not that it means much as a baseline, but on hard ai only games, the good side consistently wins in this newer version.
Posts made by zlefin
RE: Middle Earth: Battle For Arda - Official Thread
RE: The Rising Sun
zod's explanations don't account for it at all though. his stuff applies to ALL sieg maps, by his own statement.
While the situation we have here is TRS receives very little play, while NWO and WAW receive a good amount.
In order to be an explanation it needs to account for that discrepancy.
which means it needs to point to something that differentiates TRS from the other Sieg maps.
RE: The Rising Sun
another hypothesis that occurred to me after I spent a bit playing TRS vs the ai, not sure about it at all though because I haven't played enough WAW:
Pacific Theater WAW and TRS may be too similar in how they play, such that it doesn't feel interesting. From what little I've done, they look like they play very similar, look quite similar, have many of the same chokepoints/provinces.
Atlantic Theater WAW and NWO seem quite different; the style of the drawn maps is different, the scale really feels different (like how far planes go in a turn)
I wonder if i'ts affected by default zoom levels/physical size of the map.
Battle Calc does not account for bombard limits
a very minor thing: the battle calc doesn't account for limiting the number of bombards based on the number of attackers. So on maps where you only get one bombard per amphibious attacker, if you go to battle calc and put in 1 inf and 7 battleships bombarding, it'll show results as if all 7 bombards work rather than just the 1.
It'd be nice to fix to help with people forgetting which maps allow unlimited bombards and which don't. but a rather low priority, since they'd uncover it pretty fast when they actually play the map.
RE: Update for Domination 1914 No Man's Land
some playgroups enact some limits on gas, like a max of 18 at a time per nation. Just wanted to mention that there is some engine support for restrictions like that, there's a few similar options to that, and iirc one that's just that directly (max number of a unit that a player can have). I forget the exact names of them though, you'd have to check the pact of steel 2 file for that info.
The Rising Sun
I was curious to discuss the map and hear more about it from people. I haven't played it much myself, and unlike the other 2 Sieg maps, this one sees very little play. Seems like it'd be interesting to try to understand why, what we can learn about mapmaking from that, and ponder if anything could/should be done.
Talking to some people elsewhere, the general impression was that it slightly favors axis, and that the opening moves are very sensitive and complex.
I found the old thread on it on a prior forum for reference:
Some particular things I've noted with the help and advice of others:
low strategic diversity for the Allies. The Allies play is more reactive than they are in most maps (including compared to other Sieg maps). Most allied nations only really have one front they can fight on. While there's tactical decisions to be made, strategic there isn't much, it's just go as far forward from that nations' position as you safely can. It's not like say NWO, where the biggest choice is between focusing on Italy or Germany. Not having to balance multiple competing priorities/fronts makes it rather blander.
Lots of Coastal caps. Most of hte capitals in this area coastal; and the nation splitup means it's quite possible to form 2 fleets such that neither side can attack the other and win a fleet battle, since all the fleets are mixes of several nations. THis leads to the weird situation where it's about positioning/breakthroughs, and in particular that you can't sink an enemy fleet as it advances into your area, even though it coudln't beat your fleet if it had to attack. Others have also noted how sneak captures by the super subs can too easily take out a cap if you screwup the requisite blocking chains, given how many nations there are to potentially use can openers. The Japanese capitals are all split up, so it's not possible to guard them against a naval invasion.
some significant not guaranteed opening battle possibilities; not sure how much they truly affect things, but it's weird having things like turn 1 factoyr captures that are dice rolls.
and that's all I've got so far.
RE: Most Wanted Features/Changes
Having thought about it; I've decided what I'd like is improvements to the battlecalc in general. (there's a bunch of different proposals related to it). it always irks me when battlecalc results are inaccurate/less useful because of various quirks/interactions with newer features in particular.
I never got an answer to my prior question, so if it isn't in already, then I also want a way to lock the game state to the point in history I select so I can keep viewing it even if actions are taken in the current game.
Oft overlooked features
Is there a list somewhere of oft-overlooked features? ie useful things that are already in the engine, but that a fair number of people don't know about because they aren't obvious or they never thought to try.
As an example, I occasionally play offline maps vs the ai; and it'd be a bit of a nuisance to set all the ai's to the right setting for each nation. I only just now found out that there's more ways to do it than just the "Set all to" selector. That I can set one nation to the desired ai setting, then click on the alliance button to its right, and it sets all members of that alliance to that ai. It's probably been that way for years, but I never knew about it, and it wasn't obvious that it existed.
looking around, I see there's a nice subsection of help -> movement/selection help, which has a number of tidbits. While I knew most of them there, there's a few I didn't, like using alt-click for selecting in clumps of 10. In the past I've met people who didn't know about the existence of 'n' to cycle through unmoved units, and it took quite awhile before I heard about it myself.
I wonder how many people would benefit from a quick look at such a tidbit source, people could try looking at that movement/selection help and see if there's anything there they didn't know about that they find helpful and chime in if they do; maybe there'sa ebtter way to publicize little helpful details/commands, or the collections thereof, so people become aware of them more reliably.
RE: Most Wanted Features/Changes
I'll look over hte list and think which ones I Want. Also I'm re-opening the convo on at least one of the ones on that list that requires clarification, dunno how many more i'll find on the wanted feature list that also need clarification or somesuch.
I realize I'm not fully aware of things that may've been added since I play infrequently; is there a way currently to freeze the history in place? i.e. so you can click on a point in the history and it stays there even if the active player makes a move. cuz if it's not in, I want it; and if it is in, I don't know the command for it.
RE: Will there ever be an “Unmoved units finder”? (Previous, Next and Sleep buttons)
So, is this meant to supplant, or add onto, the existing unmoved units finding system?