Slitherine

Nah, there is no XP setting there. The campaign.pzdat just tells the game which scenario and briefing files to use and starting prestige, but nothing on XP; that's scenario specific.

#50 possibility to assign the Hero's in the Scenario editor for every unit - with selectable photo, Honors, Abilities and name.

H.Balck

51 Give each and every single map overlay a reference name so it's easier to work out more complex terrain.

52 Generate terrain excluding allready placed overlays

53 Rotate scenario view angle 90* 180* 270*

53 Rotate scenario view angle 90* 180* 270*

We don't need this - on a map North is north !!! BTW - you need 4 mirrowed tiles for correct fine tuned maps - thats not possible without a completly 3d map engine !

H.Balck

What exactly is the problem with experience settings? I've successfully tested all the settings and they work just fine.

Unit Experience field sets all units to X experience in a single play scenario or a campaign that accesses that single play scenario.
Max Experience field sets a experience cap in a single play scenario or a campaign that accesses that single play scenario.

Of course campaign rules still apply, that is any new purchases made during a campaign start at 0 experience, regardless of the setting of a map's Unit Experience Field in scenario parameters.

Kerensky wrote:Of course campaign rules still apply, that is any new purchases made during a campaign start at 0 experience, regardless of the setting of a map's Unit Experience Field in scenario parameters.

This is the problem. For late war scenarios that doesn't make a lot of sense (at least to me). They might be new units under my command but they are not likely to be green.

Following on...
and even if they were in reality there still should be the option for the designer to set it however he wants the scenario to play.

You better listen as El Condoro has been promoted to Sargent of an Elite Panzer.

That's why I broke my post in two.

El_Condoro wrote:

Kerensky wrote:Of course campaign rules still apply, that is any new purchases made during a campaign start at 0 experience, regardless of the setting of a map's Unit Experience Field in scenario parameters.

This is the problem. For late war scenarios that doesn't make a lot of sense (at least to me). They might be new units under my command but they are not likely to be green.

Didn't one of the later PG games allow you to buy XP stars for more prestige?
Might have been a different game such as Fantasy Wars, though.
XP/experienced reinforcements are excessively expensive in PC, though, so I'm not sure anybody would want to buy a 3 XP Wehrmacht Infantry for 1000 prestige...
_____
rezaf

I believe Peoples General had that option...

Is it just core forces purchased during a campain that it is hard coded to start at 0 xp, or are Aux units purchased subject to the same rule?

How about mountain roads? I always thought it looked odd that roads can cut straight through hills, forests and mountains, like they aren't even there. So, how about some roads that are slightly curvy (somewhat like the river tiles)? I think that would make the maps look even more organic and realistic.

54. Sort of covered elsewhere, but stand-alone scenarios should have the ability to use deployment hexes, including at sea. For example, there is no way to allow a player to purchase whatever they want and then deploy them for a seaborne invasion. You can buy and deploy at a city/port and then embark or set up the scenario with pre-purchased units at sea but not select and deploy at sea in the first turn. Other situations would benefit from deployment hexes (as PG2 has), too.

55. When you copy (or clone) a unit in the scenario designer, the AI setting isn't copied along.
Values like starting experience, entrenchment, are, but not the AI setting - you will always have to edit each unit copy if you don't want "Default AI".

56. There are more transport options than the unit editor dialog box can cope with. Example:
Assign some Italian Infantry their (italian) truck (by selecting the truck and clicking the unit).
Confirm this works by toggling the "transport overlay" to see the yellow truck.
Now shift-click the unit to change some of its values. Do note that the "Organic Transport" field does not have an entry for the italian truck (only Opel Blitz, generic Truck and half-tracks).
Even if you do not change anything and close the dialog box, the italian truck has been dropped (since it cannot be assigned through the dialog box).
Ergo: You will need to re-assign non-standard transports after each time you open the unit dialog box.

(This I would call bug reports rather than requests for enhancement; hopefully this is still the right place to report them)

38. The ability to set a maximum strength for a unit less than 10. e.g. a battalion in a historical game might be capped at 5 strength.

#38. Also already possible through the editing of the equipment file. This is how conscripts function with base 15 strength.

#38 I think we covered this during beta. You can create a new unit in the pzeqp file e.g. a 5 strength Tiger company, but you can't take an existing Tiger unit and set a 5 strength maximum. This has been available to designers in PG2 for many years - I just assumed it wouldn't be a difficult enhancement.

It would be very useful to do this directly in the scenario editor. What you are referring to is creating new kinds of units.

Currently there is a data field in the scenario editor that allows you to set starting strength. But unless the unit is surrounded by enemies, it's a simple matter of clicking reinforcements to bring back its strength to 10. This I do not find very useful. I would much rather that this data field would represent maximum in addition to starting strength.

Having to create separate units for each combination of reduced strength and unit type is cumbersome. It would be much preferable if the scenario editor would directly support assigning any unit a reduced (or increased, for that matter) maximum strength.

Best regards!

^ #56 has certainly been brought up before. Ideally, the unit stats screen would pick up all transports from the equipment.pzeqp file by nation and by type in a drop-down list. With nation already set, it should be an easy thing to filter each type of transport for that nation. At the very least, the transport given should not be dropped by opening the stats screen, as you've said.

El_Condoro wrote:^ #56 has certainly been brought up before. Ideally, the unit stats screen would pick up all transports from the equipment.pzeqp file by nation and by type in a drop-down list. With nation already set, it should be an easy thing to filter each type of transport for that nation. At the very least, the transport given should not be dropped by opening the stats screen, as you've said.

Perhaps the least work-generating solution is to simply remove or at least deactivate the "organic transport" field from the dialog box altogether (and of course, make sure to drop all instances of setting the transport value in the actual code, which is where the bug really is).

This would be completely acceptable since the editor still supports assigning all combinations of units and transports; only a half-baked feature would not actively make things harder for you.

Your proposal would of course be a nice touch, but since all functionality is already there I can't help but to consider it a luxury - and a minimal fix (which really would be an easy code tweak) would be good enough, at least for me!

Yep, I could certainly live with that.

The actualy problem with the organic transports is that they're HARDCODED in an HTML file.
You can work around the issue by just coding all possible transport units from all nations in the HTML file, then the setting will never be dropped.

It's my main disappointment with the patch that small issues such as this one weren't addressed.
_____
rezaf

rezaf wrote:The actualy problem with the organic transports is that they're HARDCODED in an HTML file.

Sorry I don't understand. The bug is that the unit dialog box disregards all non-standard transports AND THEN SAVES that as "no transport".

You could remove the drop-down box and the entire "organic transport" field from that dialog, and the editor would actually be better off.

Sure, if changing the HTML fixes the issue, that could also work. But why maintain two separate ways of doing something, and more to the point: why improve on the second, incomplete, way instead of simply dropping it...?

rezaf wrote:It's my main disappointment with the patch that small issues such as this one weren't addressed.

This patch was clearly announced to fix essential bugs only, mainly regarding multiplayer.

I'm sure there will be patches that fixes the inconveniences and unintentional glitches too.

But issues like this one was never intended to be fixed in the first patch.