Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.6

[ubernaut]

@redrum gotcha thanks

[ubernaut]

i updated but the select map is still showing version 3002.

[redrum]

@ubernaut That would be because I forgot to update the version number to 3003 I'll do that later today.

[ubernaut]

@redrum thought that was what happened just wanted to be sure

[wirkey]

@redrum said in Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.3:

@wirkey @Hepps AA support is included in the latest pre-release and will be in the next stable.

My plan was that naval fighters have a DC@0 but gives DC+1 for maybe two (or three?) destroyers. That way they can't hunt subs on their own but increase the chances for destroyers (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hunter-killer_Group).

[wirkey]

@redrum said in Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.3:

v3.0.0.3 is now live. The first post is updated and here is a list of the changes:

• Bug fixes:
  • Fix chinese fighters are land units instead of air units bug when disabling neutral players
  • Fix USA start notification
  • Allow marine production in Morrocco, Tunisia, West Africa, Nigeria, Gold Coast
  • Allow alpine production in Nigeria
  • Fix bug where liberating russian or chinese L&L territories you can't reinforce them in ncm as they turn russian/chinese immediately instead of being the territory of the nation on turn
  • Fix bug where L&L UK truck not being removed from Soviet Far East
• Starting unit updates:
  • Naval Fighter moved from Florida to Eastern U.S.
  • British Sub moved from SZ 7 to SZ 10 with the main Scapa Flow fleet.
  • British Naval Fighter moved from SZ 148 onto Java
  • British A.A. Gun added to Sumatra
  • British A.A. Gun added to Papua
• Sub/destroyer updates
  • Update ImprovedDestroyer tech from DepthCharge 2 (+1) to 3 (+2)
  • Update HeavyDestroyer unit from DepthCharge 3 to 4
  • Update ImprovedStratBomber tech from DepthCharge 2 (+1) to 3 (+2)
  • Update HeavyStratBomber unit from DepthCharge 3 to 4
  • Update Sub unit attack from 4 to 3 (3/1/2)
  • Update ImprovedSub tech from +1 attack (5/1/2) to +1 attack/defense (4/2/2)
  • Update AdvancedSub unit from 6/3/2 to 6/4/2
• Add Toulon Exiled Allies fleet save actions for if Vichy's capital falls before North Africa Protectorate

sounds good.
I have an issue going on for years and I think I've addressed it several times. In my latest game (round 20 atm) it might become a huge problem. If the capital(s) of one nation is occupied and territories are liberated by allied nations, those territories revert to the original owner after one round, making it impossible to build any infrastructure. That is really bad in China and Far East Russia

[redrum]

@wirkey I believe that is just the default behavior around liberating capitals on just about all maps. I haven't play many games that I've seen it happen so don't have a strong opinion either way on it. I'd have to leave it to @Hepps if that is how he intends it to work or if he would rather the territories not revert.

[Hepps]

@redrum @wirkey well it really comes down to whether the intention is to liberate or capture the territory. As far as I know there is no mechanism available to allow the user to decide which action is to be taken. Otherwise I would choose to have it behave as it does currently. Thus your strategy is to free the people you are liberating.

To my knowledge if you change the behavior with "when captured by goes to" then the issue is even more magnified when you are actually trying to liberate a territory for a beleaguered nation. Such as the Caucasus becoming permanently British if they liberate them. To me that feels even more wrong.

Perhaps post the save so we can see precisely what the example is.

[wirkey]

@redrum said in Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.3:

@wirkey I believe that is just the default behavior around liberating capitals on just about all maps. I haven't play many games that I've seen it happen so don't have a strong opinion either way on it. I'd have to leave it to @Hepps if that is how he intends it to work or if he would rather the territories not revert.

No, in all maps I know it is the other way:
revised for example: If moscow is occupied by Axis, any territory orignally russian being captured by UK or US from Axis becomes UK/US with the possibility to build there.
It wouldn't be that big issue (other from not getting the income) if TWW wasn't so prone to logistics. Not being able to build AFs in China or Far Eastern Russia is a huge problem for Allies. Especially as China's capital is a long way from the Sea.

[wirkey]

@Hepps said in Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.3:

@redrum @wirkey well it really comes down to whether the intention is to liberate or capture the territory. As far as I know there is no mechanism available to allow the user to decide which action is to be taken. Otherwise I would choose to have it behave as it does currently. Thus your strategy is to free the people you are liberating.

To my knowledge if you change the behavior with "when captured by goes to" then the issue is even more magnified when you are actually trying to liberate a territory for a beleaguered nation. Such as the Caucasus becoming permanently British if they liberate them. To me that feels even more wrong.

Perhaps post the save so we can see precisely what the example is.

I'd be fine if you can't build prodcution facilities but logistics (rail, AF) are really important.
In this game the problem has not yet occur, but it might if I decide to go for mainland China.tww spartan.tsvg

[redrum]

@ubernaut Version number should be fixed now if you update or re-download.

[redrum]

@wirkey Oh I see. I misunderstood what you were saying. I thought you meant when you liberate an allies capital.

TWW does appear to use the following setting which makes it so any allied territory is given back to its originalOwner regardless of capital ownership at the end of the politics phase (so this behavior might not happen if you turn politics off):

givesBackOriginalTerritories			values: "true", "false", or "default". default setting is "default", and "default" means false. If true, at the end of each politics phase, any territories originally belonging to the other player will revert to that players control.

[wirkey]

@redrum @Hepps the problem most likely only affects the Allies, as they have the related landmasses:

• China: an Allied invasion from the coast is almost impossible if both capitals have fallen if the Allies can't build any AFs in original chinese territories
• Russia: same for Far Eastern Russia
• UK: not that big problem
• EA: if EA capital is occupied, problems might occur in Dutch East Indies, North and Central Africa
• India

Don't see the problems for Axis

• Germany: if Berlin has fallen it's game over almost anyway. Italian/original allied territories (Eastern Poland/Lithuania) becoming italian/japanese are only 3 territories away. Switzerland being another possibility.
• Italy: North Africa might be small problem
• Japan: most likely game over anyway. Only territories affected Korea, Indo-China (both having possible infrastructure in adjacent territories) and the Islands (highly doubtful Italy and Germany will invade them)

I get why nobody wants UK/US production facilities in Caucasus or Shanghai.
A possible solution for the most problematic issue (China/Russia) without needing to change the xml and/or engine would be to make Shanghai and Kamchatka or some surrounding territories capitals. Or at least let them collect some income (maybe reduced percentage) even with capitals occupied. With an L&L territory somewhere on the coast of China you could start liberating China, too.

Edit: might be a bit confusing, but I guess you got my point.

[Hepps]

@wirkey I like The addition of another L&L territory for china as a solution.

[wirkey]

@Hepps said in Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.3:

@wirkey I like The addition of another L&L territory for china as a solution.

adding another L&L territory alone won't solve the issue. China will get units, but can't buy anything.

[Hepps]

@wirkey No I get that... but Shanghai as an alternate 3rd Capital... would certainly be within the realm of reason.

[wirkey]

@Hepps can you make a capital a L&L territory? If not maybe Shanghai L&L and Beijing capital

[Hepps]

@wirkey Exactly what I was just looking at.

[wirkey]

@Hepps or just trigger a unit change. All allied heavy units (others than infantry) change ownership

i'm in the lobby, if you want to discuss it further

[ubernaut]

trying to understand why these two units are showing different stats: