BrucErik CSD Studio

[Erik2]

08Kotisaari - Bru

This is the event popup. I've put the scenario in your folder.

bru-1.jpg (126.93 KiB) Viewed 2920 times

[bru888]

Winterwar 1939, Scenario 08 Kotisaari

The text for the event 20_59 is missing.

Great campaign so far.

Glad you are enjoying it. You must use the English language version of the game, however. All of the work done by this studio is in English only.

08Trigger.jpg (521.12 KiB) Viewed 2917 times

[bru888]

Anduril, belay that. My apologies; it is an issue in version 1.8 of the campaign.

Erik, this appears to be a post-production error. The text is still in the version that I have and the trigger works; it is this warning message at Scenario Start:

Screenshot 1.jpg (450.96 KiB) Viewed 2913 times

My version is on the left; official version 1.8 is on the right:

Image0403b.jpg (936.82 KiB) Viewed 2913 times

Here is the original text:

event_trigger_20_59_title = Warning!
event_trigger_20_59_text = This battle begins on the heavily forested terrain of Kotisaari Island. Most deployment must be done in this forest but certain units (tanks, engineers) cannot move through it. Do not deploy these unit types in heavy forest hexes.

[bru888]

Gabe, thanks for the comments and suggestions on Continuation War 1941. Now that it is out of beta and gone official, I am going to reply only to what could be construed as lingering bugs in that campaign. Further design improvements concerning the quality of gameplay are now up to Erik.

Regarding the "no ski troops" triggers, they work fine as is. Their only purpose is to keep ski troops off of the verdant fields of Finland in the summer. As designed, they work for ANY ski troops, core or otherwise. And they purposely undeploy ski troops, not exit, so that core units can be refunded regardless of when they were purchased by clicking the "$" sign during the deployment phase. Whether the effect is marked as "core" or not seems immaterial.

Acknowledged about "Please don't use the "check unit count" condition anymore when it comes to "don't lose X units" objectives" in 01Salla but since it is the first scenario in the campaign, it should not matter. If destroyed units are also imported in the core, then granted, it will be an issue but I am not aware of whether this is a possibility.

Regarding "There's an exploit using engineers possible, making them enter the impassable area" in 03Bengtskar, that's a gameplay bug as you reported. I would not bother to try to program around it in that case.

Acknowledged about "there's the recurring problem with objectives being evaluated at turn start and achieving them on the last turn on the scen." That came from the general design decision to have at least one primary objective be evaluated only at the end of the scenario in order to allow for proactive secondary objectives to be achieved. If they are, then there is an early scenario ending trigger to allow for a quicker victory. At the time of these scenarios, however, the final portion of that procedure had not been developed yet; that is, NOT to have that primary objective trigger tracking the count, but to have a separate counter that fired on EVERY turn start:

Screenshot 1.jpg (258.58 KiB) Viewed 2899 times

Screenshot 2.jpg (243.27 KiB) Viewed 2899 times

That's how I would do it now, if I were still designing this campaign. That's how I have been doing it since. As for this instance, however, it may not be material enough to bother with at this point.

In 03Bengtskar, about "The early victory trigger must have fired before the evaluation of the "rid the island" trigger, because it was unchecked in the victoy screen," see my next post.

Regarding the Draw in 04Ienikuvaara, you've got me there. I just did a quick walkthrough with five Waffen infantry in trucks, no opposition, exited them and got the expected Minor Victory. I did not bother with the Hunter Platoons, hence the Minor Victory. The trick with those Hunter Platoons is to follow them; don't let them out of your sight once you have engaged them.

In 05Sainio, I guess you mean the player can cut off the AI supply? Yes, that is one way to win a scenario.

[bru888]

In 03Bengtskar of Continuation War 1941, in response to what Gabe reported, I would make the following change:

Screenshot 1.jpg (287.26 KiB) Viewed 2892 times

Screenshot 2.jpg (260.5 KiB) Viewed 2892 times

Note: The Check Turn condition is set for Turn >7 to ensure that this trigger does not fire until after the Soviet marines have reached the island.

[Erik2]

Winter War 1939 1.9
Link updated in first post.

Fixed message txt.

[Anduril]

Glad you are enjoying it. You must use the English language version of the game, however. All of the work done by this studio is in English only.


08Trigger.jpg

Yeah, I know. I'm translating the mod into German and playing in German at the same time to test the translation.

Thanks for the correction of Kotisaari.

[Anduril]

Kotisaari2.jpg (377.57 KiB) Viewed 2872 times

It works fine.
And already discovered an error: schweren to dichten Wald.. changed.

[bru888]

It works fine.
And already discovered an error: schweren to dichten Wald.. changed.

That scroll bar on the side of the message will be very handy, apparently. Prior to 8.4.x, there wasn't any. In 8.3.0, which I still use, all text needed to be within the message box or it was cut off. Your German translation would never have fit.

[GabeKnight]

Acknowledged about "Please don't use the "check unit count" condition anymore when it comes to "don't lose X units" objectives" in 01Salla but since it is the first scenario in the campaign, it should not matter. If destroyed units are also imported in the core, then granted, it will be an issue but I am not aware of whether this is a possibility.

No, destroyed units are not imported (at least not as "dead").

What I meant is that with the "check unit count" trigger you can revive killed units during play.
Example: I lose a unit, the counter goes up, next turn I revive/reform the destroyed unit and the counter goes down again. See now what I mean? Doing this you can't fail this objective (unless you lose all the units on the same turn that is). And it's not really an exploit as reforming units is a regular mechanic of the game.

Regarding the Draw in 04Ienikuvaara, you've got me there. I just did a quick walkthrough with five Waffen infantry in trucks, no opposition, exited them and got the expected Minor Victory. I did not bother with the Hunter Platoons, hence the Minor Victory.

I'll look into it.

The trick with those Hunter Platoons is to follow them; don't let them out of your sight once you have engaged them.

Sure, as long as they operate behind my lines (as Partisans) I can follow them, but not if they're hiding behind their own lines and tons of infantry units.

In 05Sainio, I guess you mean the player can cut off the AI supply? Yes, that is one way to win a scenario.

I just think it's too early for that. I never liked those narrow supply corridors, too easy to cut. In the later stages of a scen, when the enemy has overextended himself, then alright.

In 03Bengtskar of Continuation War 1941, I would make the following change

Yep, agree, good solution.

[GabeKnight]

Continuation War 1941 1.0, continued

06Terijoki41

One has to love the counters in this game....

Screenshot 157.jpg (944.8 KiB) Viewed 2797 times

PS: Bruce, don't bother "fixing" this one, the objective's working alright.

07Olonets

- I guess you've used the check supply state method suggested by Shards for the bunker objective, intended to be destoyed by the Blenheim bombers, yeah? Problem is, that I've used "conventional" methods to destroy the bunker, namely tac. bombers and artillery from the other shore. I had the bunker down to 1HP, then flew one bombing mission with the strat. bomber and bang, the bunker was up to 5HP again...
- For this scen and some of the following: I hope you're aware, that the "NightWitch" commander you've assigned to some Soviet units, although super cute, has the "concealed" trait given to her. Basically this means "invisible" air units for the Soviets. Works well with the weak "night fighter" plane, but is very irritating otherwise, resulting in unwanted "ambush" situations in the air.

[GabeKnight]

08Rukajarvi

- you've removed the port hex from the one town to prevent "shenanigans", as you've called it, but you do know that I could have easily used the gunboats to embark my troops into naval transports, don't you?
- I didn't try it, but would I have kept the SBS units after turn 6 if I wouldn't have accomplished the capture mission? In retrospect they seem kinda more useful than the naval units.

Screenshot 159.jpg (943.03 KiB) Viewed 2794 times

09Litsa

Nice! Only some minor text corrections, if you want to bother:

- "freezing meinen Arsch off"
- "out of this verdammten swamp" still would sound strange to say. Better to translate swamp also: "verdammten Sumpf"

10Karhumaki

- I had 21 ACP and only 20 supply from the airfields, please add one more supply
- also I'd suggest to move the air deployment a few hexes further northeast, it's really hard to see in the corner over dense forest right now

[bru888]

What I meant is that with the "check unit count" trigger you can revive killed units during play.
Example: I lose a unit, the counter goes up, next turn I revive/reform the destroyed unit and the counter goes down again. See now what I mean? Doing this you can't fail this objective (unless you lose all the units on the same turn that is). And it's not really an exploit as reforming units is a regular mechanic of the game.

Actually, this may not be a bad thing, now that you have explained it. It costs $$RPs to revive the unit so it's a tradeoff in that respect. Still, I am aware of this now and will use the Kills & Casualties alternative (or build a simple module, as I have done a few times now) to avoid this situation.

[bru888]

Continuation War 1941 1.0, continued

06Terijoki41

One has to love the counters in this game....

PS: Bruce, don't bother "fixing" this one, the objective's working alright.

Yes, as I go along, I have been keeping counters in mind and testing them. They work in the end most of the times, but how often they are checked (as stipulated by the Trigger Event) is why they don't show current results all the time. There are tricks, one of them to build a separate counter and another to assign the counter to the AI's objective trigger. It's highly variable, depending on how the objective is worded, what event is used, and what condition is applied.

07Olonets

- I guess you've used the check supply state method suggested by Shards for the bunker objective, intended to be destoyed by the Blenheim bombers, yeah? Problem is, that I've used "conventional" methods to destroy the bunker, namely tac. bombers and artillery from the other shore. I had the bunker down to 1HP, then flew one bombing mission with the strat. bomber and bang, the bunker was up to 5HP again...

Heh, we have had this conversation before. I/we cannot program away all player versatility because, for one thing, it will cost in terms of creativity. The impulse is to avoid complicated situations like that but I/we still go back to the well, so to speak.

So, to avoid using "conventional" methods to destroy the bunker, namely tac. bombers and artillery from the other shore, how could that be done? Forbid the player tactical bombers? (That I know how to do.) Widen the river to be a lake broader than artillery range? At some point, it gets too complicated and the whole idea gets thrown out. Hence the loss in creativity.

Besides which, if you had time and surplus to devote the tac. bombers and artillery to that task, then the scenario is too easy. Erik will make that call now.

I design things with the expectation that the player will follow directions. It is the military, so to speak, and one is supposed to follow orders. Else, what is the briefing for? So, you can follow orders, have a challenge and some fun hopefully, or you can not pay attention and do the unexpected. Some players get more enjoyment that way.

[bru888]

08Rukajarvi

- you've removed the port hex from the one town to prevent "shenanigans", as you've called it, but you do know that I could have easily used the gunboats to embark my troops into naval transports, don't you?
- I didn't try it, but would I have kept the SBS units after turn 6 if I wouldn't have accomplished the capture mission? In retrospect they seem kinda more useful than the naval units.

Same response here as above. I am not going to give too much time and brainpower to all the ways in which a scenario can be gamed and subverted. Actually, I did not think of that gambol. But why not, if it turns you on?

I will tell you one thing, though. If I had thought of that shenanigan, I would have yanked the whole module out of the scenario. It would have been too much time and effort trying to program that away on top of everything else.

[GabeKnight]

Coming back to this:

Regarding the "no ski troops" triggers, they work fine as is. Their only purpose is to keep ski troops off of the verdant fields of Finland in the summer. As designed, they work for ANY ski troops, core or otherwise. And they purposely undeploy ski troops, not exit, so that core units can be refunded regardless of when they were purchased by clicking the "$" sign during the deployment phase. Whether the effect is marked as "core" or not seems immaterial.

Right now I'm not sure if this can really be solved by ticking the "core" box as I've suggested. I guess the module works fine during the deployment phase. But it does not work satisfactory with deployment during a scen, as it's done in the very first scen (Finns arrive on turn 10). See screenshots.

Another thing is, that almost all my imported core units were ski troops. And you can't "upgrade" imported units without deploying them.
I just couldn't accept that my whole imported infantry was for nothing. So, I did not "cheat" in the classical sense, but I had to removed your module in the editor in one scen to be able to change my infantry to the regular class.

Screenshot 163.jpg (934.22 KiB) Viewed 2781 times

Screenshot 164.jpg (976.82 KiB) Viewed 2781 times

01Salla
I made an "error" and placed mines in the southern corridor. That way I never saw any tanks and did not achieve the sec. objective. Why not add some tanks in the center-attack, too? And maybe rather make it two destroyed units.
I think the Finns income gets increased a turn too late, should be the same turn with the reinforcements IMO.

And forget this. On my second playthrough, the armored attack suddenly happened in the centre. And the income issue is probably related to an error with "screen refresh" inside the new UI.

[GabeKnight]

Heh, we have had this conversation before. I/we cannot program away all player versatility because, for one thing, it will cost in terms of creativity.
[...]

I do not mention/talk about those "issues" (only) because I'm expecting them to be fixed or something. Sometimes I just think they're funny, but usually I try to "help" you seeing another angle, in the hopes for enhancing your produce in the future, so to say.

Besides, I really liked the included maps in the popups and the "forbidden units" module in general.

But why not, if it turns you on?

Strange, but yes, it does. Finding ways to circumvent, winning by subterfuge.
(It's always "cheaper" in the end...)

And I forgot to say: THANKS guys, great campaign, it was really fun to play!!! (All of them actually.)

Now all that's left for me to do is edit some tracks into each and every one of the scens...

[GabeKnight]

Regarding the Draw in 04Ienikuvaara, you've got me there. I just did a quick walkthrough with five Waffen infantry in trucks, no opposition, exited them and got the expected Minor Victory. I did not bother with the Hunter Platoons, hence the Minor Victory.

I did some tests: The "draw" always happens if you exit the last remaing batch of your units on the last turn of the scen. And only then.
(If you watch closely, you can even see the "failed" checkmark of that objective being changed to "complete")

I've tried some approaches with different trigger combinations, looking for a "solution", but I have nothing so far. I'll sleep over it and try something new tomorrow.

[GabeKnight]

I've tried some approaches with different trigger combinations, looking for a "solution", but I have nothing so far. I'll sleep over it and try something new tomorrow.

I haven't forgotten this, just placed it on hold. I'm replaying your first WinterWar campaign with the chassis changes, and so far it's harder and much more fun.

And I don't know why actually - the changes must have slipped my mind for a second - but I was kind of surprised and shocked as the Soviet tanks suddenly attacked my ski troops, as usual "hiding" in dense forest terrain...

[GabeKnight]

Yes, quite harder. Those slippy little light treaded Soviet tanks are super annoying...

And I mentioned this like a thousand times before: please, please, please, STOP providing supply EXACTLY to unit count (e.g. 04Soumussalmi). If in any of those scenarios I even lose one f*ing VP to the massive Soviet HORDES of infantry, I'll put my whole army into undersupply in my own country? Please, I'm "at home" and not in the Dunkirk pocket!?!