Slitherine

Picked up the game today at a local game store and started playing around with it. Tried out PBEM by sending moves to myself. Quite disappointed at the lack of a PBEM replay, just a bunch of arrows and circles.

I read in another thread that you merely end your turn and the autosave will save the game. However in any PBEM games I have played, we always saved manually so that we could name the file. For example, if it is the German September 21, 1939 move, I might name it GerSept21/39. Makes PBEM a lot less confusing as to where you are in the game. I did try this, by manually saving and then ending the turn. First thing I noticed is that the save file showed as PBEM39.

Question 1: If you save manually, how many characters/numbers can you use?

Question 2: It appears that if you want to send your opponent a move after you have ended your turn, that autosave is the only option. I could not end my turn and then manually save. Could I go in and change the name of the save file by right clicking on the start button on the desktop (bottom left), choose explore, and access the file to change the name?

Question 3: According to the manual, "to unload from a transport you must start your turn next to an unoccupied and non-neutral land hex." I assume then that for a amphibious assault that units attack from the transport and must have reduced effectiveness. Couldn't find anything about amphibious assaults in the manual.

Finally, a couple of suggestions for future patches, other then the PBEM replay which I think should be the #1 priority. It would be informative, if the shock part of combat was segregated and viewable in combat. Also, how about an option where the combat result from each combat displays on the map until the player hits a key to go on to the next attack? Either that, or have an option so that a player can choose how long the combat result is displayed, for example 10 seconds. It would also add to tactical decision making if a player could have the choice of having his fighters not to intercept. Same goes for escorting bombers.

Looks like a fun game and looks like I have a lot to learn about strategy and tactics. My thanks in advance for any replies to my post.

We are improving the saved game behaviour in the patch but we will not be adding a replay as it's just not compatible with the system.

The other ideas might be nice for some players but could be annoying for others. We could add lots of options to turn info on and off, but it actually gets pretty complex to test when the number of combinations gets too high so we're a bit loath to do it.

canuckgamer wrote: Question 2: It appears that if you want to send your opponent a move after you have ended your turn, that autosave is the only option. I could not end my turn and then manually save. Could I go in and change the name of the save file by right clicking on the start button on the desktop (bottom left), choose explore, and access the file to change the name?

Question 3: According to the manual, "to unload from a transport you must start your turn next to an unoccupied and non-neutral land hex." I assume then that for a amphibious assault that units attack from the transport and must have reduced effectiveness. Couldn't find anything about amphibious assaults in the manual.

Finally, a couple of suggestions for future patches, other then the PBEM replay which I think should be the #1 priority. It would be informative, if the shock part of combat was segregated and viewable in combat. Also, how about an option where the combat result from each combat displays on the map until the player hits a key to go on to the next attack? Either that, or have an option so that a player can choose how long the combat result is displayed, for example 10 seconds. It would also add to tactical decision making if a player could have the choice of having his fighters not to intercept. Same goes for escorting bombers.

Question 2. You can save at any time when you play against the AI. When you play by Hot-seat of PBEM you save automatically to the game file you created when the game was created. After you have saved you can't do anything else. This is to make it harder to cheat. So if you save a PBEM game manually you can't load it because the computer will ask for the password of the next player.

Question 3. You make amphibious assaults into enemy territory by unloading your units from the transports. You unload into empty hexes. Remember that BB's give supply level 1 if it's located adjacent to one of the invasion hexes. It's beachhead supply. When you move inland with your land units all hexes you capture who can trace back to the BB will save supply level 1 instead of supply level 0.

It's also important to know you can use the load and unload function to make quick invasions across straits. If you move your transport after loading you can't unload during the same turn. You have to wait till the next turn if your already adjacent to a land hex. But if you load your transport you can in the same turn unload it to another hex adjacent to the transport. This is particularly effective against Copenhagen. The German transport in Kiel loads and unloads immediately to the Danish island of Sjælland and can attack immediately. Another German unit can move to Jutland and enter the island of Fyn to attack Copenhagen from the west. So it's possible to capture Copenhagen in one turn if you have air support as shore bombardment from BB's.

One good thing about the game is that it's simple. So having flags you can put upon fighters and escorts to not intercept may no be a good idea. I'm sure many people will forget to put the flag on so they will intercept and then think it's a bug when the fighters won't intercept.

One very important aspect of the game is that the attacker chooses the sequence of the attacks. So the attacker can decide to attack with one unit somewhere to draw the enemy interceptors. Then the important tac bomber attack can continue without interceptors. I often use fighters to ground strike a hex I want to attack just so it will be intercepted. Then I won't lose so much step losses on the bombers and they damage the enemy unit more. I've played this game quite a lot and I think the different aspects of the game work well. Some things may be improved, but the general feel for the game is that it works. So I think Slitherine will be reluctant to add choices who will make the game more complicated.

Stauffenberg wrote: I've played this game quite a lot and I think the different aspects of the game work well. Some things may be improved, but the general feel for the game is that it works. So I think Slitherine will be reluctant to add choices who will make the game more complicated.

I got the game last weekend and have enjoyed playing it. I agree that adding more choices and complexity is bad. Part of the attraction is the simplicity and intuitiveness of the GUI. There are enough units and stratetic options to produce quite a rich, complex set of interactions in itself. Yes there are things that can be improved: top of my list is probably more variability is countries entering the war.

I didn't know about the BB ability to supply a beachhead. Useful!

Neil

canuckgamer wrote:Picked up the game today at a local game store and started playing around with it. Tried out PBEM by sending moves to myself.

In a local game store? I tought the game was only available in online stores of Slitherine and Matrix?

Thanks for all the informative replies. I didn't know about the BB's and beachhead supply. I live in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. We have a store here, specifically, The Sentry Box that carries board and computer wargames, plus a large selection of fantasy games and related items. I think it has the largest selection in Canada. They carry a lot of Matrix games.

Yo, canuck!

It's not just BB's that can supply a beachhead. Any non-submarine combat ship will do.

Oh, and...

How many Californians does it take to change a light-bulb? Ten. One to change the bulb and nine to share the experience.

How many Canadians does it take to change a light-bulb? Ten. One to change the bulb and nine to chase away all the Californians that came up to share the experience.

Stauffenberg wrote: One very important aspect of the game is that the attacker chooses the sequence of the attacks. So the attacker can decide to attack with one unit somewhere to draw the enemy interceptors. Then the important tac bomber attack can continue without interceptors. I often use fighters to ground strike a hex I want to attack just so it will be intercepted. Then I won't lose so much step losses on the bombers and they damage the enemy unit more. I've played this game quite a lot and I think the different aspects of the game work well. Some things may be improved, but the general feel for the game is that it works. So I think Slitherine will be reluctant to add choices who will make the game more complicated.

This is very well said, Stauffenberg. Very well said indeed, and I emphatically agree.

Like most of the other beta-testers, I'm sure, I have to grin when somebody plays the game for a day or two, and then posts wanting to make fundamental changes, or add whole layers of complexity. My reaction is always, "Neh neh neh, come back in 30 days and we'll talk again, after you've had time to appreciate all the subtleties of the game and engine."

It's not Cross of Iron, and it's sure not War in Russia, (/me shudders in genteel horror). CEAW is its own genre, and needs time to be appreciated.

possum wrote: It's not just BB's that can supply a beachhead. Any non-submarine combat ship will do.

It doesn’t seem to be mentioned in the manual.

Once we moved to computer games I always thought manuals would be easy to update. But for some mysterious reason this is not the case.

In about 15 years of playing computer games I have never seen a manual updated.

Errata: Uncommon Valour was updated

-

It's actually very difficult to update manuals. Usually manuals are outsourced as laying them out is a specific skill that most developers do not have. We outsource. Making any changes to the text generally means everything after that point in the manual has to be reflowed. Page breaks, pictures, basically you have to lay out the rest of the doc again. This is a ot of work and as it has to be outsourced very expensive. I assume this is why they rarely get updated.

The only time we have updated a manual is when it is going to reprint for a re-release.

Yes, I can imagine redoing the whole manual is a lot of work. So how about including an addendum containing the changes made. I don't know if you guys do readme files. I haven't seen one coming with patch 1.04.

A readme is a good idea, we usually include one with patch notes but for some reason it was overlooked this time.