pzgndr

It will be a couple more weeks. I'm waiting for the PDE v1.01 patch to get released first. I also have a few more tests to run on my mod. There is ALWAYS something else to do!

Unfortunately, no. Wish List items for future consideration: - Unit withdrawal event - Force pool build limits change event - Research/Diplomacy levels change event - Convoy MPP transfer change event

Alaric, no problem at all if you want to modify what I've done and post it. I've kept my mod pretty plain with most emphasis on the event and AI scripting. I'm sure you and others will find lots of things to adjust. I coming around to liking the +/-2. I don't quite follow the point you were trying to make linking this to other economic factors. The average losses remain the same, just a little more variability. In a couple of cases where I took an attack for granted things didn't quite work out as expected. It forces me to reconsider things more, and that's good.

I'm working on a v1.01 update for my Advanced Third Reich mod for SC2-PDE: I just played some as Allies against Axis AI up to invasion of USSR and spotted a few more things to adjust, like making fortification build times a little longer (2-sides should take 2 turns). The increased combat variability seems OK, not too different but provides a few more surprises. I'm curious if others would want that included in an update or just leave it at +/-1. If anyone has some comments, good or bad, or other suggestions for improvements, speak up. I'll probably just make one more update over the next month or so.

MJY, Hubert can clarify, but here's my take: (i) The +/-1 variability has been integral to the game since SC1 was introduced. All it means is when attacker/defender losses are calculated according to the formulas, actual losses may vary by +/-1 for either or both sides. (ii) The damage evasion is a percentage chance, as described in the manual: I assume this is what you're refering to, which is different than the combat results variability?

IMHO, the problem is not with the amphibious transports. I've experimented some with giving transports a modest soft attack value, which is possible with the editor, but the effect is negligible. The bigger problem is Axis having too many defenders, at least in the default campaign with no build limits or soft limits. In my A3R scenarios without the soft limits option, Axis usually cannot defend the entire French coast without risking disaster elsewhere. Allies can usually find someplace to land, or else make a place to land using air and naval attacks. I've seen some game reports from the default campaigns showing what I consider excessive defenders and engineer-built fortifications. This may be fun and interesting in its own way but I do not care for it. The build limits and restrictions on engineers in my mod seem to produce more reasonable results, similar to the board game and historical results.

arado, I respectfully disagree. In many cases the AI reacts to what you do and can choose a course of action and choose what forces get assigned to a plan, just like a human opponent on the other end of a TCP/IP connection. You have to react to that. And with FOW on you don't know what the AI is doing until you confirm or deny what it's doing. Just like playing a human opponent, yes? Something I tried to emphasize in my AI articles was that SC2 really brings together a "perfect storm" of features for a challenging computer opponent: decent generic AI based on fuzzy logic, AI scripting including decision events and global variables, and event scripting for randomness and variants. You cannot possibly know for sure how the AI is going to react to your moves. And that is the beauty of the whole thing. :cool: It's not perfect yet, for sure. But it's getting there. Hubert's got a great system developed which can only get better.

wolflars, I pretty much agree 100% with your comments. Ideally, it would be nice to have hexes and stacking and combined attacks, etc. Yet, I've adapted to this alternate style and find overall results comparable. I get into the gameplay and enjoy it. Perhaps MWiF will provide that grognard nirvana one of these days. :cool: You'll have to mention later how it works out. This ain't the old AI anymore! If you're playing Expert +2 you will definitely be challenged. Those shore bombardment results being too high is most likely that +2 bonus kicking in. I tried to gear the game to be decent at Intermediate +1. Thanks! My intent really was not marketing, since I'm not paid to do this. I see it as a great story that needs to be told and hopefully it will generate some AI ideas out there for other games. We have great eye-candy out there; we need some great AI. That's the next programming frontier. Yes! You can import map indexes from a tile map created with MapGen.exe. MapGen.exe is a utility to create tile maps from a bitmap image. This tile map can then be imported by hitting F5 in the Editor and used as a starting point for a new scenario.

Rafael, I just sent you an email. For other's benefit, please review the installation guidance I provided in the READ ME file: Those "fancier" graphics are the new PDE interface with various Axis and Allied symbols on their respective screens. The "plainer" graphics are what players should be used to in the WAW interface. I'm old school; I prefer the plain interface and customized 2D unit icons, a la Third Reich. Of course, others can go fancy and use the default 3D icons. Whatever floats your boat. I note there have been about 100 downloads so far. I really would appreciate any feedback players may have, particularly where ahistorical strategies (Sealion, Spain, Turkey) come into play. And if any two players decide to try a head-to-head game, I'd be interested to hear about those results too. Thanks!

Armuss, I did all my latest development work in SC2-PDE. I do not plan to go back and retrofit the SC2-WAW version of A3R. The new decision events in PDE really allowed me to overcome the problems I was having with USA deployments to North Africa. Looking back, I'd say the first draft of A3R I did with SC2 Blitzkrieg was about 75%. With SC2-WAW it was about 90%. With SC2-PDE it's now about 95-99%. I'm generally happy with the results now. I'm curious what comments players may have for improving A3R "just a little bit more."

Congratulations on breaking the ice with the editor! Soon your journey to the Dark Side will be complete... I can't speak for the other modders, but I'll say if you want an accurate scale map for these larger PTO or global games then the island tiles become an issue. Without unit stacking, you need to make some of these islands (or island groups) larger to accomodate enough units. Then you get a map that looks funky. Until Hubert makes some changes, modders are kinda stuck.

I keep seeing this and wonder. Firstly, CEAW is NOT division scale; it's corps level. Something more along the lines of Computer War in Europe 2 being developed by Decision Games is more applicable as a division-level game. Unfortunately CWIE will not have AI. It would be really cool if Decision Games would work with Hubert to implement his AI package. :cool:

FYI, there is a Windows update version of Clash of Steel available for free download. Interesting news. Edit. Link fixed. [ May 01, 2008, 05:06 AM: Message edited by: pzgndr ]

Well OK, the bidding has started at $10. Do I hear $9?

I'm glad to see some players trying out the different options available. Another sleeper option is the normalized production for seasonal turns, ie more MPPs during the longer winter turns and less during the shorter summer turns. Sometimes playing the same campaign with a slightly different flavor provides new insights.

In the 'Edit resource layer' there are customized capitals like Paris with the Eiffel Tower, generic capitals for western and eastern countries, and other cities and villages. Select a capital, not a city, and place it on a map tile in your country.

Chesty, here are some quick ideas. First copy localization.txt into your _campaign directory and edit that. Change one of the major countries to Japan. That adds it to the list when you open up the editor. For units, you have to go into the country menu and update the build limits and unit names for your units. If you want to change their unit type names, you can go into the localization file and do that there. If you want to change unit values, go into the combat values menu. Once your units are defined, you add them to the map using the edit unit layer button. To add resources, use the edit resource layer button. Hope this helps.

I'll chime in with a couple of comments. Like Moonslayer and Timskorn said, starting small and getting some hands-on experience goes a long way. And I'll echo what MajorRH said. I've been working on my Advanced Third Reich mod for about 20 months now, from SC2 through SC2-WaW to SC2-PDE. I've documented a lot of stuff in my design notes, but I just can't say there's a "simple" step-by-step process to follow. You just have to build piece by piece, playtest to verify things are doing what you want them to be doing, re-evaluate and redesign things as necessary, and keep going through this iterative cycle. Until you're "done" or you've gone completely insane, whichever comes first.

Armuss, these are editable parameters. You can change these yourself without a patch.

Steve, thanks! I haven't done anything with RPG games; must be my evil brother out there. Regarding my A3R mod, I've got it fully upgraded to SC2-PDE with quite a few improvements. The new decision events and global variables help a lot. And Hubert's AI enhancements, some of which were backfitted to SC2-WaW v1.03, make a big difference. If you like A3R so far, you'll love the new version. :cool:

There's a Edit Unit Layer button at the top. Open the dialog, select a unit, then click on the map where you want to put it.

Steve, the SC2 manual with the tutorial was written prior to SC2 release. Since then there have been some updates to those early beta campaigns, plus some additional changes for SC2-WaW. That original step-by-step tutorial is a bit dated now but should still provide helpful guidance for getting started. Good luck!

I did for SC2. When I get a chance, I intend to dust it off and update it for SC2-PDE. With all the new feature additions in WaW and PDE, plus my scripting experience gained along the way with A3R, I'm pretty sure I can get the old Red-vs-Blue campaign to rock&roll. :cool:

What, you never played chess in your whole life?? I guess looking at a chessboard at an angle with that isometric view made moving bishops diagonally a difficult experience. How about moving those horse things two up and one over?? Too funny. Y'all crack me up.

The problem is not with tiles but with how the adjacent unit movement penalty is applied, for both movement and supply calculations. If the penalty could be revised to apply only to intervening tiles between enemy units, then it could be increased to be more realistic. Also, some addditional penalty for armor ZOCs would be nice.