Slitherine

I can't find any issues with the trigger/events in Second Bardia. Did you get a green check mark after eliminating all Axis units?

No. I wonder if that´s because I´ve been playing since prior versions and updating the campaign as new versions are being releasaed.

Maybe...
Usually a scenario update means you just need to restart said scenario.
There have been radical changes to the campaign file so it would probably be safest to restart the campaign and nuke your way through scenarios you do not want to play again.

Mascarenhas wrote: No. I wonder if that´s because I´ve been playing since prior versions and updating the campaign as new versions are being releasaed.

Erik2 wrote: Usually a scenario update means you just need to restart said scenario.

Yeah, a scen restart should do the trick. If you can play the mission, it means the campaign file as such must work.

What often leads to false update-errors are misunderstandings of the folder structures used with custom campaigns and scens. The savegame files are linked to the folder names used there. You'll have to make sure, that the updated campaign and scenario files actually overwrite the old ones!

For example, this campaign folder was named "Desert Rats 1940-1942" before the v3 update, now it's "Desert Rats 1940-1943". If I didn't notice this, and didn't change the folder name manually, my existing savegame files would still take further scens from the outdated '42 folder and not the new '43. Was it understandable like that?

Erik2 wrote:There have been radical changes to the campaign file so it would probably be safest to restart the campaign and nuke your way through scenarios you do not want to play again.

That would be the measure of last resort.

So, your suggestion is that I change back campaign´s folder name to 40-42?

Mascarenhas wrote:So, your suggestion is that I change back campaign´s folder name to 40-42?

Could be, but my actual suggestion just states to be sure to install updated campaigns/scens properly. A simple extraction or drag&drop might not be enough, it's all I'm saying. Don't know what the case may be for you.

And bear in mind, even the almighty Erik tends to leave a few mistakes in his works, as to not appear perfect and divine.

Mistakes? Erik? Noooooo....

Hi Erik
A suggestion and a question to your Desert Rats cmp.
Why not either reduce the supply from 30 to 20 and ad 5 to the other two VP's - that makes more sense to defense something, which have some value or even better keep the 30 and ad 3 to the other two VP's

To the question: How can I edit in your campaign (never tryed or dared before) so I can test, the ideas that comes to my mind

Sir

Which scenario are you suggesting supply changes to?

Select Editor and then Campaign if you want to edit campaign stuff.
If you want to edit specific scenarios you need to copy them from the My Games -Campaigns...Scenarios to the My Games...Scenarios folder.

Hi again Erik and thx.
The 3rd scenario "The Battle of Girba".
Btw even if I like your units names, I like to change them into my own historical names but when I do and then save the game and return later, they have changed back to your original names - how can that happend
It is rather clever by you keeping your personal touch in the game no matter what

I'll take a look at Girba.
I've seen the unit name issue earlier. Maybe post about it in the Tech support forum?

Edit: The British sole supply source in Girba is on the primary objective.
The Italians need their own supply source and I find it is better to have that on the northern map edge to prevent the British from cutting Italian supply too easily. The Italians are one the offensive here anyway.

Yep but you have to defend 3 VP and if you loose just one - you loose the scenarie
It just make more sense (to me) if there were a reason, why to defend the other two (they are primary objective as well) in this case it could be supply.
Another thing is, you dont get any RP after the fight, so you cant repair your core force. Is this intentionel

Girba has only the one objective. British held at start.
Maybe you mean another scenario?

It is Girba which have one start objective (defend 3 VP's Goldflag) and later on destroy Italien Armor - as i earlier have said it was a suggestion.

Why not either reduce the supply from Main Objective (Goldflag) of 30 to 20 and ad 5 to the other two VP's (Goldflag) - that makes more sense to defense something, which have some value or even better keep the 30 and ad 3 to the other two VP's

Aha, I forgot about the later enabled objective.
And I missed the two other golden flags...
Good suggestion, actually

The dust (sand?) seems to have settled a bit here . . . no new versions in nearly a week . . . so perhaps it's time for my CSI sweep.

Here's an initial recommendation: Don't do anything with this now because it's too much work in the campaign editor but in the future, if you were to put a preceding zero in your scenario folder names, it would help to sort them in a file explorer window so that you can see them in proper order. As it is, we have this order:


If you do anything else on the scale of GGC (94 scenarios!) you may want to put two preceding zeroes, as "001Poznan."

Here's another preliminary. This campaign description doesn't seem adequate any more. It was apprpropriate when Desert Rats first came out but you have greatly expanded it so you may want to jazz this up a bit to be more far-reaching in scope:


Wow, I'm looking at "Border" now and you have upped your game in this campaign with the briefings!

I think you colonials are suffering from US measuring/date systems and whatnots.
My Norwegian folder is sorted perfectly with the current numbering system.

You may have a point; there are differences in the way things are done as demonstrated in Windows by a peek at the Control Panel / Region settings. I noticed that in your zipped file, the order is indeed correct (which image I am keeping as a guide):


No matter; it's only a minor inconvenience over here. Back to the Border!

Border Raid v. 3.6

How strict to do want to be when the first truck escapes and the primary objective is failed? Because I let it happen deliberately by turn 4:


Now, if you are strict, that means the AI should win at this point and the scenario is over. This does not happen because you don't have an AI objective for it to win in this case.

Ok, so maybe I still want to pull out a minor defeat by smashing the Italian supply dump/airstrip (perhaps thinking to avoid a major defeat). So I attack it thusly and am aggravated, as you have been, that a lowly truck can cut off supply (I think your complaint was about a train doing that) but this is not your doing, of course:


So, back to the Border, I go ahead and achieve the secondary objective by turn 7:


But that now means sitting there for five more turns with nothing to do but clicking next turn until the scenario ends . . . in a Draw?


It's a Draw because by these definitions, nobody has achieved all their primary objectives (the AI didn't have any to achieve):


Major/Minor Defeat are not even possible in this scenario; the worst outcome is a Draw.

I always feel the need to sneak in this disclaimer: It's supposed to be fun; it doesn't have to be perfect (and maybe losing this scenario is actually meant to be hard to do); I only point stuff out in case you want to follow up on it; I don't go back to check on whether you do so.

Border Raid v. 3.6

Three more things. First, I am confused by these triggers as to why you did them this way. The exit hexes are as shown, and I think "Truck-2" is the one that actually does the trick because it's the one that points to an exit hex. The others point elsewhere with a Distance of 0; the exact spot is required; even Distance = 1 would make sense if you are trying to allow for trucks bypassing roadblocks. If not, why not merely Check Unit Count / Italian Truck / Exited >0?


The second thing is, in two playthroughs, I watched the Italian AB 40 literally waltz around the British Daimler Dingo without ever attacking:


I think this is due to "Land-based Recon units will also be more likely to retreat from combat to prevent taking significant losses" and that you have the AB 40's AI team set to only 50 aggression. When I cranked that up to 99, the AB 40 attacked in the third playthrough (to its detriment):


The third thing is, I'll take back what I said about "maybe losing this scenario is actually meant to be hard to do." I don't think so at all once that I have tried to really play it. Too many trucks at one time and the player is certainly not helped by this Universal Carrier being utterly useless against trucks! (Zero attack versus mechanised.)


That's it for this one. Moving on to Capuzzo this evening, perhaps.