Page 1 of 4

DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 1:33 am
by Kerensky
With the 10th and final Grand Campaign DLC complete, there may be an opportunity in the future for formation of a Mega Pack, and even the possibility for giving some of our oldest DLC some updates with the new features we've been developing over the past two years.

To that end, if you have any input for us for potential changes you would like to see in DLC updates, let us know either in this thread or threads of your own! We've had a great experience collecting user feedback during each DLC's BETA testing process, but if there are any lingering issues now is the time to make them known.

Mostly, our focus will be on:

* Updating old DLC with new features, especially in game text pop ups.
* Where appropriate, we can also correct any geographical discrepancies, though some of these are done intentionally for better game play purposes.
* Adjusting and adding clarification to scenarios where needed.
* Adding more pre-placed heroes throughout the entire Grand Campaign.

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 2:07 am
by ThvN
Sounds like a great plan, I hope to be able to help out. I have been playing through the early GC's again to see how my modded equipment performs, so I will pay more attention to the maps from now on.

If I collect enough ideas I will post them, but I can already name one thing that has been on my mind since AK: gliders for Eben-Emael. And adding in-game messages will make some scenarios easier to understand for new players (GC40 'Wassigny' comes to mind).

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:55 am
by Kamerer
I have posted a laundry list of things elsewhere, I'll put new ones here. I really like the fact 1.13 incorporates much user feedback; it's really great. Here's two old ones and three new ones I've thought about that are on the top of my head now.

1) (Old idea): This was bugging me again yesterday:

Units embarked in landing craft should not exert zone of control influence inland before they land.

This came up in GCWest '44 but didn't get addressed. I encountered it again in GCEast '43 yesterday. It's frustrating when ground units can't resupply because they are on a beach facing landing craft. I could understand that a bit if facing two surface combat units, but two landing craft?

2) (New idea): It would be awesome if there was an indicator for who has the initiative in a scenario, and even turn: you or the opponent (e.g., first move on a new turn). Despite a lot of experience at the game, I get confused and don't know whether I'm on the offense or defense in a given scenario at the start. Sometimes it is explicit in the briefing - but not always. And it can be disastrous to your ground forces if you deploy thinking your offensive first, then get gobsmacked instead. Likewise, during play, the same mistake can cripple your tactical air when the weather changes. I have more than once deployed my tac air in the rain, thinking I was safe because the opponent had the same weather, then been mauled when it was suddenly sunny and I was caught short. Some kind of indicator would be VERY helpful.

3) (back to "old"): Regarding "waypoints" or smart routing, which you kindly addressed the other day, perhaps if the movement algorithm was programmed to, when given the possibility of different options to get to the same hex, chose to avoid a) towns, b) hexes adjacent (e.g., in the zoc of units potentially resident in said town), and c) road junctions. At current, it seems programmed to just take the easiest terrain, regardless of town, road, etc. I'm not a programmer, but I think that would solve it w/o changing the game too much or being too burdensome.

4) ( A new idea): In deployment, there are shadowed deployment hexes for the "layer" (air or ground) of units not currently selected for deployment. Meaning: if I have an air unit selected, while I see the possible air deployment hexes as white as they are now, I ALSO see the possible ground deployment hexes at the same time in 1/2 shade, grey, hashed yellow, or something. This would GREATLY speed deployment since I can now know where I can put air to be adjacent/cover my ground units when I am in a defensive posture. After '43, you can't leave artillery w/o air cover without great risk. So this would make it much faster to deploy instead of having to toggle back and forth, move/remove/reposition air and artillery to get a safe and wise deployment. Likewise, if in ground deployment mode, I see the possible air spaces in 1/2 shade or something. Then I can lay all my artillery out and later come back and fill in my air w/o toggling back and forth multiple times. This won't radically improve the gameplay, but it will be smoother for those who really tweak their deployments, and I don't think it would be hard to implement.

5) Better ammo indicator - I often am super frustrated because I move a unit into an aggressive position, then realize afterwards it was at 2 ammo - and more vulnerable than I thought. Right now the indicators are effectively "full" (no warning) or "1" (yellow stack) - but no middle ground. Perhaps instead of the little yellow/red 'stack' indicator, it could just be the raw number? Or perhaps orange shows up at 2, yellow at 1? I find it too tedious to go squint at the actual ammo state in the UI sidebar for every unit move - but then I move a "2" unit into a position I would not have had I known it was "2," and I'm frustrated.

So there's a few to start. Thanks for starting this thread as a place to put ideas and suggestions.

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:04 am
by Kamerer
And adding in-game messages will make some scenarios easier to understand for new players (GC40 'Wassigny' comes to mind).
That's a very good thing to bring up, ThvN. But I think you are being far too polite. ;) I posit that the only in-game messaging that could possibly explain Wassigny would be something like: "For this scenario, and this scenario only, please assume French forces have acquired future teleportation technology and defend accordingly."

Honestly, that scenario needs to be re-worked so that opponent units don't magically appear behind your lines within secure defensive perimeters. A strong counter-attack, as briefed, is one thing, magical middle-earth/elven teleportation is another!

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 11:23 am
by KeldorKatarn
Well, there's a few cities with wrong names (see my DLC critique thread), some lakes and rivers wrongly named or missing, some maps named incorrectly...

I also found that in the Leningrad mission lake Ladoga is called lake Lagoda. And frankly, the very first scenario of GC 39 needs to be replaced. It is too unhistorical to start the campaign with Germany having the borders of modern 1990s Germany, having to conquer territory that was already German to begin with.

But aside from that one scenario I haven't found any major glitches except for city locations and on some maps entire rivers missing. Most of the stuff was wrong naming of cities (The Danzig scenario was pretty bad in this). I guess I should speed up my map critique thread huh? ^^

How are you planning to do this update? In one big go or DLC by DLC?

PS: Also there were a few units that I didn't understand in terms of their availablity date: 15cm artillery and Kradschützen. Both of those were standard equipment well before the war. Giving them a bit later to the player is probably understandable due to balancing reasons, but having the 15cm only in 1940 and the Kradschützen in 41 when they were pretty much already useless in the real war, that prevents players from building divisions which are modeled after the historical ones.

And one feature I would REALLY like is for units with multiple functions like the PzH42 or the 88 to be upgradable in both unit type sections, so you can decide whether you want to keep it mostly as an AA or as AT or the PzH mostly as Artillery or as Anti Tank. That would also make it possible for Kavallery and Kradschützen to be later transformed into Recon units which would be quite historical.
The StuGs pretty much went the same way, first close support then transformed into AT role. Being able to upgrade multirole units in both paths would make historical upgrade paths and evolvement of ones core easier. This needs to be balanced a bit of course, but I think this would be really cool. (Even though probably not exactly easy to implement ;) )

The map updates should have priority though :)

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 12:51 pm
by zappel
ThvN wrote:If I collect enough ideas I will post them, but I can already name one thing that has been on my mind since AK: gliders for Eben-Emael.
And I would like to see many gliders in Crete, too.

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 2:11 pm
by Kerensky
We can put gliders in, that's a good suggestion. As a reminder though, there is no functionality to deploy CORE forces into a glider during the deployment phase.

As for major scenarios changes, this most likely won't be happening. If there was a serious problem, they would have never made it through BETA testing in the first place. Makes me wonder why that problem with 1939 was never picked up until several months after release. Possibly because of the zero impact on game play caused by this issue, but that makes it a fine candidate to go back and correct now if we have the chance! ;)

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 2:28 pm
by zappel
Kerensky wrote:We can put gliders in, that's a good suggestion. As a reminder though, there is no functionality to deploy CORE forces into a glider during the deployment phase.
Really? As a new feature of version 1.13 paratroopers can be deployed mounted in air-transport or as ground unit. Is this functionality not supported for gliders?

I'm looking forward GC39 reloaded, will it be distributed by in-game-update?

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 2:35 pm
by zappel
ThvN wrote:If I collect enough ideas I will post them, but I can already name one thing that has been on my mind since AK: gliders for Eben-Emael.

Now I found my old posts:

viewtopic.php?f=125&t=36213
zappel wrote:There are a lot of improvements in version 1.10 which I'll really miss in the Original and Grand Campaign. Just to mention some examples:
- gliders (Eben-Emael and Crete)
- mines
- new destroyable structures
- new objectives
- core units of an allied

Is it planned to redesign or update these older campaigns?
viewtopic.php?f=121&t=38377
zappel wrote:Are there thoughts to redesign some scenarios of vanilla and grand campaign to take advantage of new improvements?
For example
- new units like gliders in Eben-Emael or Crete
- new objectives like prevent allied units to evade in Dunkirk
- new structures like mines
- ...

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 7:34 pm
by ThvN
Kamerer wrote:please assume French forces have acquired future teleportation technology and defend accordingly. A strong counter-attack, as briefed, is one thing, magical middle-earth/elven teleportation is another!


Well, actually they were very cleverly hidden so they could not be seen, the British taught them that trick with the help of an instructional video:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltmMJntSfQI (Monty Python sketch: 'How not to be seen')

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 8:39 pm
by robman
A relatively simple tweak (or series of tweaks) that would improve replayability would be to increase randomness of the place and timing of enemy unit deployment, and apply randomness to availability of captured units. I realize that some of these changes would be more difficult than others, but I bet it wouldn't be too hard to play around with the location and contents of the Easter Eggs.

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 16, 2013 10:09 pm
by zappel
zappel wrote:
Kerensky wrote:We can put gliders in, that's a good suggestion. As a reminder though, there is no functionality to deploy CORE forces into a glider during the deployment phase.
Really? As a new feature of version 1.13 paratroopers can be deployed mounted in air-transport or as ground unit. Is this functionality not supported for gliders?

I'm looking forward GC39 reloaded, will it be distributed by in-game-update?
I took a quick walkthrough to Caucasus and can confirm: there is no functionality to deploy CORE forces into a glider during the deployment phase.

So only the second question is still remaining: will the redesigned DLC be distributed by in-game-update?

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Thu Feb 21, 2013 4:26 pm
by DerTroof
An alternative to the Stalingrad path in DLC 42E. These scenarios are not historical (i.e. no units actually made it out of the kessel, Italians etc.), not in scale, and IMO not fun.

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2013 4:55 pm
by Longasc
As I am playing Afrika Korps right now and the 1.12 patch is really fine otherwise, here is a minor typo that slipped through:

AlamHalfaA.pzbrf
"I remind you, Generalfeldmarschall, that the Abwher has a special additional mission for our forces. There is a mobile radar unit in the British rear that is reported to carry confidential documents that Abwher believes have extraordinary intelligence value. As the unit is mobile, its location cannot be pinpointed. I have no further information at this time."

Minor typo, make it Abwher -> Abwehr.

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sat Feb 23, 2013 5:06 pm
by Rudankort
Longasc wrote:Minor typo, make it Abwher -> Abwehr.
Thx, fixed.

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 7:21 pm
by Longasc
This cries for yet another typo correction thread... but here we go. I played Palestine today... ;)

Palestine.pzloc
IDS_SCEN_AXIS_CAM_OBJECTIVES <i>Decisive Victory:</i><br/>Capture all objectives, protect pipeline stations and at least 6 Arab Volunteers need to survive.<br/><br/><i>Marginal Victory:</i><br/>Capture allobjectives.

-> Capture all objectives , missing space.

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Sun Feb 24, 2013 11:39 pm
by Kerensky
There is another important detail that should be mentioned. With the release of 1.13 coming soon, we're also keen on any potential breakage this may cause in DLC past (especially related to pop up messages). If you have any experience playing any DLC post 1.13, we really want to hear from you! I can't give you an exact release date at this time, but 1.13 and the 10th DLC 1945 West are both things that are arriving soon!

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 7:57 am
by Rudankort
Longasc wrote:This cries for yet another typo correction thread... but here we go. I played Palestine today... ;)
Feel free to open it. ;)
Longasc wrote: Palestine.pzloc
IDS_SCEN_AXIS_CAM_OBJECTIVES <i>Decisive Victory:</i><br/>Capture all objectives, protect pipeline stations and at least 6 Arab Volunteers need to survive.<br/><br/><i>Marginal Victory:</i><br/>Capture allobjectives.

-> Capture all objectives , missing space.
Yeah indeed, fixed too. Thx!

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Mon Feb 25, 2013 10:12 pm
by piotrekxg
There is one thing that comes to my mind when thinking of future improvements and changes to the game. In many games I can not use all my core units because of limited number of core slots (I don't like the idea of using codes to change that). So I need to choose whether to deploy more of my aircrafts at the beginning of scenario leaving some tanks/infantry in reserve or deploy more land units reducing the number of air power in this scenario? And why not introduce additional function that would allow player to move a deployed unit back to reserves in the middle of scenario? Fore example when I get rid of all enemy fighters I could reduce number of my core fighters deploying some tanks/infantry instead?
This way all core units could be used in most scenarios building their experience and the game balance would be saved thanks to leaving the core slot limit.
Moving unit back to reserve list wouldn't be possible when unit is surrounded or adjacent to an enemy unit obviously or maybe could be possible only if a unit returns to deployment hex to make things more difficult :).

Re: DLC Update Thread

Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2013 8:18 pm
by KeldorKatarn
I wrote several issues into the typo thread and I'll continue to collect geographical problems and typos. but please please adjust or replace that Poznan anachronism ;) Maybe keep the map for a "Cold War gone hot" campaign or something :)