Timskorn

Cool stuff! I've used a lot of editors from RTS games like Empire Earth (even worked professionally doing scenario design), but we never had an easy way to save and transfer triggers. I just think it's awesome that we can all pool scripts together like this and simply copy them over if we want them in our version. Can't wait to see what we have in a year! Yeah, I've noticed the BEF army never leaves port too. I haven't checked any scripts for it, but, is this something the AI should be doing without scripts? I'd also be interested to know from Hubert how the general AI works (the stuff we can't script). It would help us scripters in regards to how much or how little we should script something. For example, with the AI eventually launch an offensive from Alexandria as the UK? Or is that something that must be absolutely scripted?

Ah good find. I have yet to change that from 0 so haven't seen that problem.

Not sure how many French SMG's the Germans smelted down for a new U-boat, but I'm guessing none. I'm sure they did something like this to an extent, but to revolve a big gameplay element around it seems a bit much.

Can you post your script? I'd imagine you could just use the D-Day script and change some of the coordinates and numbers around, such as radius from Syria that you are looking for units and the min/max required to initiate the transport. Also, have you made sure the country ID is correct? Sometimes little details like that derail me for an hour as I try to look for the complex problem. Also, not sure if you are doing it, but I'd set the trigger percentage at 100 for now just to see if it works.

You're right John, which is what I was talking about when I said the 1939 game generally always follows a certain predictable path. However, thankfully we DO have the editor which can change a ton of things. The Iraq coup can be set to trigger only 75% of the time, for example, so it's a little more random. Same with the Yugo coup. I'm actually all for making things like this a little more random.

After thinking about it I like the bit of guessing that goes into finding convoy routes. After awhile you get to learn their general vicinity and can find them pretty quickly, and it does simulate a bit the uncertainty of U-boats finding their prey. It's better than always knowing exactly where you need to position your U-boats because their is a big yellow line running on the tile screaming, "Go Here!". When you look at the convoy map now, it sorta feels like I'm overlooking an intelligence map giving me the general route of the convoys and I have to figure out precisely where they are. HEY, I got an idea. At the beginning of the game, for example, the convoy routes are displayed but are very rough indicators on where they actually are. The Intelligence research would then also double up on narrowing down exactly where the routes are at sea. At level 1 the convoy route shifts closer to its actual location until at level 5 its precisely where the convoys are.

John, I like your system, it's very well thought out and would work fine I think as it still offers a good randomness factor, but a little more predictable. As a player I would always 'feel' like I'm just about to make a breakthrough in technology with each successive turn...if I knew the formula (or had played a lot). Right now it feels very random because it is, but again I make a case for Hubert's system simply from a replayability sense. With your system we can reasonably expect a breakthrough within a certain number of turns, but with Hubert's we simply don't know. The difference can be a lot in terms of how we play the game. As in most game design, this is all "Theorycraft" right now. Your formula would need to be played and tested by players to see how it affects gameplay, and whether it ultimately makes it better or worse than Hubert's system.

The southern approach is one of the least defensible all the way to Stalingrad area. If you can break past the river running from Rostov to Stalingrad, bypass Stalingrad and gun for the Caucasus you may have a chance. If you can at least grab some of them and force them to be destroyed, sacrifice a couple units, you at least hamper their economy for awhile. It's still risky though. Your center and north armies will likely be slow going, and unless you commit your air, Leningrad probably won't fall. If you fail in the south and get bogged down you may be in danger of getting cut off completely. Worth a shot though, especially if your opponent doesn't properly prepare for it.

I can definitely see the argument against the current research model. It doesn't make sense that upon researching a new tech it's available a week later, not for everything anyway. Or how about the fact that my armor 1000 miles east of Germany can then also upgrade all of their tanks to the latest model in a single week? My point is, the current system COULD be more realistic, but I like it the way it is. It adds unpredictable variables into a game that already runs pretty predictably. Axis attacks Poland, then Denmark, then France, then Norway, then Yugo, then Russia...for the majority of instances this is how it goes. I'm going to play this game enough times to want to see some pretty different variations. I mean one game I might get heavy tank level 3 by 1941, in another not until 1943. Will it make or break my game? Possibly, but to me that's a challenge to overcome.

You mean give the US, for example, an HQ in the UK a few turns before D-Day?

Here are my (very) early script to have the US invade North Africa and move on Algiers/Tunis. There are currently at least 2 problems with it so far, however. One is the big issue of US HQ's never leaving port, and the other is the lack of naval support which I have yet to script in. I altered some of the US's production percentages as well to favor a little bit more on ground forces so they have enough for D-day as well, so not sure if the below scripts will still allow for both to occur without those production values edited. The scripts worked though for me and the US did land, took Casablanca and also landed at Algiers. Without an HQ though, it ain't gonna go anywhere. ; USA prepares to attack North Africa: { #NAME= USA Build Up Sea Transport - Algiers (Port for North Africa) #POPUP= #FLAG= 1 #TYPE= 1 #COUNTRY_ID= 3 #TRIGGER= 100 #LEVEL= 0 #PLAN_ID= 2 #SIZE= 3 #LENGTH= 0 ; Casablanca #GOAL_POSITION= 68,31 #DATE= 1943/01/01 #STEAL= 0 ; Set friendly positions: ; 1st Line - New York #FRIENDLY_POSITION= 5,22 ; Set variable conditions: ; 1st Line - USA politically aligned with Allies and not surrendered #VARIABLE_CONDITION= 3 [2] [100] [0] ; Set tactical conditions: ; 1st Line - Washington D.C. not tactically threatened (dummy condition) #TACTICAL_CONDITION= 2,23 [3] ; Set dummy activate position (no units at position 0,0) #ACTIVATE_POSITION= 0,0 [0,0] [0,0] [0] ; Set dummy cancel position (single neutral unit at position 0,0). This is not possible as no ; unit can occupy tile 0,0 so event will not be cancelled due to #CONDITION_POSITION #CANCEL_POSITION= 0,0 [0,0] [1,1] [0] } ; USA Attacks North Africa: { #NAME= USA Build Up in Casablanca - (Port for North Africa) #POPUP= #FLAG= 1 #TYPE= 1 #COUNTRY_ID= 3 #TRIGGER= 100 #LEVEL= 0 #PLAN_ID= 3 #SIZE= 2 #LENGTH= 1 ; Casablanca #GOAL_POSITION= 67,30 #DATE= 1943/02/01 #STEAL= 0 ; Set friendly positions: ; 1st Line - New York #FRIENDLY_POSITION= 5,22 ; Set variable conditions: ; 1st Line - USA politically aligned with Allies and not surrendered #VARIABLE_CONDITION= 3 [2] [100] [0] ; Set tactical conditions: ; 1st Line - Washington D.C. not tactically threatened (dummy condition) #TACTICAL_CONDITION= 2,23 [3] ; Set dummy activate position (no units at position 0,0) #ACTIVATE_POSITION= 0,0 [0,0] [0,0] [0] ; Set dummy cancel position (single neutral unit at position 0,0). This is not possible as no ; unit can occupy tile 0,0 so event will not be cancelled due to #CONDITION_POSITION #CANCEL_POSITION= 0,0 [0,0] [1,1] [0] } ; USA Attacks North Africa: { #NAME= USA Attacks Tunis - (North Africa) #POPUP= #FLAG= 1 #TYPE= 1 #COUNTRY_ID= 3 #TRIGGER= 100 #LEVEL= 0 #PLAN_ID= 1 #SIZE= 3 #LENGTH= 1 ; Algiers #GOAL_POSITION= 77,31 #DATE= 1943/03/01 #STEAL= 0 ; Set friendly positions: ; 1st Line - New York ; 2nd Line - Algiers #FRIENDLY_POSITION= 5,22 #FRIENDLY_POSITION= 68,31 ; Set variable conditions: ; 1st Line - USA politically aligned with Allies and not surrendered #VARIABLE_CONDITION= 3 [2] [100] [0] ; Set tactical conditions: ; 1st Line - Washington D.C. not tactically threatened (dummy condition) #TACTICAL_CONDITION= 2,23 [3] ; Set dummy activate position (no units at position 0,0) #ACTIVATE_POSITION= 0,0 [0,0] [0,0] [0] ; Set dummy cancel position (single neutral unit at position 0,0). This is not possible as no ; unit can occupy tile 0,0 so event will not be cancelled due to #CONDITION_POSITION #CANCEL_POSITION= 0,0 [0,0] [1,1] [0] }

All I did with this is I delayed the minimum start date by 6 months and changed the min/max units required to start it (#Activate). It was initially 20,20 so the AI would need precisely this amount within a 7 tile radius in the UK for this to be true, so I changed it to 12,20. I'd like to be able to say EXACTLY 4 US troops + HQ though, for example, before D-Day is attempted. Before I had changed the date by 6 months, the US dropped two Armies and 1 Tank division to take Brest in mid-1943. All the US HQ's were dancing in Boston and New York still. Grr... I don't think I changed the Length though, which is currently 1. { #NAME= USA Build Up Amphibious - Brest (D-Day) #POPUP= #FLAG= 1 #TYPE= 1 #COUNTRY_ID= 3 #TRIGGER= 100 #LEVEL= 0 #PLAN_ID= 2 #SIZE= 3 #LENGTH= 1 ; Brest #GOAL_POSITION= 59,18 #DATE= 1943/07/01 #STEAL= 0 ; Set friendly positions: ; 1st Line - Manchester #FRIENDLY_POSITION= 61,13 ; Set variable conditions: ; 1st Line - USA politically aligned with Allies and not surrendered #VARIABLE_CONDITION= 3 [2] [100] [0] ; Set tactical conditions: ; 1st Line - Washington D.C. not tactically threatened (dummy condition) #TACTICAL_CONDITION= 2,23 [3] ; Set activate position: ; 1st Line - 20 Allied units in England #ACTIVATE_POSITION= 64,15 [7,7] [12,20] [2] ; Set dummy cancel position (single neutral unit at position 0,0). This is not possible as no ; unit can occupy tile 0,0 so event will not be cancelled due to #CONDITION_POSITION #CANCEL_POSITION= 0,0 [0,0] [1,1] [0] }

Thanks for the reply pzgndr. The problem with using another scenario (ie, 1943 for D-day) is it won't take into account everything leading up to it. But in all actuality, my #1 problem has been the US failing to transport HQ's overseas. I can get D-Day to occur but without those HQ's, it'll never amount to anything. Nor any North Africa landings they pull off. As far as what I'm modding, I'm not trying to deviate too much from the standard 1939 scenario. Trying to fix some AI issues, make the AI tougher and eventually adding some variable scripts so it isn't as predictable. I'm sure Hubert's patch will do most of this, but it's good practice anyway, and I'm sure he doesn't have time to add in all the optional stuff.

I was thinking of adding some historical "what ifs" regarding the Pacific campaign. Make a small percentage chance (15-25% or so) that the US loses the Battle of Midway, then divert some of their MPP from the European theater to help on the west coast.

Exactly. This is especially true for Russia, which has the daunting task of driving an Axis human player back. With units being dropped here and there, the most they can do is stall. This is, of course, against experienced players. I feel that my Russian AI right now would put up a tough fight against a casual player. They produce more units and managed to keep me from Moscow until Dec. of 1943. If I can get the North African landings to work, and D-day to be pulled off, I'll be stretched. The US has already sent a bomber and fighter to the UK, on top of the UK's bomber and fighter and have been hammering my production. I've been forced to divert 2 of my 3 AF's to France to stem the bleeding. Edit: Sweet! I got the US to land in North Africa! They DoW'd Vichy France and landed two Corp and 1 Army to take Algiers in March 1943. Later I turned FoW off to see how D-day was progressing, and I see a problem. The US fails to ship their HQ's to the UK, nor did they send any to support the amphibious landing. Hubert, is this just a bug right now with the US or do I need to include something in the code? [ April 20, 2006, 04:57 PM: Message edited by: Timskorn ]

Been working on an updated 1939 campaign and am currently testing it (takes a long time to see if D-day works properly!). So some questions. 1. Will there be a way to test certain events without having to play through an entire game (ie, changes made to D-day code)? 2. Is there anything to override an AI's willingness to operate its units? I thought using the Garrison effect would do it, but it still looks like Russia operates (and moves around) units too much instead of letting them dig in. Or is it possible I am seeing 'extra' units the AI happens to be shifting around (ie, units that are not part of any AI strategy, or part of the Garrison scripts)? 3. Is there a way to tell the AI to use their Siberian units specifically for something? The editor picks units generally with #Size, but not specifically (all tanks, for example). Or am I missing something? I'd like to add a Soviet offensive script utilizing most of their best units at the time. I'm currently in the middle of testing the latest version. The Soviets are loaded with troops, it's the winter of 1943 and I'm about to take Moscow. I added a couple scripts for the US to land at Algiers, but I'm still waiting to see if it occurs. Also, will the US automatically DOW Vichy France in order to land there?

Well, as soon as I get the AI to a point where I'd feel it's worth releasing to the public I'll certainly do so. But, Hubert will likely beat us to the punch with the patch. I'm not sure when it'll be released and how much he is tweaking the AI, but I'm assuming it'll resolve a good bunch of the issues I'm trying to address in the editor.

In my recent game with my tweaks the AI ended up pushing me back at Stalingrad, but only temporarily. Still, it had a good 10 corps, 2 HQ's, 2 Armies and 1 Armor. At about the same time the US landed in France. Was fun to see, but still needs more work. Yeah, it seems the scripts in North Africa aren't there for either side. The UK will wait for you to advance, and so will the Italians, but neither are scripted to attack. Cool, thanks for the tip, that'll save me some time on figuring out how to coordinate something like D-day.

Hey Edwin, have you tried adding some of these events via the editor? It seems there are a good number of scripts missing from the 1939 Fall Weiss campaign that, unless HC is putting them in with the patch, we'll have to do ourselves. For example, I never saw any script to take Norway or Sweden for the Axis AI, nor any counter-Allied script to take either of these back. There's also no scripts for either AI in North Africa, except one for Italy to send some troops to Tripoli. Hopefully these will be in the next patch, but if not they can certainly be added with the editor. Also, we can implement the possible AI strategies you mention in your first post and just weigh them with percentages. Would certainly be cool to know the Russian AI could be choosing between 4 different unique strategies. A lot of other things are simple changes you can make fairly quickly, such as making sure certain cities are garrisoned or focusing production techs during certain years/months. It sounds like HC is busy working on a lot of the basic AI scripts, but I feel it'll always be up to us to tweak the game to a point that we're happy with. I'm sure HC isn't going to focus his time making 4 variable strategies for each major nation. The exciting thing is we can add scripts that mimick real player strategies...Rambo AI.

Cool stuff! This sounds like it would definitely keep the Axis player occuppied. I was actually tweaking some numbers today to get the Allied AI in general to be more formidable during the game. I managed to get the Russian AI to properly form defensive lines in front of a few of their cities, and to also increase their number of units in general by tweaking their production/research percentages. I've only done one playthrough, and I noticed the Russian AI still operating units away from defensive positions, but it's been reduced quite a bit. I think one of the reasons is that some of the scripts are trying to 'steal' units away for others, so for less important cities I'll be marking those for false and see how that goes. I managed to get the US to actually land in France, but it was a little early and without enough units. They landed two Army units and an Armor unit and almost took Brest. I'll try and tweak this event and get the UK to go in on the landings as well. I'm going to try and add a "US Heads to North Africa" script and get their initial land/sea units into the action as they prepare for D-Day, and to get the AI for Italy and UK more aggressive in North Africa in general. I'm really enjoying the editor. It took a little reading up, and I'm still learning, but the scripts are a very powerful tool. Until Hubert releases an official patch, this is a great way to 'do it yourself' in the meantime. Anyone else have success re-working the AI for either side?

I thought $45 would put me off from buying it, but after playing it (and knowing HC's track record for support patches) I'd say it's definitely worth the money. I wouldn't WANT to pay anymore though, that's for sure.

I see what you're saying but it seems like those would be special circumstances, SMG42. As hellraiser said, if a unit is meant to be at 10 str and is beat down to 5, naturally morale and readiness will continue to suffer. The men wouldn't have all the equipment and men they believe they should have. But in SC2, there aren't units that are supposed to be a max 5 strength, so anything below 10 is considered lacking.

I had this happen to my FJ unit I landed near Leningrad. Once he went in, it took many turns before he could move out. Had fully supply range to the city, no partisans, etc.

Alright, alright. No need to hijack the thread praising Hubert's game. Back on track... The 2nd, but a close 1st, is how Hubert managed to give us the experience of making the high level (and mid level) decisions of directing the war. As JameyCribbs said, we're presented with the opportunities and dilemma's that were there during the war. Do we go along with history, deviate a bit or try something completely different?

This actually goes for both games. I was thinking while playing the game recently what makes this series so friggin' fun? In my opinion, the crowning achievement of the series is its simplicity with complexity. Let me explain. When people think of wargames, as I have, I imagine a bunch of numbers and factors that I have to consider every single time I decide to attack, move, defend, etc. Weather, morale, supplies, experience, command, entrenchment, rivers, mountains, fortifications, flanking, organization, how many cigarettes your men have this month, etc. Hubert managed to keep all of these things in the game while making it so unbelievably simple to understand and process while playing. I can, with a quick glance, look at a unit and estimate its ability to attack or defend. Then its simply a matter of two mouse clicks to attack. It's really amazing that with a game of this scope how you can, over the course of the game, just have a "sense" about the entire picture on every turn. Where you are weak, where you are strong and what you feel you need to do in all of those situations. I never feel like I don't have a complete understanding of the state of the war, from individual units to entire fronts. Anyway, what is the one thing all of you feel is the "thing" that makes SC 1 and 2 the game that it is? The scope, of course, is right up there in 2nd place.