Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.6
-
am i missing something here or is scrambling/intercept not working correctly for strat bombing?
-
@ubernaut You can't scramble to intercept SBR. You can only scramble into regular battles. Only the planes already in the territory being bombed can intercept any bombers.
-
@redrum ah thanks!
-
Hi, I'm back. Cool to see that you are still advancing TWW.
I'm looking for an opponent for By-Forum or By-Email. Who wants to play me? I'm discussing my moves with a friend, so feel free to form a team as well if you want. We both have more Real-Life atm than usual, so the game will be slow. Two moves per week or something like that.
For settings, I prefer with Low-Luck, with Research, without Tech-Sharing, rest is up to you.
-
@redrum said in Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.3:
@wirkey Not sure I can answer any of those given I pretty much never play with politics on and most players don't. But here are my thoughts:
#1/2. I honestly have no idea if that used to be how it worked so I'll have to defer to @Hepps. Might we worth testing 2.7 or 2.8 to see if the behavior there is the same or if something has changed (I'm not aware that anything has). My expectation is however it works now is how it worked in 2.7.7.2.
#3. I think their turns should just be skipped and that they shouldn't build any units. Otherwise they end up with an absolutely massive stack that makes ever attacking them completely insane. That way it may eventually be worth players attacking them to open up the map a bit more towards late game. But again, I don't think neutrals were ever balanced that well or fully flushed out so that its better to just play with politics off.
- actually I'm not sure if it was that way at all, that you get neutrals money.
- pretty sure neutrals didn't keep their money. All they had the round war was declared on them, was what they had collected the round before. I think this is what it should be.
- unless players agree to go a different way: Neutrals collect their income but loose it, if they aren't at war at the beginning of their turn. But they get an inf placed in the capital every 2nd round (or 2 inf in 3 rounds or whatever...)
-
@wirkey maybe i'm missing something, been dabbling with TWW all my game so far i've had politics on and have not seen what you are talking about in 2.7, 2.8 or 3.0. Neutrals are not accumulating PU's or infantry. Have yet to capture or lose a capital yet so cannot speak that in particular.
-
@Gully Count me in. We should be releasing v3.0.0.3 soon so if you don't mind waiting a few days, I'd say let's do that then start one up. You'll probably want to review all the changes if you haven't already.
-
@redrum wirkey was faster. You are the final boss again.
Hm, the sub changes. First look and I think it helps the Allies in the Atlantic (British air superiority, also cant combine Kriegsmarine and subs anymore). And in the Pacific, you have to decide whether you want a fleet that controls large areas or one that can poke and do small trades efficiently. Pacific overall will be more interesting I think.
-
-
is there a limit for making constructions on occupied territories? tried building a trench in french indo china and got a message telling no more constructions are allowed.
-
@ubernaut Yes. Japan can't build anything in French Indochina since its an occupied Vichy Territory. Its similar to how Britain can't build infrastructure directly on occupied exiled allies territories.
There are sections in the manual that covers French Indochina and the other british occupied/protectorate territories that highlights most of that. Though I'm not sure why French Indochina isn't actually owned by Vichy France (might be cause they didn't want Vichy France building there either?). @Hepps would have to weigh in on the history there.
-
@redrum must have missed that bit thanks again.
-
@ubernaut you can only build there if it was taken by Allies and recaptured by Japan.
-
@wirkey Do you know why it isn't initially owned by French Indochina?
-
@redrum yeah, but can't tell you. Would have to kill you if I told you and I really want to avoid that
-
-
So thinking through the best way to adjust destroyers to make countering subs more interesting and balanced, here is my proposal at this point:
Option #1 (weaker strength but can hunt and defend against subs)
Destroyer: 2A/2D with 2 DepthCharge on A/D/Flyover
Improved Destroyer Tech: Increases DepthCharge from 2 to 4
Heavy Destroyer: 3A/3D with 6 DepthCharge on A/D/FlyoverOption #2 (same strength just hunt subs more effectively)
Destroyer: 3A/3D with 2 DepthCharge on A
Improved Destroyer Tech: Increases DepthCharge from 2 to 4
Heavy Destroyer: 5A/5D with 6 DepthCharge on AOption #3 (weaken subs and just increase destroyer hunting a bit)
Sub: 3A/1D
Improved Sub: Increases attack from 3 to 4
Improved Destroyer Tech: Increases DepthCharge from 1 to 3
Heavy Destroyer: 5A/5D with 4 DepthCharge on AThoughts?
-
@redrum seems pretty good to me, Destroyer DC is def too weak as is.
-
engine sometimes fails to remove lend-lease unit:
-
@ubernaut Can you clarify? I'm guessing you mean that a UK truck should have been removed from Soviet Far East?
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login