Winter War 1940 Beta Test

[ColonelY]

For the recon, yes in theory. But it was not always the case (maybe because sometimes there was apparently simply no LCP at all allowed by the designers). That's precisely why there was so many comments about it.

So, sometimes, it looks like this War Economy has been somehow disabled by decision of the scen designers... So, we've had this spec unlocked but were unable to use it, to deploy an extra recon plane...

Although, right now I don't remember where it happened exactly...

[bru888]

. . . maybe because sometimes there was apparently simply no LCP at all allowed by the designers[/i]) . . .

Oh, for crying out loud! When will we have finally plumbed the depths of this game?!?

For, that is indeed the case. A quick test revealed:

- if I assigned the player War Economy and 6 air CPs, he had 7 when the scenario started.
- if I assigned the player War Economy and 0 air CPs, he had 0 when the scenario started (not 1, as I assumed).

In other words, 0 air CPs shuts off the possibility of any increments from specialisations. Heh, even when I assigned just 1 air CP, War Economy made it 2. But zero is zero, period.

Well, well, another day, another OOB artifact uncovered. Okay, as your reward for diligence and persistence, Colonel, I will go back and manually assign 1 air CP for recon where I think it to be appropriate. For example, Haukila Farm or the Summa Sisu thing with a winding road in heavy forest are NOT appropriate for air recon. Small operations like those would not call for aerial reconnaissance. The big battles, yes, perhaps. I will let you know.

[ColonelY]

Super, thanks.

[Erik2]

I have 2 Bristols roaming the blue Finnish skies.
But due to the usually limited air deployment hexes, the Bristols have to wait until turn-2 to deploy.

[bru888]

I have 2 Bristols roaming the blue Finnish skies.
But due to the usually limited air deployment hexes, the Bristols have to wait until turn-2 to deploy.

Will take care of that as I upgrade air CPs. Please stand by.

[bru888]

Okay, here are the results:

Image0390.jpg (211.82 KiB) Viewed 2346 times

Two comments:

Where the player gets only 1 air CP to start, and he has War Economy, it's going to show 2 air CPs. Same with 10 getting bumped up to 11, etc. I don't want to hear any complaints about "one more and I could deploy a fighter instead of a recon plane." That is not the intention.

In 14Viipuri, the player gets 17 to start and War Economy may bump it up to 18. Here, the player could forgo a recon plane for another fighter or bomber. I am okay with this. It would require a conscious decision to go without recon in favor of another warplane.

[GabeKnight]

- I will continue to use my spreadsheet method for calculating initial RPs but I have cut back bonus RP awards from 100 to 50.

That's okay, I guess. But this doesn't have to be a static decision, Bruce. Coming from finances, you probably like rules and regulations, but some scens may be harder than others and require a bit flexibility RP-wise.

- I will cling to my rule of 1 RP per unit, per turn. This is the reasoning: I don't gauge income on the basis of when the battle took place or how expensive a unit becomes to purchase later on. I base it on an overall survey of DLC in which 1RP/unit/turn was an almost exact average that official designers used in their campaigns from all war years. It seems to work.

If you haven't been playing much stock content lately, you may forget that in none of the stock scens the enemy has nearly as much RP income as with yours. It's whole different if you damage an enemy unit and you know it'll stay that way or if you know that it'll come back full strength the next turn...

(the AI does not properly handle off-map supply for its air units - once exited, they never return)

In my understanding this option only serves as substitute for the (air)supply that airfields/airstrips provide. Otherwise the planes would lose efficiency on maps without (enough) airfields or carriers. Has nothing to do with planes exiting and returning.

So, Gabe, here are a couple of previews of what you will face the next time you decide to take a leisurely jaunt, by ski or wing, to a Soviet airbase!

Perfectly fine by me. Enough to stop/discourage a small recon force from advancing.

I think that all "important" spots should have some static unit(s) guarding them. Like supply hubs or towns deep inside enemy territory. And every airfield should have at least one AA unit attached.

Where the player gets only 1 air CP to start, and he has War Economy, it's going to show 2 air CPs. Same with 10 getting bumped up to 11, etc. I don't want to hear any complaints about "one more and I could deploy a fighter instead of a recon plane." That is not the intention.

If you add 1 ACP via triggers (scen start), then the WarEconomy should not increase it any more.

Otherwise I concur with the rest. You have my blessings, son...

[bru888]

13TuppuraIsland

- period added to sentence in scenario description.
- added in-game deployment hexes in various spots, south and west.
- air superiority message moved up to scenario start/deployment phase
- Tuppura map message moved from scenario start to Turn 1.
- rather than moving the wall, which makes it look weird, I moved the road.
- increased aggression for artillery and air AI teams to 99.
- all Soviet artillery units moved 5 hexes closer to the action.
- moved the soviet air base a couple of hexes forward and provided for its defence.
- added a popup message when the Soviet air force activates on Turn 6.
- reduced "Evacuate the wounded men" mission award from 100 RPs to 50.
- changed the "Save at least 2 of the Canet Guns" mission to "Preserve the integrity of the fort" and lowered the award from 100 RPs to 50. The mission description is now "A combination of at least three canet guns and/or gatehouses must survive."

Note: Regarding "the Canet gun in the 'corner'. Are the Soviets supposed to be able to actually get inside at this point after destroying the Canet?", the answer is no.

Note: I find the Wounded Man module is working as designed. It does shut off wounded men but the timing of the trigger that does it may delay until the next turn start and a couple more wounded men may spawn before the folder is shut down. Also, the spawns of wounded men are randomized, so they may show up consecutively someplace and not at all thereafter. I am reluctant to fiddle with those triggers because they are complicated and they work. Trying to test for whether friendly units are nearby would be very complicated indeed. Besides, it's a fortune of war that some wounded may be left behind when a position is evacuated. All the more reason to try and hold onto those positions. Finally, for the spawns near Outpost C, it is a short walk south to safety.

[GabeKnight]

This was really mean...the first tracks in this campaign...I'm happy like a little boy and then this:

Screenshot 133.jpg (973.68 KiB) Viewed 2313 times

Boy, oh boy...

[bru888]

14Viipuri

- as stated previously, aux Blackburn recon planes removed and additional air deployment hexes placed.
- there are now outcome images in the scenario folder.
- increased aggression for artillery and air AI teams to 99.
- moved the soviet air base a couple of hexes forward and provided for its defence.
- improved the early scenario ending trigger to allow for completing secondary objectives.

So. Youse guys are bored after 12 to 20 turns. Youse guys want more Russkies; is that what you want? Okay, youse guys want more Russkies, youse guys are GONNA GET more Russkies! Heh, heh, heh. I'll be back later with the good/bad news.

[bru888]

So. Youse guys are bored after 12 to 20 turns. Youse guys want more Russkies; is that what you want? Okay, youse guys want more Russkies, youse guys are GONNA GET more Russkies! Heh, heh, heh. I'll be back later with the good/bad news.

SPOILER ALERT - DO NOT VIEW IF YOU WANT TO BE SURPRISED

Screenshot 1.jpg (646.63 KiB) Viewed 2297 times

Screenshot 2.jpg (764.17 KiB) Viewed 2297 times

Screenshot 3.jpg (628 KiB) Viewed 2297 times

Screenshot 6.jpg (128.75 KiB) Viewed 2297 times

Screenshot 4.jpg (712.39 KiB) Viewed 2297 times

I am anticipating that you fellows will not be bored after turn 12 anymore and that you will appreciate having 36 turns now.

One update: The third message will be titled "Who Is In The T-38?" because I realized that the picture may be confused with "The General Himself." The image is the Finnish general talking to his colonel, not General Timoshenko.

[bru888]

One update: The third message will be titled "Who Is In The T-38?" because I realized that the picture may be confused with "The General Himself." The image is the Finnish general talking to his colonel, not General Timoshenko.

Yeah, this is better:

Screenshot 7.jpg (636.82 KiB) Viewed 2290 times

By the way, I believe the Colonel will recognize his inspiration for this new challenge.

[bru888]

At this point, I uploaded version 0.94 in case anybody wants to catch up in beta testing.

Tomorrow: The final showdown with Turku. That scenario is going to be tamed or my name is Mortimer. Two principles to be implemented:

1) A special two-plane tactical bomber team whose ONLY job will be to bomb the City Garrison. I anticipate murmuring to them as I set it up: "You have have only one job. One job! " The player will get another AA gun in compensation.

2) A return to all aux planes (sorry, Erik). This thing is out of balance, needing to purchase a bunch of core fighters with little or no experience only to sit on the shelf in later scenarios. At most, the player would have only core 5 fighters if he purchased no bombers in preceding scenarios and they would have not much experience. He probably only has two or three core fighters in fact and since I cannot depend on the player having even those available, and since Turku is a tough scenario (about to get tougher) that requires 12 experienced Finn fighters, it's back to all aux fighters.

[ColonelY]

By the way, I believe the Colonel will recognize his inspiration for this new challenge.

Yes, indeed. Thanks, it looks just awesome!

And, this time, the city of Karjala will also play a role (this also somehow echoes in me ).

[bru888]

The 15Turku scenario is updated. This scenario is the same as the standalone The Raid on Turku v2.0 scenario. The changes are as follows:

- removed the deployment phase and hexes, took away the initial resources for purchasing core planes, and returned the original 12 aux fighters, all Fokker D.XXI according to the historical squadron which inspired them.

- moved all structure names (Arsenal, Baltic Line, Barracks, etc.) and flags into the hexes rather than next to them. This makes the map look less cluttered and is no long confusing to the player. Hovering over each structure will identify it:

Screenshot 1.jpg (284.68 KiB) Viewed 2197 times

- split the tactical bombers into two teams; one assigned to cruisers and one assigned to city garrison. The garrison will definitely be attacked now.

- removed the artificial damage system for the city garrison. Since that unit will now take actual damage from tactical bombers, the system was no longer necessary. It will move to exit when its strength is 4 or below.

- restored the two coastal defense ships to human control. This was accomplished by creating another Finland faction in the human column. No resources are assigned to this faction so the ships cannot be repaired, as intended.

- restored the two coastal defense ships to full strength (=10; the screenshot above was taken prior to this change). This should enhance player enjoyment, being able to fire the ships' AA guns, but movement is confined to the dock areas. The tradeoff are two more Soviet Ivanov tactical bombers.

- removed the distracting and balky cargo trucks and trains which played no part in the outcome. They were only window dressing and they took up playing time watching them go.

These changes in total were enough to go to a version 2.0 tag for the standalone version (in Bru's Scenarios). If you played this before and enjoyed it somewhat, or if you have not played it at all, you may want to try it (again). It's better than ever IMO.

[bru888]

At this point, I uploaded version 0.95 in case anybody wants to catch up in beta testing.

This version is now ready for official release, in my opinion. Let's give another couple of days for any more input and then, on Friday, I will transfer it over to Erik for the release announcement and any further maintenance required.

Effusive thanks to ColonelY and Gabe for their help. A slight professional nod of respect to my colleague Erik as well (I can't actually thank him, since he is my partner ).

[ColonelY]

Hey, considering this recon plane issue (i.e. when LCP =0 despite "War Economy" unlocked for the faction in question) and having tested the scenario "09Litsa" of the Continuation War 1941, I think it's definitely worth checking as well where on Continuation War 1941 AND on Winter War 1939 this recon plane issue does appear!

'Could there get to use some German recon plane and some Finnish recon plane.

(I put a comment, amongst others, related to this on the Continuation War 1941 Beta thread as well...)

[bru888]

Yes, Colonel, I will be following suit now in CW41 on a number of issues that I learned about while working on WW40. Specifically, these:

Here is a summation of best practices that I have learned recently and which will be applied in this campaign and Continuation War 1941. (I'm also thinking of proposing some retroactive work on WW39 too, Erik):

- All scenarios to have at least one primary objective that requires the full amount of turns so that secondary objectives can be achieved. The offset is to have an early scenario ending trigger once those secondary objectives are completed.

- I will continue to use my spreadsheet method for calculating initial RPs but I have cut back bonus RP awards from 100 to 50.

- I will cling to my rule of 1 RP per unit, per turn. This is the reasoning: I don't gauge income on the basis of when the battle took place or how expensive a unit becomes to purchase later on. I base it on an overall survey of DLC in which 1RP/unit/turn was an almost exact average that official designers used in their campaigns from all war years. It seems to work.

- Airfields will not be so remote.

- Friendly airfields will be placed as close to the action as feasible without obviously putting them in harm's way. Where this is not possible, then I will use off-map air supply.

- Enemy airfields will still be placed on the map in a somewhat remote location (the AI does not properly handle off-map supply for its air units - once exited, they never return) and I will guard them from the player's single unit raids.

- Air and artillery tasks will always be with 99 aggression. (For infantry and tanks, the rule will still be 50 for moseying along, 75 for paying attention to business, and 99 for banzai attack).

- Simple is better as long as: a) it gets the job done, and b) creativity is not overly curtailed. Look, some of these triggers simply don't work as they were designed or work as they should have been designed. That's just an OOB fact of life.

Also:
- Provide for air recon in appropriate situations by adding +1 air CP. Do not depend on War Economy specialisation to do this, particularly where air CP = 0 otherwise.

[bru888]

Never mind all that, Colonel. You should be ecstatic with the changes to Turku, particularly human control of full-strength coastal defence ships!

[ColonelY]

Oh, yeah, that sounds perfect to me!

Indeed, I do look forward to replaying that scenario!