Total World War: December 1941 3.0.0.6
-
@redrum Red, I agree that special warfare is kind of an all or nothing deal. For example, Britain is often able to hold onto at least one protectorate whenever Japan doesn't get special warfare in the 1st round; however, Britain is certain to lose all protectorates when Japan does get special warfare in the 1st round.
With this idea, how would Britain hold on to Malta? Perhaps add some additional fortifications and air fields to make attacking Malta in the early rounds not too appealing to Italy.
Maybe change the infantry to a combat engineer then add a second air field and both a second entrenchment and a second bunker. Also move the destroyer and transport to somewhere else in the middle east so that the combat engineer is stuck there.
The idea is that even if Cairo falls, Malta could remain as a thorn in Italy's side.
-
@xAAAx
Destroyer/Sub - Well, I don't think we necessarily need to make subs and destroyers more similar in stats. They are meant to feel like very unique units with very different purposes. They just need to be tweaked a bit to be more balanced in the overall naval system as I think right now subs are a bit too strong compared to destroyers. The idea is to make subs very cost effective attackers, hard to hunt, and weak for defending fleets. While destroyers are meant to be good screens for capital ships, be able to hunt subs, and be able to defend fleets against subs. These things are mostly true in the new system but destroyers just need to be a bit stronger in hunting subs and defending against subs. I think just increasing the strength of destroyer's depth charge and/or allowing it to work on defense as well as attack can achieve this.Malta - I actually think Malta's current strength is ok. Most games I play, Malta tends to last for a while and some it lasts the entire game. I think it should be a choice for Italy. If Italy wants to invest in a decent amphib assault and pull forces/pressure away from Egypt then they can to take it. If we add too much more defense to Malta then it will essentially have no chance of ever being taken especially when you consider UK can often put some air units there to help defend. IMO, the Axis could have conquered Malta during WWII if they had chosen to put more focus on it and it was probably a mistake that they didn't. They chose to put all the focus on driving towards Egypt rather than securing Malta. They had drawn up plans but decided to cancel them for various reasons: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Herkules
-
@redrum Yeah, I was gonna bring up how Malta never fell during WWII, but edited it out as I thought that the point wasn't relevant—largely for the reasons that you discussed (i.e., Malta could have been taken by the Axis).
The idea behind adding fortifications to Malta was that prospective changes to starting tech tokens or the formula for special warfare could make Malta more vulnerable than it currently is.
-
gotten this message a few times when ai tries to attack subs with air:
Mar 05, 2019 2:55:57 PM games.strategy.engine.message.unifiedmessenger.UnifiedMessenger invoke
WARNING: Cant add an event, not a step. Must be in a step to add an event to the step.
Trying to add event: Recording Battle Statistics
java.lang.IllegalStateException: Cant add an event, not a step. Must be in a step to add an event to the step.
Trying to add event: Recording Battle Statistics
at games.strategy.engine.history.HistoryWriter.startEvent(HistoryWriter.java:120)
at games.strategy.engine.framework.ServerGame$1.startHistoryEvent(ServerGame.java:123)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:62)
at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:498)
at games.strategy.engine.message.unifiedmessenger.EndPoint.invokeSingle(EndPoint.java:151)
at games.strategy.engine.message.unifiedmessenger.EndPoint.invokeMultiple(EndPoint.java:134)
at games.strategy.engine.message.unifiedmessenger.EndPoint.invokeLocal(EndPoint.java:120)
at games.strategy.engine.message.unifiedmessenger.UnifiedMessenger.invoke(UnifiedMessenger.java:145)
at games.strategy.engine.message.UnifiedInvocationHandler.invoke(UnifiedInvocationHandler.java:48)
at com.sun.proxy.$Proxy13.startHistoryEvent(Unknown Source)
at games.strategy.engine.history.DelegateHistoryWriter.startEvent(DelegateHistoryWriter.java:35)
at games.strategy.triplea.delegate.GameDelegateHistoryWriter.startEvent(GameDelegateHistoryWriter.java:42)
at games.strategy.triplea.delegate.BattleTracker.sendBattleRecordsToGameData(BattleTracker.java:1105)
at games.strategy.triplea.delegate.BattleDelegate.end(BattleDelegate.java:113)
at games.strategy.engine.framework.ServerGame.endStep(ServerGame.java:462)
at games.strategy.engine.framework.ServerGame.runStep(ServerGame.java:434)
at games.strategy.engine.framework.ServerGame.startGame(ServerGame.java:290)
at java.util.Optional.ifPresent(Optional.java:159)
at games.strategy.engine.framework.startup.launcher.LocalLauncher.launchInNewThread(LocalLauncher.java:41)
at games.strategy.engine.framework.startup.launcher.AbstractLauncher.lambda$launch$0(AbstractLauncher.java:51)
at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:748) -
-
@redrum not sure only noticed it happened when the AI attacked subs with air both times im pretty sure but ill try to pay attention if it happens again.
i've also noticed that under certain circumstances AA guns seems to be able to move on their own. is that a bug or is that supposed to be possible under certain conditions in this game?
-
@ubernaut it's a player enforced rule as docks give AA and material +1 movement in order to allow them to load onto transports without trucks.
-
@redrum ah gotcha thanks for clarifying. curious one other thing about train tracks noticed there are two in certain territories. is building more than one track on a territory just for redundancy vs strat bombers or is there some other reason it's advantageous to double them up?
-
@ubernaut Just redundancy vs strat bombing.
-
@redrum gotcha thanks, confirmed anytime ai attacks subs with air power it creates that message in TWW.
Question, regarding the new sub rules can subs still submerge vs depth charge? Does air only attack of subs get one shot or is it a battle to the death unless attacker retreats?
Also noticed that AI never submerges subs (not just in this game but all games) even when it really makes sense to do so. AI seems able to retreat from battle curious why the submerge decision logic is more difficult.
-
@ubernaut They can submerge after the 1st round of depth charge fires. So if I say have 12 destroyers (no techs) attack a stack of subs with LL then they will always kill 1 sub and then the subs can choose to submerge. Not sure what you mean by "air only attack of subs".
The AI should submerge if it doesn't have good odds of surviving. I'm fairly sure it works on maps like revised but haven't ever tested in on TWW. If you have a save game showing an example of when the AI should clearly submerge its subs then I'm glad to take a look at it.
-
ive never seen hard ai submerge subs on any map i will send the next save after i attack subs which should be submerging. air can attack subs without the assistance of destroyers now so im guessing they act just like destroyers now (in terms of ability to attack subs before they submerge) so i believe you answered my question there.
-
sorry correction, i think ive seen subs submerge in the past but not recently (this version of the engine for sure).
"You should never have told me horses sleep standing up, it gave me a mental block." - Mister Ed
-
@ubernaut Yeah, strat bombers work exactly the same way as destroyer depth charge. Its possible that I accidentally messed something up with the AI. I'll try to do a quick test later today.
-
@ubernaut I ran a quick test with the latest pre-release and the AI properly submerges remaining subs on revised when I attack 10 subs with 10 BB: test_revised_submerge.tsvg
-
@ubernaut So there is a bug with v3 sub rules when checking submerging. It works fine in any maps based on v2 rules. Here is the PR with a fix and once that's merged you can test the latest pre-release: https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/pull/4739
-
yeah i was playing a lot of domination 1914 lately i think that uses v3 based rules also. not very git capable i have an account but honestly not sure how to do a pull request or compile things on my own very well.
-
@ubernaut You can get the latest pre-release here: https://github.com/triplea-game/triplea/releases. Don't need to know anything about github just download the appropriate installer for your OS. Just be careful with save games as the new pre-release isn't compatible with old save games.
-
not sure if I didn't mention it before or if it got ignored: if you liberate 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. Just doesn't feel right...
-
@wirkey I wasn't aware of that though guessing that issue has always existed in TWW. I'll try to take a look to see if there is a way to fix that.
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