Total World War (TWW) 2.7.7.2
-
Hello Hepps, possible bug? In recent game, Russian research center in Urals remains undamaged upon capture by Germany. Per the manual, research centers appears capturable. But, Russia's scorched earth policy for other infrastructure would seem to contradict. So, should Russian research centers survive upon capture, become 1 material, or be destroyed all together?
-
@ghostronin Research Center is the only capturable facility in the game.
Because ALL RC are capturable we left them out of the scorched earth umbrella.
This was done for multiple reasons years ago during the original development. When we first built the game the Russian RC's were destroyed... but after much testing and input from players we changed it so that they were capturable.
One the same topic I am heavily debating some additional changes surrounding RC.
I am contemplating expanding each nations total max to 4 Research Centers (producing 2 Tech. Tokens per turn instead of 3) and allowing placement of RC in the Minors.
I wonder what everyone would think of this idea.
-
@hepps I think keeping RCs at 3 tokens each but allowing minors to build them and just capping total tokens per turn at 9 is probably better. This allows research rate to stay the same across nations but gives more flexibility to building advanced units in minors.
Other interesting ideas that came up:
- Multiple tech path rolls per turn with a cap on how many tokens can be spent on each (say 2 possible paths with a max of 6 tokens per roll) and then allow say max 4 RCs each generating 3 tokens (12)
- Reducing territory production requirement from 3+ to 2+ to allow more possible RC building areas
-
@redrum Well we had a stimulating convo on the Lobby last night. So now my head is filled with all kinds of alternative idea's. I am going to test a few key concepts in the coming days to see what is possible... as I think some of what we discussed has the potential to really add some new depth to the game. (and represents what I wanted to do in GD as well). So its a win win for me.
-
Total World War: December 1941 Trains 2.8.0.0.
With all the changes completed I am going to outline the change log for the members of the testing group.
First I shall out line the changes to units:
-
Addition of trains & Rail lines as described in the earlier post.
-
Changes to all Bombing units (Strat. Bombers, Tact. Bombers and Rockets) as described in the earlier post.
-
A.A. Guns have been changed dramatically. They now start the game with an A.A. defense of 1 (down 1). They increase to an A.A. defence of 2 (the combat increase to a defense of 1 remains unchanged) with Improved A.A. tech. They increase to an A.A. defense of 3 with Advanced A.A. Tech. A.A. Guns now fire their A.A. defence during ALL ROUNDS of combat.
-
A.T. Guns have been changed dramatically. They now start the game with combat defence of 1 (down 2). The A.A. ability stats remain the same ( 2 initially) and the techs remain the same. A.T. Guns now fire their A.A. defence during ALL ROUNDS of combat.
-
Mobile Artillery A.A. defense now fires during ALL ROUNDS of combat. Cost is now 8 PU. (+2).
-
Submarines "first strike" A.A. defense vs. DD has been reduced to 2 (-1). This increases to 3 with Improved Submarine Tech.
-
Cruisers A.A. defence now fires during ALL ROUNDS of combat. The ability is still only gained with Improved Hulls Tech. And now the Advanced Hulls Tech only increases the A.A. defence to 2 (down 1).
-
All advanced prototype units have been removed from the map. Due to this and in an effort to correct some balance issues additional changes to the starting set up of the map have been done.
I shall detail the changes to the starting setup in the next post.
-
-
Starting Unit set up changes.
Since everybody will know where the missing Advanced Prototype units have been removed from I shall not list them. Instead any unit that has been placed due to the removal of one such unit shall be followed by the caption (Adv. Unit). Furthermore, a unit that has been removed due to the addition of trains shall be followed by (Trains). And lastly any unit changes that have been done for balance shall be followed by (Balance).
-
I feel the AA changes (AA, AT) will bring more balance against air heavy opponents (e.g., russia defending against germany). It will no longer be possible to mass air to take leningrad witouth taking substancial losses, as battles in urban territories usually last for a couple rounds at least !
I think AT now are a unit worth buying. They have less regular defence, but they can hit prior to a combat round which is better.
For sub I agree totally. Sub AA was always to high, rendering DD all but useless.
Cruiser are now worth buying en masse. We now have the option to go with a ship heavy fleet (instead of planes doing all the job).
For bombing, i am ont the fence. I need to see it in play.
-
@jean-pat Yes what you are saying is really what these changes mean... and how they are meant to change the game.
Bombing changes kind of work in tandem with the reduced effectiveness of the AA Guns.
So they (A.A. Guns) are less effective early on vs bombing runs (since firing every round in combat does nothing to effect bombing runs). This means that while there is the chance Bombers can be less effective it also means that you are less likely to loose them.The idea of course being that players might be more inclined to get more bombers as a viable strategy to cripple an opponent. And the opponent is going to have to invest more in a defensive strategy to counter increased bombing.
At the end of the day the changes to bombing represent the first stage of an experiment in a dynamic we have never had before. So we have to keep an open mind and experiment.
-
The unit changes look pretty good and agree with @Jean-Pat analysis. Bombing changes should be interesting and hard to comment on their balance until we play it some.
The only 1 that I don't really like the feel of is:
Mobile Artillery A.A. defense now fires during ALL ROUNDS of combat. Cost is now 8 PU. (+2).I think that makes M.Artillery too expensive to really be used much. Most of the games I've played I really haven't seen any of them built so I wonder if other experienced players thought they were balanced in 2.7? I think giving them AA defense fires all rounds probably isn't worth the 2 PU increase.
-
@Jean-Pat Agree with analysis as well.
@Hepps I am most intrigued by the train unit. Train basic movement is 6, it's transport capacity is determined by the # of rail units in a province? Based on the maximum of 6 rail units per territory with 6 provinces in line, a train could theoretically transport 6 infantry units 6 provinces in a single turn. Is my understanding correct?
Would capitals and strategic cities with higher infrastructure would start with 2 rail units to allow both starting trains of the major belligerents to pass-thru in round 1 , whereas the rest of the country would be limited to 1 or 0 rail units.
Where there are bottlenecks I'm assuming the train would only be able to carry the capacity of the lowest rail infrastructure province? For example, if provinces were in line and every province had 3 rail units, but a province in the middle only had 1 rail unit, the train would only be able to carry a single unit thru the full length of the line due to the bottleneck.
-
@ghostronin No
Currently trains are the same as trucks.... they have a capacity of 1. But a train can move 6 and pick up and drop off multiple times in the same turn.
I have given the area with developed infrastructure 2 rail lines each. IE. lots of Europe... Interior of Russia....
And a long term goal is to have land transport units capacity settable like sea thransports.
-
@hepps Yeah need to make an adjustment so the engine loads the dice image for 0. After I did that then I get this beauty:
-
@redrum Little bit of over kill don't you think?
"A joyous heart sours with the burden of expectation"
Hepster -
I think the starting tech for japan should be changed to something else than improved dd. As much as I like it when I play japan, and japan is my favourite country to play, it is simply too good compared to the other starting tech. Removing it would make things more dynamic in the pacific too in my opinion.
I think replacing it with improved gun laying would be reasonable.
-
@hepps I'm not seeing the technology tab panel appear on the right side in the latest TWW 2.8.
-
@redrum Weird. Cause all the same files are in the folder.
I think it's just a naming issue since I renamed 2.8
-
@jean-pat I hadn't looked at Techs. But part of me does agree that Improved Destroyers gives the Japs a certain edge. Was trying to limit the changes to get a handle on how the inclusion of Trains and the alterations to the units would affect balance. But definitely something to consider.
-
@hepps Just a quick follow up.
First,
I got the tech Tab back up and running. Was just a naming issue. Will include with a new update.
Second,
Though I don't intend to make any changes immediately until more games have been tested into further rounds. I have been considering the changes to the A.A. Guns and weighing it against some of the new input and some long standing input.
Based on that I have come up with an idea to find a good medium for the unit...
Just putting the idea out there to get some feedback.
-
I like this idea, with 2 tech, the aa gun will stay around a little longer in combats.
-
Yeah, definitely a step in the right direction. I think some really good player did mention AA guns were a bit under powered
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