Winter War 1940 Beta Test

[GabeKnight]

Gabe, keep going if you wish.

Definitely.

"Thanks" to the quarantine I have a lots of time (again) and was using that to work on my mod and upgrading/ new units. Usually I don't have the nerve to do that when there's other work to be done. But there's always enough time for playin'....

[GabeKnight]

Still on it.

Bruce, I've been a bit pressed for time this week (that's why I didn't write much), but I've continued to play this great campaign. Please expect more detailed feedback on the weekend.

But there's an issue with AI engineers not clearing mines now. I don't know if that's some change with the new game update or if it's because of you changing the mine's faction. Just wanted to let you know in advance, in case you want to do some tests on your own.

The screenshot's from the second scen of the "crossroads" trio (Mannerheim Line: 08,09,..) that I've played and the Soviet engineers just refuse to clear mines (???)

Screenshot 123.jpg (929.25 KiB) Viewed 3335 times

[bru888]

Gabe, that's fine. Just as you resume play this weekend, I will be starting at the beginning of this thread and making final scenario edits before we release this campaign officially.

You will probably have no problem staying ahead of me because the post-beta editing will probably take at least a week. If you finish early, you will perhaps have fun beta-playing Continuation War 1941.

Regarding balky stuff like those engineers and mines, I will probably be "dumbing things down" (or, put another way, right-sizing for AI IQ limitations) because of something that occurred to me as I read your post: I'm designing in 8.3.0 and you guys are playing in 8.4.1. I had better keep it simple wherever I can for that reason alone.

So, for example, less mines, and/or no engineer tasks for clearing them. Let the 8.3.0/8.4.1 AI figure it out for itself. We'll see. Thanks for testing and reporting.

[bru888]

Beginning tomorrow, I will be editing Winter War 1940 according to the input provided in this thread.

[bru888]

Beginning tomorrow, I will be editing Winter War 1940 according to the input provided in this thread.

Here we go. I trust you fellows will recognize your input as I respond to it. Know that I have reviewed EVERYTHING even though I may choose not to respond to all of it. Without quoting you, and addressing every point, we will save time and space here.

Regarding the comments about "suggest some (delay) mechanic for the primary objectives' check to allow for the completion of the secondaries," I hear you. The flip side complaint is having to play out too many turns once all objectives have been completed. Starting from now, I will make it a standard practice to have at least one primary objective being evaluated only at "Scenario turn limit." Where I think excessive turns may be in store, I will either cut back the number of turns or I will include an "Early scenario ending" trigger which is much easier to do than "Delay scenario ending."

[bru888]

01RaateRoad

- added 3 land CPs (and 1 RP per turn) when prize 122mm M1938 artillery gun spawns.
- reduced Blackburn Ripon mission award from 100 RPs to 50.
- converted "Counterattack defeated" trigger to "Scenario turn limit" to allow for secondary objectives to be completed.
- added a "Counterattack counter" trigger to show progress because the above trigger will fire only at scenario end.
- added an "Early scenario ending" trigger.

Note: General Vinogradov is spawned in the first two scenarios, Colonel. That is why I cannot assign a face to him as I did in the third scenario. (Unlock Commander can be used to assign a commander to a unit only if the unit is on the map or in reserve.) Besides, in the first two scenarios, he's rather a shifty, skulking character.

[bru888]

02HaukilaFarm

- reduced "Decimate the counterattacks" mission award from 100 RPs to 50.
- 'skiwork" is now 'skiwork' (I always use single quotes because I have seen double quotes get garbled by programs and it looks neater in the game).
- converted "Take Haukila Farm" trigger to "Scenario turn limit" to allow for secondary objectives to be completed.
- added an "Early scenario ending" trigger.

Note: Regarding "I think it should be possible to deploy one unit at the encampment since this is the sole Finnish supply source at start," that goes against the nature of the scenario. The player is supposed to be surprised, partially cut off from supply (the road) and have a desperate time taking the Soviet supply camp before the rest of his supply is severed (the encampment).

Note: Regarding "A couple of the perimeter units move off their farms, even with 7-8 strength left after only light attacks," that is by design, for extra challenge. The objectives to seize the farm perimeter and destroy the perimeter guards are separate.

[bru888]

03MakinenRoadblock

- reduced "Capture General Vinogradov" mission award from 100 RPs to 50.
- all Soviet infantry units moved up two hexes and redistributed for swifter access to targets.
- removed four of nine mines. I think I have a handle on engineers and mines now, and I don't think it's a bug in either 8.3.0 or 8.4.1. We need to give more credit to the AI, I believe. First, a solid line of mines seems to be an impossible barrier to the AI even if you provide it with engineers and direct them to do their jobs. That much must be accepted. However, if you have a reasonable amount of mines, the AI will use engineers to clear just enough of them to make a path, particularly on a road. It will not waste resources (assuming that they use them for the job) clearing mines that are not in the way. I ran a simulation four times and each time an engineer cleared the mine in the road, which is all that I wanted. The other engineers will sit and vegetate because the AI will send the infantry into combat first, especially in tight quarters. It is not going to clear mines just because we want things to be tidy.

Screenshot 1.jpg (364.83 KiB) Viewed 3219 times

Screenshot 4.jpg (464.08 KiB) Viewed 3219 times

- set up an "Unauthorized Unit" trigger for engineers, paraphrasing the "The Finns have used their stock of mines, you can't deploy any engineer units" suggestion, because "It is relatively easy to stop the Soviet tanks from exiting by laying a couple of well-placed mine-fields." That's been a recurring problem in these scenarios when we are trying to get tanks from Point A to Point B: heavy forest. We need it for realism but it creates bottlenecks that can be exploited by engineers. Not now, in this one.

Screenshot 5.jpg (793.43 KiB) Viewed 3219 times

- simplified tasks for tanks. Remember when I said "Simpler is better, as long as the job gets done"? Look for the simplest way to do things, is my motto now. Take this for an example of what not to do :

Screenshot 6.jpg (251.65 KiB) Viewed 3219 times

No wonder the tanks did not move; they were waiting for three mines in and near the road to be cleared and the engineers balked. Now the tanks advance when the infantry has dislodged the AT guns; they go to S&D halfway up the road; they help clear out the four foxholes; and when those are clear, the tanks seek to exit.

- removed fourth and fifth engineer units. Another test showed that Engineer #3 does the required road mine removal so these two were superfluous. Instead, I took the Colonel's suggestion to provide a tank unit with each flank attack; OT-130s to be exact. They will melt the snow off your skis, gentlemen!

- added 20 supply to all VPs to make them more enticing and rewarding to the Soviets.

Note: Regarding the aux AT guns, they are written into the script: ". . . the commander of the Finnish 9th Division, Hjalmar Siilasvuo, has taken the extreme risk of sending the only two 37mm anti-tank guns the division possesses to Captain Eino Lasilla's 1st Battalion."

Note: Not in all scenarios is a recon plane appropriate. Not in this one, I believe. The bigger battles, perhaps.

[Erik2]

01RaateRoad
.....
Note: General Vinogradov is spawned in the first two scenarios, Colonel. That is why I cannot assign a face to him as I did in the third scenario. (Unlock Commander can be used to assign a commander to a unit only if the unit is on the map or in reserve.) Besides, in the first two scenarios, he's rather a shifty, skulking character.

You can use deploy unit instead of spawn if you want to assign a commander to the unit.

[bru888]

04Hotinen

- converted "Finland 4 objectives" trigger to "Scenario turn limit" to allow for secondary objectives to be completed.
- provided for a true Draw result in case neither side ends up holding 4 objectives.
- added an "Early scenario ending" trigger.
- reduced "Destroy all Soviet tanks" mission award from 100 RPs to 50.

Note: I kept the aux artillery for gameplay balance. The Soviets get an equal amount of artillery (and more powerful guns) in Turn 2 and they have tanks which the Finns lack.

Note: I see no possibility of supply being reduced when concrete bunkers are destroyed. There are no Change Supply triggers nor strategic bombers in the scenario.

[bru888]

05SummaSisu

- reduced "Destroy at least 4 tanks" mission award from 100 RPs to 50.
- added two more Soviet commanders - Balashov and Etush. Other commanders were already attached; now 8 of 12 Soviet tanks have commanders.
- added an "Early scenario ending" trigger.

Note: No doubt you know the title "A Bridge Too Far." Well, this may have been "A Scenario Too Far." An extraordinary amount of time and effort was spent on this one and I found myself unwilling to make any more changes to it other than those listed above. It seems to work adequately in my tests.

Note: Regarding "The [land] bomber unit mechanism works fine, although my bombers were not very successfull. 2 attempts and 2 failures," the success rate will average out to be 33%.

Note: The supply planes are just window dressing to cover up the fact that there are artificial pockets of supply every six hexes up the road to help the tanks. They don't actually do anything.

[bru888]

06Terenttila

- objective now points correctly to Terenttila.
- the "Mannerheim line" is now replaced by "Mannerheim Line" (the L! )
- reduced "Destroy 2 enemy tanks" mission award from 100 RPs to 50.
- reduced "Destroy 3 enemy planes" mission award from 100 RPs to 50.

Note: There already is an early scenario ending trigger in this scenario, so one should not have to worry about excessive turns. The requirement is to eliminate all enemy units. That includes land AND air.

Note: Not every reward merits a popup message. After a while, they get tiresome to make (as well as to view as a player) and that is saying something, given my predilection for them.

[Erik2]

I never tire of receiving any messages. But they may be tiresome to make...

[bru888]

07Lahde

- improved the early scenario ending trigger to NOT end the scenario until secondary objectives are achieved as well as enemy units are eliminated.
- moved the Finnish airfield closer to the action (but still in a secluded spot).
- updated supply and spawn/message target hexes for new airfield location.
- fixed the bridge in the NW - just a cosmetic matter because it is out of the way but the error would have been even more noticeable with the airfield nearby.*
- add two more in-game deployment hexes at the top of the map.

Note: The "fighter message stating that 'air recon reports...'" is there as a notification of an event that is happening at that time. It cannot depend on whether the player actually has air recon that notices the development.

Note: There is an early scenario ending trigger in this scenario, so one should not have to worry about excessive turns. The requirement is to eliminate all enemy units. That includes land AND air.

Note: Regarding "650 supply points left over after elite repair," reducing the various secondary bonus awards from 100 RPs to 50 has gone some distance in addressing that matter. So far, 350 potential RPs have been eliminated.

Note: What I tend to do is to calibrate the AI unit's experience by the point in time of the campaign. At the beginning, say, all AI units have 1 experience. Then 2, then 3 as the campaign goes on. In Continuation War 1941, it was 1 experience for scenarios 1-2, 2 experience for scenarios 3-4, 3 experience for scenarios 5-6, 4 experience for scenarios 7-8, and 5 experience for scenarios 9-10. I believe I did something similar for WW40. Now, I know that these troops would have been seasoned by WW39 but I am thinking of when people play WW40 alone. In that case, the player starts with 0 experience.

*Note: Actually, I will take that back. There were in-game deployment hexes on that road and they would have been affected by that "drowned" bridge which is now fixed. Nice catch, Colonel.

Screenshot 1.jpg (207.74 KiB) Viewed 3169 times

[bru888]

Just a quick note again on engineers and mines. We cannot depend on the AI to necessarily clear mines even when "told" to do so. The AI seems to evaluate the utility of doing so, depending on the situation, and it may or may not comply. I saw in Makinen that it did clear the one mine in a row of three blocking the road, consistently over several tests. Yet here in Muolaa, not that I tasked them to clear mines, but the engineers are bypassing or serenely gazing upon mines like visitors at a zoo ("Dangerous animals, huh. Lucky they're in cages!":

Screenshot 1.jpg (631.88 KiB) Viewed 3148 times

Screenshot 2.jpg (576.11 KiB) Viewed 3148 times

I guess the upshot is, don't bother trying to make engineers clear mines unless it is crucial and then, better test repeatedly. Otherwise, let the AI determine if and when to use its engineers to clear mines. And don't overdo mines in the first place; a sprinkling or strategic placing of a few mines achieves that delay/surprise effect but trying to wall off territory with rows of mines is counter-productive in that such an array could be too effective.

[bru888]

08Muolaa

To address the problem of "The Soviet air units never made a comeback after their first sortie. So no chance to down 2 Soviet sir units as the Finnish fighters arrived late to the party":

- moved the Finnish airfield closer to the action (It's up to youse guys to protect it!) but refrained from doing so with the Soviet airfield even though I considered it. (I'm looking at youse, Gabe, with your shenanigans: "Well, well, well. Here's an enemy airfield too close to the front lines and unprotected. What say we run a squad down there and disrupt things!" Yes, I keep picking on you but I don't mean it maliciously - I actually appreciate knowing about such things at this stage rather than later - and besides, I think you like the challenge and the recognition as an unorthodox strategist. )
- updated supply and spawn/message target hexes for new airfield location.
- moved up the appearance of both air fleets from Turn 6 to Turn 4 (no earlier or it may interfere with the paratrooper mission).
- raised fighters and bombers aggression from 75 to 99.

Other changes:

- the knitting lady now knows what she is talking about concerning Minor Victory: "There were things that we set out to accomplish which remained unattainable. Those failures are regrettable but the important result is, we have stopped the enemy advance. Truly a victory."
- I bid the artillery (and Tanks/GAZ-AAA) to "step lively, there" by raising their aggression from 75 to 99.
- "Lahde" is now "Lähde" in the scenario description (my goodness, but I will not miss the diacritical "a" at all!).
- "proctect" is now "protect" in the briefing.

Note: Regarding "Air recon message vs possible Blackburn again," the message is there as a notification of an event that is happening at that time. It cannot depend on whether the player actually has air recon that notices the development.

[bru888]

09SummaHardestDay

- this time, I opted for off-map air supply instead of moving the Finnish airfield south; it would be too close to the Soviet assaults moving north.
- removed the old airfield (swallowed up by swamp!)
- placed air exits and deployment hexes on the western edge of the map, in the south as well as the north.
- updated supply and spawn/message target hexes to be near the new southern air exit/deploy location.

Note: That is okay about "Lost Observer Post A to the Soviet 'naval' inf. There was no way the Finns could move up regular units in time." You are supposed to maybe lose one or two VPs up there in order to put the fear of God in you! There are 7 objectives and the lower limit to hold onto is 4 so you have 3 lost VPs to play around with.

Note: Regarding "I was a little surprised: these Marines/Paratroopers reached the ground at the beginning of the second turn, but it's only on the 4th turn that the objective to deal with this paratrooper mission actually appears/is updated... Shouldn't this obj update come sooner?", the sequence is this:

1) AI Turn 1 - Transport planes are spawned over the swamp.
2) Player Turn 1 - Airdrop Notice: "Incredibly, for the first time in this war, the Soviets are attempting an airdrop behind our lines!"
3) AI Turn 2 - Transport planes are removed; Soviet naval infantry units are spawned in the swamp (but they are impervious as they have the guerrilla trait).
4) Player Turn 2 - The commander and his subordinate have their good news / bad news conversation: "Uloste! (Excrement!)".
5) AI Turn 3 - The "paratroopers" are given their orders to move out.
6) Player Turn 3 - The "Volunteers" popup message appears: "Other than a few MG nests and bunkers, all we have guarding the observer posts are several volunteer units." In that same trigger, the "Defeat enemy paratrooper mission" objective and triggers are activated.

So you see the message and the new objective on Turn 3, not Turn 4. Turn 3 seems adequate to me, so no changes. The player cannot do anything about the paratroopers until they are down and activated and that takes three turns.

Screenshot 3.jpg (535.06 KiB) Viewed 3116 times

Screenshot 4.jpg (476.95 KiB) Viewed 3116 times

Screenshot 5.jpg (401.74 KiB) Viewed 3116 times

Screenshot 6.jpg (444.27 KiB) Viewed 3116 times

[bru888]

10Kirvesmaki

- revised the popup message about von Rosen. Yes, we did "meet" him before but Erik's point is valid; if one is playing this campaign who did not play WW39, then the message was not appropriately worded. This is how it looks now:

Screenshot 2.jpg (551.31 KiB) Viewed 3090 times

- fixed bug in this scenario with the AI air teams; I had left them at aggression 50. I hiked that up to 99 so hopefully that will help with "elusive sec obj 'kill Sov air units'".

- revised the Minor Victory message to read as "It was a near thing. They threw everything they had at us and the news from the front was not all good. Even so, our lines bent backwards but did not break. In the end Kirvesmäki was ours still!"

- revised the Major Victory message to read as "They threw everything they had at us but could not destroy us. The bulk of our fortifications have held and Kirvesmäki is ours still. The enemy is back where he started, minus a few tanks and planes!"

- reduced "Destroy at least 3 enemy planes" mission award from 100 RPs to 50.

[bru888]

At this point, I uploaded version 0.91 in case anybody wants to catch up in beta testing. I'm looking to finish tomorrow, though; only five scenarios left.

[GabeKnight]

Sorry, a bit late to the party, but better late than never, right?

First of all I'd like to mention that I've read all the feedback from Erik and the Colonel on the scens, and that they've basically said it all.
Only some minor annotations and suggestions "left-over" for me...

I've noticed since the foundation of the Bruce-Erik cooperative, that I don't have to check any triggers and such anymore, as everything's working alright from the start. Thanks! and Kudos! for that.

Also I've had no RP problems in this one, no unfair battles or such, and difficulty-wise very close to vanilla TBH. And I won't comment on turn limits unless they're too far off.

04Hotinen
nothing to report
05SummaSisu
ditto
(Although I feel a bit sorry for the scen designer here, since he implemented some intricate trigger "bomber" mechanics and supply planes and whatnot. My solution was more crude and "direct"... )

Screenshot 115.jpg (997.18 KiB) Viewed 3065 times

06Terenttila
- how about changing the reward tank from the previous scen to one from the Finnish unit roster? But it's probably too early for the T-34 model, right?
- good thing you didn't include any Japanese snipers in this one. I think they could've used the tunnel entrances the "proper way" then...
- some enemy reinforcements on turn 8-10 would be nice. Tabula Rasa around turn 18.

Crossroads / Mannerheim-Line-Trilogy (MLT)

All:
- The popups/events are great and add much flavour to the scens. Personally I'm very happy for all the maps showing me where I'm actually fighting. Thanks!
- The maps are too big and the airfields too far away for any meaningful air combat (or achieving the sec. obj. for that matter!). The only time(s) I've achieved them was to a) sacrifice my dogfighters in pursuit of enemy bombers or b) send some of my skitroops to capture the enemy airfield...
There's also another downside as the enemy AI planes won't operate too far from their only home base. A dogfighter with 7-turn fuel won't go further than two-times their speed from the airfield. If you want this to work properly with OoB you have to use more airfields/airstrips, historical or not. Otherwise I'd suggest to scrap the air objective and use enemy bombers only.
- add (some) supply to towns/VP or the enemy might not hold them!
- less mines

07Lahde
- the easiest of the three. Everything was over around turn 10. It was here where I took the enemy airfield with my ski troops. Enough turns for that...
- the only scen where enemy arty actually managed to get into operational range and land a few shots. In none of the other scens did the arty arrive/move to even be able to fire.

Screenshot 124.jpg (873.09 KiB) Viewed 3065 times

08Muolaa
[-]

09SummaHardestDay
- descr. text: "the temperature is -20 Celcius" there's the "degree" or "°" missing

- you could move the campaign pin for the para objective somewhere closer to where it was achieved. At least out of the water.

Bruce, I've written this before I read your revisions (<- this one's on me ), so some of this may be obsolete by now. Just discard it in that case.