Holiday Project - MP Scenario - Battle of Raseiniai

[GabeKnight]

Go ahead

This is a much simpler project that Tallinn but I'm sure there's things to find!

Four eyes are better than two, except if you are referring to glasses, and even then they are a blessing! I discovered this myself the hard way when my own latest creation was "scrubbed clean" out there in the cold, cruel world.

Sorry.. we meant no harm

[bru888]

Sorry.. we meant no harm

No, you did good.

[bru888]

Only one typo! "The German tankers of Army Group North are racing ahead to capture key crossings over the Dubysa River. Russian armoured forces have gathered East of Raseiniai and moved to intercept them." I assume you will "flesh out" the event popup images, if that is your choice, or leave them as blank windows.

As I understand it, Soviets win if they hold all six objectives on turn 6 or they are still holding all four bridges at scenario-end. Soviets lose if the Germans have achieved their objectives of holding Raseiniei and their two assigned target bridges. I see how you fail the German objectives when you complete the Soviet objectives. However, I don't see the reverse; don't you need to fail Soviet objectives when the Germans achieve theirs in order for the Germans to be declared winners?

For Select Bridge Objectives, you have an extra "Activate Bridge 4" trigger here. Given that you are selecting two, isn't there a chance that the random trigger will select both "Activate Bridge 4" triggers, thereby only activating that one bridge objective folder? The German player cannot win if that is the case:

Screenshot 3.jpg (266.41 KiB) Viewed 3522 times

The only other thing that puzzles me a bit is this mechanism here. You are turning on and off the German objective of "Hold Assigned Target Bridges" according to whether the scenario variable GerBridgeCount =2 or is <2. Why do you use a random trigger with one possible outcome instead of Set Trigger State? Then, all the random trigger is doing is turning on or off the toggles which themselves turn on and off the "Award/Unaward Target Bridges" triggers accordingly. Why not just include the set trigger states in with the "Award/Unaward Target Bridges" in the first place? This works, I guess, but seems overly complicated:

Screenshot 7.jpg (380.97 KiB) Viewed 3523 times

Screenshot 8.jpg (376.36 KiB) Viewed 3523 times

Screenshot 9.jpg (81.19 KiB) Viewed 3523 times

[Shards]

For Select Bridge Objectives, you have an extra "Activate Bridge 4" trigger here. Given that you are selecting two, isn't there a chance that the random trigger will select both "Activate Bridge 4" triggers, thereby only activating that one bridge objective folder? The German player cannot win if that is the case:

Screenshot 3.jpg

For this one, I found a bug where, if you ask the game to select 2 or more items from a random list, it won't pick the items from the end of the list. Duplicating the last entry here is a hacky work-around for that bug

[Shards]

For the Random Trigger, the reason why the Set Trigger State aren't in the same trigger is that you can't use functions inside a trigger to turn itself off. So I've bodged it to be in that other trigger.

I've used Random Trigger with one entry as that was how my mind worked for "get that trigger to fire now" rather than just "enable that trigger for further use"

It's a bodge and I think I've tidied it up nicer elsewhere!

[bru888]

For this one, I found a bug where, if you ask the game to select 2 or more items from a random list, it won't pick the items from the end of the list. Duplicating the last entry here is a hacky work-around for that bug

For the Random Trigger, the reason why the Set Trigger State aren't in the same trigger is that you can't use functions inside a trigger to turn itself off. So I've bodged it to be in that other trigger.

I've used Random Trigger with one entry as that was how my mind worked for "get that trigger to fire now" rather than just "enable that trigger for further use"

It's a bodge and I think I've tidied it up nicer elsewhere!

Wow. You're the expert so now that you have discovered that multiple choice random trigger bug, I hope you have reported it to you-know-who!

As far as the other thing goes, I have seen that Set Trigger State "used" in other scenarios to, quote, "turn itself off," unquote. It may be that those designers may not realize that it is not working. If you feel this is a design decision then so be it but if you think this is also a bug, I hope you will report it as well.

Say, cannot someone play both sides of a MP 1v1 scenario? I have a hankering to play this one as Generalissimo Bru vs. Field Marshal Bruce!

[Shards]

You certainly can play both sides in a Hotseat game. That's where I do my longer form testing. (I'll often throw in some AI units with basic capture orders to do quick tests)

I may have been impatient with the set trigger status and not thought about how to use it properly, I should take another look

[Shards]

Oh Detective Bru, I've found something you missed in your investigations

On the Russian victory check for all 6 objectives, I'd put the wrong operator on the Check Turn query, it was checking that it was LESS THAN turn 1

[Shards]

Updated to 0.1.5

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nmoejxz6hn7p ... 1_cla?dl=0

Fixed that victory check
Added flags to the hexes where off-map supply comes in
Tweaked the Russian victory conditions to require that their objectives have a supply link back to their North East base. I want to encourage the German player to be more mobile and to be able to prolong the battle by circling around the Russian heavy armour.

[uran21]

Forum post can stand more words than game chat.

There is jungle hex near Lioliai. Intended?
There are supply sources around bridges on open ground but central one has no supply. While checking supply with spacebar is surely possible it is good to have graphical marker for such things on map. Even more so in multiplayer where performance and palnning needs to be more efective than in singleplayer. So some flag on open ground would be in order.
Don't get German incentive to hold Northern secondary objective flag other than preventing it from Soviets but this can be done some other way as well.

[Shards]

Forum post can stand more words than game chat.

There is jungle hex near Lioliai. Intended?
There are supply sources around bridges on open ground but central one has no supply. While checking supply with spacebar is surely possible it is good to have graphical marker for such things on map. Even more so in multiplayer where performance and palnning needs to be more efective than in singleplayer. So some flag on open ground would be in order.
Don't get German incentive to hold Northern secondary objective flag other than preventing it from Soviets but this can be done some other way as well.

- Jungle is a mistake Fixed
- Removed those supply sources, they were legacy from an older version
- Northern objective is indeed just to alert the player that the Russians are going to take that point. It's mostly an attempt to draw some combat up there as it gets packed around Raseiniai and the historical reality is that the Germans gained a crossing in the North and swept down the Eastern side of the Dubysa to rout the Russians. I'm open to ideas on how that could be done differently?

[uran21]

Glad you are open for ideas but let's play for a while to get the feeling of it. Than some will certanly come.

More comments to follow:

Initial deployment zones were available on turn 2. Ability to deploy unit should be transparent for both sides. This is why I think initial deployment should work on turn 1 only and later we should rely on graphically marked supply bases with their deployment rules. If this means placing villages on strategic points, let's be it.

Rail going across lake near Iytuvenai, Sovied side north. I wish we have hex coordinate system for such reports.

[Shards]

Glad you are open for ideas but let's play for a while to get the feeling of it. Than some will certanly come.

More comments to follow:

Initial deployment zones were available on turn 2. Ability to deploy unit should be transparent for both sides. This is why I think initial deployment should work on turn 1 only and later we should rely on graphically marked supply bases with their deployment rules. If this means placing villages on strategic points, let's be it.

Rail going across lake near Iytuvenai, Sovied side north. I wish we have hex coordinate system for such reports.

The deployment zones are only there for the Russians as you've got a column of reinforcements heading your way and you can't do a split deployment period... But I see your point!

Fixed the lake by diverting the rail line

[uran21]

We got to an end of scenario So it is about holding 3 bridges at all times for the Soviets or something is not working as intended?

The deployment zones are only there for the Russians as you've got a column of reinforcements heading your way and you can't do a split deployment period... But I see your point!

Reinforcements meant I got additional CP for purchase which I did… and haven’t placed newly acquired units on desired area but wherever game rules allowed me to so I do not see the point of those deployment zones.

Events don’t have images. I do not think images should be searched for in the moment when event was actually added during production period but what helps on the long run is to have generic placeholder image so when you create an event placeholder with correct name is located in scenario folder. This gives you an advantage later on because only by looking at scenario folder you can see how many images do you need and what are they all about. From that point on when finding appropriate image what it takes is only correctly renaming the file (copy-paste from the placeholder) and overwriting the placeholder in the folder. If the placeholder is overwritten you know file was correctly renamed and previous play tests gave you an info on correct file integration in the event because if placeholder appeared all if fine if not something is broken, taking into account play test was not done through the editor which is impossible for the hot seat anyway. If this method is used more often we would have less “missing images” reports.

I don’t like the low effets Soviet Anti-Tanks have on German tanks.

I am in for another round

[Shards]

Hmm, I thought I'd set those deployment zones to be turn 0 to 5... Did you not get the option to deploy to them?

The German player is given two target bridges by High Command. These are randomly set at the start of the game. The Russian player has to stop the German taking their two Targets.

[Shards]

Updated to 0.1.6 with changes suggested from uran's playtest.

Also added images

https://www.dropbox.com/sh/nmoejxz6hn7p ... 1_cla?dl=0

[Shards]

Thrown a challenge up for you! I've taken the Russians this time

[uran21]

Hmm, I thought I'd set those deployment zones to be turn 0 to 5... Did you not get the option to deploy to them?

Yes I got the option. The point is I do not whant to use that option in realistic way because game rules (supply hexes) allow me better options in this particular situation. For that reason I do not see advantage of it and it is not transparent enough for the other player.

Other thing I am considering is German bomber force. Looking from Soviet perspective it loks like once bomber leaves from map there is no turning back or repair. But I am not sure about it. It can define my startegy to confront them.

Anyway victory conditions should be stated more clearly. As it stands now it looks like you need to hold bridges at scenario end and if you lose two of them after turn 6 you will fail in secondary objectives which is not how the game acctually works.

[Shards]

The German's have an airstrip in the South West to repair their bombers at.

I see what you mean about the Objectives. I was struggling for the Germans with only being allowed 5 primary objectives, and so their "stop the Russians" became a secondary objective. I can understand that, for the Russian player, it would be better if "stop the Germans" was a primary objective as the Germans have the Initiative as it were?

For the deployment zones, how I would love the ability to place a village, with a flag and supply but NOT ALLOW deployment to it....

[uran21]

I see what you mean about the Objectives. I was struggling for the Germans with only being allowed 5 primary objectives, and so their "stop the Russians" became a secondary objective. I can understand that, for the Russian player, it would be better if "stop the Germans" was a primary objective as the Germans have the Initiative as it were?

First time peak in the editor. For soviet side you have place for one more primary objective. For German side you have place for explanatory line to anounce how secondary objectives are actually primary as well.

For the deployment zones, how I would love the ability to place a village, with a flag and supply but NOT ALLOW deployment to it....

I second this desire. In PG2 nad People's General there were several deployment hexes. Where you can deploy only side A, or only side B or both sides. Something like that could be part of Panzer Corps 2 but it requires good graphical markers so there is no confusion. Work around this situation is to remove village hex and place some overlay over open ground. Drawback is one cannot take advantage of village combat modifiers and cover is very much important in multiplayer.