Hubert Cater

If using the 1939 Storm Over Europe campaign as a point of reference for this discussion, the basic desire is if let's say in a situation for when Germany invades the USSR and Minsk is surrounded and completely cutoff from a friendly resource chain back to Moscow, then instead of dropping to a supply value of 5 from 10, it should drop to 0. Additionally any HQs caught behind in this pocket should also drop to 0 supply instead of the minimum default of 5. The immediate impact of this type of change would be on a D-Day situation where if let's say the Allies land in Normandy and on their first turn only capture Caen. Caen would have a supply value of 0, and the HQs that under the current rules act as a sort of mulberry supply source, that have also landed in that pocket would also have a supply value of 0 under these proposed changes. Essentially all units in that pocket, and without any further changes, would have a supply value of 0 until Paris is recaptured. Question #1 How would you address this type of situation?

From memory the supply would be cut in half, i.e. all connected resources to the capital in let's say in Germany would drop to 5 from 10. One reason why this might not have been immediately apparent is that many countries are listed to have secondary supply sources. For example in the 1939 Storm Over Europe campaign, Germany has Berlin, Konigsberg, Munich and Dusseldorf all acting as primary supply sources. You did mention more than just capitals as supply sources, I'm just trying to understand the potential model in simplest terms which is why I was looking at the most basic example such as a single supply source capital and going from there. I'm actually very interested in this discussion and not to exclude what else you've written here for now, but what I would suggest is that we continue it but with a basic model of changes and building from there. I only suggest this as there are many different possibilities to introduce unforeseen downsides and I have to keep in mind that any proposed changes need to work in a generic way for all maps and campaign types. In that vein, what I would suggest, and if you are up for it, would be that since I am looking at it from a programming point of view as well, that I ask you a series of questions and with each answer we move forward to the more complicated situations. I'll write my first question in the next post.

In some ways this is how the current model works where the primary supply source is let's say the capital and the remaining connected resources are relaying resources that will drop in value if the capital is cut off. If major supply is only from the capital and if the rest are more like depots would this not make decent supply values throughout the map very difficult to achieve, or at least more so than is currently modeled? One problem that keeps me at least from making this type of change, and this is not to suggest that the current model is perfect, but if this were the case then areas like North Africa and/or initial landings from D-Day would mean that all those units would have 0 supply unless we create alternative supply rules for situations like this as well. This is a tricky one as a general rule as some units may just be far from a decent supply source, again such as a unit in the longer stretches between cities/towns in North Africa and so on. Then HQs landed from amphibious assaults would not be able to provide any supply until they can connect to a town and again in stretches away from a low supply source such as a town with supply 5 an HQ could easily drop to 0 as soon as it is outside of range. I can understand in some situations how this is desired but I'm still hesitant as there would be other situations where this is less so.

For the asterisk it could have been that there was a small adjustment to the Garrison script that was not compiled with the rest of the campaign upon initial release and if so this will be fixed for the first patch. Either way the campaign did have a compiled set of events for Garrison planning for the AI, just likely not a minor change introduced at the end. Saving under another name in the Editor should show the AI and Event scripts but if you change the name in Windows explorer then it might not find the files. Perhaps this was the case? For the campaign not showing in Windows Explorer, this is likely the Windows 7/Vista UAC control blocking the placement of these files in your Program Files installation folder. I would suggest navigating to your campaigns folder and then clicking on the 'Compatibility Files' button at the top of Windows Explorer. It should then show your campaign hidden in the Virtual folder. You can cut them from there and then paste them back in the expected 'Campaigns' folder in your installation directory. They should then show up as expected, or you can just leave it as is as both the Editor and the game should find the files from the virtual folder as well even if they don't show up where you are expecting them to.

Welcome aboard Awen

It's certainly an option and one of the reasons we left it in the Editor even if we don't use it ourselves for the default campaigns. I just ran a test and the reduced cost seems to work on my end as I set it to 50% and a BB that was sunk could be rebuilt at half the cost of the other BBs on the list.

I think it comes down to how we define the linking and the idea was that you could link a few HQs together to increase their normal supply as shown in Phase 2. As for HQ2 not supplying any units this is not exactly true as the unit directly below HQ2 is receiving supply from HQ2 as otherwise if HQ2 was not there it would have a supply value of 3 instead of 4. All that being said I think what many were looking for was for HQ2 to also get a supply value from HQ1 based on the table on page 34. In this case the outcome would be for HQ2 to also have a supply value of 8. I'll have to look into that as that might have some side issues as supply being too good for situations like when Germany pushes deep into the USSR for WWII games but at the same time I can see how it might be more applicable for these smaller campaigns and so on. For the idea that supply in most games require you to link to a major supply source such as a capital or staging area, is this not what we already have in place as supply would be reduced if the capital or other major supply source is cutoff? I only ask as this discussion does come up quite often and I'm always interested in any possible improvements on what I might be missing. Thanks, Hubert

Just to add think of the assignment of HQ supply values as two separate phases. The first phase of HQ supply values is calculated relative to its distance from a resource as shown in the table on page 34. Generally this will leave an HQ with a supply value of 10, 8 or 5. The second phase which is where we describe HQ linking is simply a way to boost the supply value given to an HQ from phase one and the way it works is the same way that HQs give supply to all land units, i.e. supply is calculated as distance from supply source, i.e. whether it is from a resource or from an HQ. * * * So in the screenshot attachment you've provided on the top of page 2, the HQ at 8 and the HQ at 5 show the situation perfectly after *Phase 1* of the HQ supply calculations. In other words the HQ1 at 8, according to the table is receiving a supply of 1-5 from the resource. The HQ2 at 5 is receiving 0 supply from the resource so it receives a minimum supply value of 5. For *Phase 2* since the HQ1 is 4 tiles away from the HQ2 (if you include the terrain costs) the HQ1 cannot increase the supply of the HQ2, i.e. 8 - 4 = 4 which is less than the value of 5 that HQ2 already has. Hopefully this helps to clarify the issue, Hubert

On or adjacent to any Partisan pop up position will do the trick and prevent them from spawning.

You'll need to maintain border units in and near Konigsberg and Warsaw, for the most part, but even then Soviet mobilization will still slowly rise albeit not as fast as likely what you are seeing in game.

If you captured the French capital with Italian units then this is the expected behaviour, i.e. France would surrender to Italy.

This is an event that transfers control of Iceland to the UK after Denmark surrenders... unfortunately this is how the game engine handles these events, i.e. similar to how Axis units will be booted out of Vichy France once Vichy France is created. When this happens, your Axis Garrison unit should have been returned to friendly Axis territory somewhere on the map, and in this case most likely mainland Europe.

Oops, a definite toot, toot for acrashb as well

Hi Awen! Welcome to the forums and I'm glad to hear the game is keeping your interest even if it is a bit of a challenge. On the positive side your feedback tells me that we did improve the AI but I can see the point in that it might still be nice to make things easier for players that prefer this. I think the easiest thing for me to suggest is to open up the Editor and make some changes to your campaign as desired, i.e. perhaps give the Axis side some extra units or extra MPP to see if that helps. Hope this gives you some ideas, Hubert

Hi Mike, Welcome to the forums and sorry to hear about the trouble and I'm not sure why it would be lingering, does it still do this after a fresh reboot of your system? Hubert

Great idea but it's just unfortunately not on our radar right now.

I'll second the toot, toot Thanks again John!

Hi JD63, this doesn't sound like an anti-virus issue but either way I would submit a ticket to the Battlefront Helpdesk as they should be able to get you up and running very quickly. Below is the URL: http://www.battlefront.com/helpdesk I hope this helps, Hubert

Thanks, this is now fixed

Yes, thanks Thrwawn for this and good to hear from you again in the Forums

Thanks and this is now fixed on my end for the next update to the game

Hi Cantona66, this could very well be an error in the import function allowing you to import an incompatible unit layer when it really should not. I would suggest not importing the units and see if that fixes the problem.

If you still have it, please do send it my way, support@furysoftware.com In the meantime you can just skip the replay to continue your game.

I never had to touch Heuristics either, just made sure the exceptions were set for the installation folder and that did the trick.

Great to hear Don and thanks for your support, definitely feel free to spread the word as well! Merry Christmas