Total World War: December 1941 (BETA) 2.8.0.5

Hepps

Sub and Destroyer mechanics all done.
Vichy fleet all created.

Now I just need the conditions and triggers to make it all work.

If anyone wants to help with this... I'd be more than willing to accept help. As conditions and trigger are not my forte.

General_Zod

@hepps I can help you out in exchange for some future beautification favors on my project.

prastle

@general_zod OOH the trade wars start

General_Zod

@hepps A couple clarifications for me required.

If Algeria (as a German Protectorate only) is taken by allies instead of Morocco, (not listed) I assume the Germans still gain the remaining 5 Vichy med territories (German Protectorates change into German Occupations). Correct?
In this version allies essentially auto scuttle anything in Toulon fleet that Germans (trigger) can't save/capture. Meaning no other mechanisms?
Desired, exact timing in sequence? ie: prompt, unit changes, scuttles, territory changes
Do German Protectorates get any free infantry like Allied Protectorates (exiled?) do, if liberated? Just ask because this would be a consistent mechanism with the existing mechanism.
Differences of German Protectorate, German Occupation and German Owned behaviors if any?
Free Vichy material behavior?
Does Vichy barracks get removed on German Occupation?
Fate of Corsica?

Hepps

@general_zod said in Total World War: December 1941 (BETA) 2.8.0.5:

@hepps A couple clarifications for me required.

If Algeria (as a German Protectorate only) is taken by allies instead of Morocco, (not listed) I assume the Germans still gain the remaining 5 Vichy med territories (German Protectorates change into German Occupations). Correct?

Both are listed as requirements. The Liberation of either terr. produces the same result.

In this version allies essentially auto scuttle anything in Toulon fleet that Germans (trigger) can't save/capture. Meaning no other mechanisms?

No. The scuttling happens when either Protectorate is liberated. The Germans have to invest 1 PU per unit (7 Vichy units) to try and prevent the scuttle attempt.

Desired, exact timing in sequence?

Well since either USA or Britain (I guess Russia as well, but really.... not really) can liberate. So ideally the Vichy fleet thing would be immediately following each Allied combat move.

redrum

@hepps Would it be better to have the scuttle event during beginning or end of Germany's turn since they are now the one making a decision? This also prevents UK taking it then USA killing the remaining units.

General_Zod

@hepps said in Total World War: December 1941 (BETA) 2.8.0.5:

@general_zod said in Total World War: December 1941 (BETA) 2.8.0.5:

@hepps A couple clarifications for me required.

If Algeria (as a German Protectorate only) is taken by allies instead of Morocco, (not listed) I assume the Germans still gain the remaining 5 Vichy med territories (German Protectorates change into German Occupations). Correct?

Both are listed as requirements. The Liberation of either terr. produces the same result.

I meant in the list of what get liberated, but understood.

In this version allies essentially auto scuttle anything in Toulon fleet that Germans (trigger) can't save/capture. Meaning no other mechanisms?

No. The scuttling happens when either Protectorate is liberated. The Germans have to invest 1 PU per unit (7 Vichy units) to try and prevent the scuttle attempt.>

Referring to after the liberation takes place, but understood.

Desired, exact timing in sequence?

Well since either USA or Britain (I guess Russia as well, but really.... not really) can liberate. So ideally the Vichy fleet thing would be immediately following each Allied combat move.

Yeah I agree that the German turn is ideal as @redrum pointed out.

Hepps

Sure. I guess that's fair. I think it felt more natural to me for it to happen immediately.

But at the start of the next German turn would be good.

Shonn

Armour & Tactical Bombers

I feel that armour is less used an amount, now that the AT got beefed up with its cyclical fire.
I suggest that armour gets +1 attack as well with the Improved Armour tech.

Tactical Bombers are rarely seen beyond the starting allotment. In general a fighter (either type) is more versatile in attack and defence. Even more so as Fighters get the improved range rather easily (same branch) while TACs need strategic technology as prerequisite, so ultimately a Fighter has matching attack of a Tac or differs of 1 (and it's not something you can easily mass to cut a large difference), and Tac helps tanks which are not overly used as of now.
So I feel Tactical Bombers too should get some beef in a way or another.

Hepps

@shonn I have felt for a while now that the key lies in reducing the effectiveness of fighters rather than adding more power else where.

Shonn

That too can work tbh - but it means some reworking.
Fighters having some AA against other planes when both defending and attacking and less regular attack / defence. (and Naval Fighters too or they'll end up being used as fighters on land too)
That should mirror some 'air battles' too that go each round on.

Hepps

@shonn Separate air battles are not slated for TWW. My work on TWW is winding down. Completely separate air battles will be included in GD only.

All the work I am doing for TWW is really just as a way of doing proof of concept for many of my idea's for GD.

Shonn

I did not meant 'separate air battle' which I think it's a wrong concept by how TripleA works.
What I mean is to give 'AA fire' (like AA, Anti Tank, etc) to fighters / naval fighters against other planes.
It is not a separate battle - but each round fighter shoot at other planes (like each round an AA shoots specifically to planes, and AT to tanks).

I don't think it will be massive work that in terms of coding.

redrum

@shonn Generally, I think tanks and tacts are fairly balanced and agree with @Hepps that fighters/n.fighters are overpowered. If fighters/n.fighters were nerfed a bit then tanks/tacts become a more needed source of attack power. In regards to AT guns, if anything they are underpowered (true before and after the changes to shoot every round). I don't believe I've ever built an AT gun in any of the 10-15 TWW games I've played and if I see my opponent building a significant number of them then I know I've already won. Glad to play against anyone that wants to try some AT gun strategy to prove me wrong.

Shonn

They're built if you produce armour.
If you do not produce armour (which is easily countered by having many cheaper AT in the mix of forces) then no, no one plays an AT strategy.

Hepps

@shonn Separate air battles is the definitive solution. In my prototype design it solves OHHH SO MANY issues and finally makes air warfare sensible and realistic.

I have no idea on what basis you have already determined it doesn't work for Triple A, as to my knowledge the prototype I have is the only functioning example of these mechanics.

redrum

@shonn As both Germany and Russia, I often have a good number of tanks and mech and hope that my opponent builds lots of AT guns.

Shonn

I meant if there is a whole airbattle and only 1 side gets through fighters and bombers - that's conceptually wrong.

If it is possible to have 1 air battle round - then 1 ground round, and cycling that way all is good.

Hepps

@shonn Why would it be conceptually wrong?

Shonn

In the mirror of the scale of the fights no side had 'total' air superiority unless the enemy did not had pratically absence of fighters / bombers (ie - late '44).

If you take in the average time of the war when both sides had an active airforce there was no side having absolutely 0 bombers or so flying through enemy fighters.

Thus it should be that each round there is 1 round of air combat - do it with separate air battle OR with AA style fire - and then the surviving planes support ground forces for 1 round of ground combat.

It is called realism where bombers can go through fighters - albeit with losses.