the main reason for implementing this system.

User avatar
Ebbingford
Posts: 6120
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2007 5:22 pm
Location: England

Tue Jul 14, 2015 12:00 pm

The problem with the movement as displayed at the moment is that you can't calculate how long it is going take. It's not worth moving anything in the 30 day, or even 14 day turns as they only move as far as they would in 7 days. It looks wrong. A journey that should be finished in a 30 day turn only just starts instead.
"Umbrellas will not be opened in the presence of the enemy." Duke of Wellington before the Battle of Waterloo, 1815.



"Top hats will not be worn in the Eighth Army" Field-Marshal Viscount Montgomery of Alamein K.G.





Image

Return to “EAW Mods”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest