Winter War 1939 Beta Test

[ColonelY]

Colonel, you read my mind.

[terminator]

The first scen worked flawlessly. But yeah, the southern Soviet column has no chance whatsoever to cross that river.

Crossing the river T is essentially a pathfinding problem. I suggest trying one of the following 2 options:

- river option:

Capture d’écran (82).jpg (245.04 KiB) Viewed 2883 times

-frozen lake option:

Capture d’écran (83).jpg (251.29 KiB) Viewed 2883 times

[bru888]

Guys, thanks. Erik appears to be taking a short and well-deserved hiatus. When he is back, I am requesting that he place official copies of these scenarios in the "Ready for Bru" folder for the noted reasons:

01Terijoki - redesign the bridge area, taking terminator's original suggestion of having it be three river hexes, thus allowing the southern Soviet column to apply more firepower across a wider front.

02Kollaa - add a set of Finnish exit/deployment hexes to the east and add the artificial AI air redeployment mechanism that gives the human player another chance at enemy planes (although they "redeploy" at full strength). Also, check the scenario description - see next post - thanks, Gabe.

03Linnasalmi - for counting bonus kills, build in a counter for that so, so, satisfying body count based on "Combat Events" (or tweak the existing triggers for the same effect).

04Soumussalmi - adjust the sniper spawns for better target hex locations.

05Koukkuniemi - see if I can (easily!) accommodate Colonel's suggestions about objective counts and, instead of a lame "Watch out for our own mines, fellows" in the briefing, experiment instead with Finnish ownership of said mines.

06Tolvajarvi1 - consider the objective description suggestions made by ColonelY. I leave command and resource point descriptions to Erik because he is good at gameplay balance.

[bru888]

Wasn't this bridge-crossing supposed to be changed (suggested by terminator)?

Yes, I should have listened to terminator when he first brought it up. Actually, I did, but I hoped that other improvements would resolve Soviet shyness. Instead, see what I said above.

You're the expert, but I think there's a verb missing in that sentence:

Screenshot 44.jpg (43.18 KiB) Viewed 2864 times

Screenshot 44.jpg

This is rather distressing. I hope it's not an indication of post-production problems because I did not leave the scenario description in that manner. (It is from the original source, a scenario designer who is not very adept at English spelling and grammar. What leaps out to me even more readily is the inappropriate use of "it's" which means "it is" and is wrongly used here, a pet peeve of mine. )

Anyway, although that is what the 02Kollaa text file in the version 1.5 download says, this is how my copy reads:

Image0218.jpg (746.27 KiB) Viewed 2864 times

So there is a problem perhaps. To that end, below is a zip file with all 21 text files numbered by scenario number ("HA" is "HevossalmiAlternate"). I urge Erik to ensure that these text files (with the numbers removed) are in place in every official scenario folder.

Image0219.jpg (145.77 KiB) Viewed 2864 times

Image0220.jpg (280.93 KiB) Viewed 2864 times

Winter War 1939 Text Files.7z

(29.03 KiB) Downloaded 88 times

[Erik2]

Forum ate my homework

Bru:
Scenarios 1-5 in Bruce-folder
text_english replaced in all scenarios 1-20+HA
Optional recon air is a good idea, I will add air exit/deployment hexes for scenarios 6-20 (if there are currently none)

Everybody else:
Thanks for the feedback.
Non-Bru issues added to my list.

[ColonelY]

Great, good to read that the "War Economy" spec will allow us to use an air recon!

[ColonelY]

07Hevossalmi:

Very nice , and this time the battle reaches the sky as well...

1. Maybe add just ONE turn...
For as it is, it's rather difficult to rush for the escaping cargo trucks without losing any auxiliary unit (and our right flank is mainly composed by them).

2. This time, why can't we use our own fighter? You know, the one bought during the second scenario and never used again since...
(And, because of the presence of planes within this scenario, I was going to write again about the recon plane from "War Economy", but it's now no longer required. )
-------
11Kotajarvi:

Another awesome scenario, with nice counterattacks and great events around tanks!

I would just suggest at least adding some reward for the secondary objective about destroying enemy artillery. What about 50 to 100 RP bonus?
-------
08Kotisaari:

First few little points:
1. Briefing 2/5: "[...] to secure the the road [...]" -> One is to be deleted.
2. Name on map: "Artilley Park" for the "Artillery Park" -> A letter yet to be added.
3. Secondary objective: What about highlighting this Artillery Park once clicked on the blue "?"?

Then a bigger issue:
Impossible for me within this map to move heavies or engineers inside the dense forest! (Already just after the deployment.)
Indeed, they can't go from dense forest (pine trees) to dense forest, nor from open terrain to (enter into) a dense forest hex...
Never seen this! The fact of having or not Finnish trucks doesn't change anything to it (of course ).
It works as usual with regular infantry or ski troops...

[Erik2]

Thanks, ColonelY

Added to my list.

[bru888]

Back to Erik: 01Terijoki

- Created a three hex-wide front at the bridge using open terrain and river rather than deep water.
- Returned 6 Rifle Co back to 75 aggression (from 99, which was my recommendation so I feel safe in reversing it) to avoid recklessness.

Screenshot 1.jpg (421.48 KiB) Viewed 2790 times

This should provide the player with a greater challenge now, holding off the southern attack while dealing with the other column north of the river. All other previous changes were left alone.

P.S., I hope that's you taking the scenario out of the "Back to Erik" folder, because I could swear I just uploaded it. Others to come soon.

[GabeKnight]

Then a bigger issue:
Impossible for me within this map to move heavies or engineers inside the dense forest! (Already just after the deployment.)
Indeed, they can't go from dense forest (pine trees) to dense forest, nor from open terrain to (enter into) a dense forest hex...
Never seen this!

But I have, it's been reported for about a year now and still not fixed. Same goes for the engineers BTW. You can test it yourself in the Endsieg/Huertgenwald scen.

[ColonelY]

10Uomaa:
A great scenario too, with heavy fighting!

1. We can't use our tank within this scenario ... is it on purpose?
No deploy hex outside dense forest with a possible path to reach the theater of actions, as tanks can't go through dense forest...

2. Scenario description: "Kotajarvi" should be replaced by "Kotajärvi" (as in the other scenarios about this location), to stay coherent...

3. Secondary objective -> destroy artillery... without reward?! What about adding a bonus of around 100 RP for the completion of this objective?
-------
09Tolvajarvi2:

Wonderful, a rush towards victory points to handle with the slaughter of enough Russian units... without knowing what will jump out of these dense woods nor from where!

Although, again, I would really wish that there is some reward for the completion of the (unique) secondary objective. So, what about adding (again) around 100 RP as reward?

Otherwise, it's really tempting to only rush for the 4 capture points (it's really easy! ) and win this scenario without bothering about the rest, thus loosing much of the flavor that this scenario contains.
Even a "Minor Victory" count as a victory, no? The challenge here is to capture and keep only 3 victory points, delaying the capture of a fourth one until enough enemy troops have been slaughtered... But this does imply more loses too, as well as some adaptation, because one doesn't know what the enemy is actually planning and one can't afford to lose to much troops nor to many victory point to the enemy... So all this, without any reward, it would be a little a pity, wouldn't it?
-------
Oh, and by the way, adding these maybe 100 RP as reward for the completion of these few secondary objectives won't somehow be too much anyway, for the player will only play ONE of those scenarios (per campaign) thanks to the crossroad.

[ColonelY]

Then a bigger issue:
Impossible for me within this map to move heavies or engineers inside the dense forest! (Already just after the deployment.)
Indeed, they can't go from dense forest (pine trees) to dense forest, nor from open terrain to (enter into) a dense forest hex...
Never seen this!

But I have, it's been reported for about a year now and still not fixed. Same goes for the engineers BTW. You can test it yourself in the Endsieg/Huertgenwald scen.

So, what could we do about it? Nothing?

It's still not fixed, okay, but it's the first time in this campaign that this happens (to me at least)... So, why is this problem sometimes appearing and sometimes not? When is it actually happening? What can one do to avoid it?

Well, if the answers to these questions had been found, the problem should already have been solved , so...

[GabeKnight]

So, what could we do about it? Nothing?

It's still not fixed, okay, but it's the first time in this campaign that this happens (to me at least)... So, why is this problem sometimes appearing and sometimes not? When is it actually happening? What can one do to avoid it?

Well, if the answers to these questions had been found, the problem should already have been solved , so...

It's only happening on winter maps and if there's no road present. My guess would be, it's some bad combination of movement points and climate (winter + snow/rain or something like that).

[bru888]

Back to Erik: 02Kollaa

- Created a second set of Finnish air exit/deployment hexes in the east.
- Added the mechanism to "redeploy" Soviet aircraft artificially:

Screenshot 1.jpg (225.35 KiB) Viewed 2763 times

Screenshot 2.jpg (225.81 KiB) Viewed 2763 times

The proper text file has been restored to this scenario, Gabe.

[GabeKnight]

The proper text file has been restored to this scenario, Gabe.

Thanks, I've already downloaded your updated text-archive from the post above.

WW39 1.5, lvl3, 04Soumussalmi

No issues, other than the snipers' spawn directly into enemy fire. And I think the Colonel already mentioned that.

Screenshot 46.jpg (871.51 KiB) Viewed 2754 times

[ColonelY]

12Uomaa2: (or the Lemetti road, i.e. the first scenario after the crossroad)

Great scenario!
An experienced and entenchend unit blocking the road, covered by 3 AT-guns hidden in pine trees, what a death trap for Soviet tanks! And all infantry units inside the dense forest, but just at its borders, so that the tanks can't attack them directly (although the opposite is still possible ). At level 3, almost whiped out the entire Russian column; after they have been defeated, the remnants of the Russian units have retreated, followed by Finnish soldiers full on pursuit! A lonely Russian infantry just survived when it was time to end the scenario, an unit red and heavily depleted - which would have been destroyed as well if I had chosen the tank instead of more artillery as reinforcements.

Issue found, secondary objective: "Inflict 6 aerial damage on enemy land units" -> the ace is well unlocked, but this damage counter doesn't make a difference, right now, between an aerial attack and a land attack!
At the beginning of the scenario, 1 damage to a tank unit by my bomber then 5 by experienced ski troops hidden in pine trees, so 6 in total -> 6/6 (already!?) -> objective checked/validated, so ace unlocked... hem...

[Erik2]

....

P.S., I hope that's you taking the scenario out of the "Back to Erik" folder, because I could swear I just uploaded it. Others to come soon.

In Bruce we trust

[GabeKnight]

In Bruce we trust

And rightly so. A trust well-earned.

WW39 1.5, lvl3, 05Koukkuniemi

Again no issues in my playthrough. My only suggestion would be to reveal (at least some of) the mines to the player. You could use the reveal/hidden units trigger at scen start.
Excellent campaign so far, thanks again guys.

[Mascarenhas]

Hello Guys,

After almost finishing Canada´s Normandy scenarios with no major issues to report, I think I´m ready to tackle Winter War. Should I wait for some new revised beta version after so many suggestions and observations?

Regards,

[bru888]

Back to Erik: 03Linnasalmi

This was tough but I got it to work and tested it thoroughly. It probably was tougher than it needed to be but I got diverted onto various paths which got more complicated at every turn. Simpler is always better and believe it or not, this is simpler:

Screenshot 8.jpg (217.15 KiB) Viewed 2706 times

Screenshot 9.jpg (224.28 KiB) Viewed 2706 times

Screenshot 10.jpg (190.7 KiB) Viewed 2706 times

Screenshot 11.jpg (228.05 KiB) Viewed 2706 times

Remember, the aim here was to provide "for counting bonus kills, build in a counter for that so, so, satisfying body count based on 'Combat Events' (or tweak the existing triggers for the same effect)." This has been achieved.

Here is how the objective looks in the beginning:

Screenshot 1.jpg (369.62 KiB) Viewed 2706 times

After 4 kills, you can join this character in maniacal laughter:

Screenshot 2.jpg (330.75 KiB) Viewed 2706 times

The counter mechanism continues tracking additional kills (and the bonus +100 resources is awarded properly and timely):

Screenshot 3.jpg (329.33 KiB) Viewed 2706 times

And this is how it ends, if all goes well:

Screenshot 7.jpg (289.32 KiB) Viewed 2706 times

(Erik, when you play this campaign, you may see opportunities yourself for adjusting the gameplay balance of some scenarios. This may be one of them but it's hard for me to tell. I breezed through this one but that may be due to my having awarded myself #warbonds 1000 to test it standalone. Maybe, under real conditions like a shortage of resources resulting from the first two campaigns, it is more difficult to play.)