HOF Version 3 - "Test Run"

Eric, I think it would be very boring for a human to play Nature. The concept is inventive! But the results make for very unrealistic outcomes. Maybe you should try to make just one Typhoon, one Malaria, one duststorm. Make then strong offensively and weak on Defense. As it is..you got a bunch of Nature controlled cities and that is just a negative for an otherwise fine scenario. Love the concept...think it is beyond the scope of the game engine to utilitize realistically! My take.

Sully
 
aksully said:
Eric, I think it would be very boring for a human to play Nature. The concept is inventive! But the results make for very unrealistic outcomes. Maybe you should try to make just one Typhoon, one Malaria, one duststorm. Make then strong offensively and weak on Defense. As it is..you got a bunch of Nature controlled cities and that is just a negative for an otherwise fine scenario. Love the concept...think it is beyond the scope of the game engine to utilitize realistically! My take.

Sully
Click to expand...

Sully:
I don't understand how that would work. Let's say you just had 1 typhoon in the
game, weak on defense. The first powerful ship that spotted it would kill
it right away, then no more typhoons for the rest of the game?? Or were you
thinking of a house rule that prevents you from attacking them?
 
What I meant Eric is to have just one nature city for Typhoon, iceberg, malaria, Blizzard, and sandstorm. Make them devastating on Offense and weak at DF.

Or give each player one of each to control. As it is now..the Russian player is the only Human player that "Controls" a Nature unit during a reasonable period of time. THat is an awesome advantage for the Russian. Why not do the same for all players? Russians get Blizzards, and so do the Germans. Give the CW and Germans Sandstorms. Give the US and Japs a couple of Typhoons?

As it is now...Nature is just way too strong and affects the game balence...Again..just my opinion as a Player. Nature should NEVER capture cities. Nature should be things to deal with...not to defeat. Cheers Everyone!

Sully
 
Well Boys...Moves? We've come all this way to almost conclusion...lets have play or closure? And thanks for a great game to date. It is rare to get some many players to commit to starting and finishing a game!

Sully
 
===> knutis

Sapporo :

US ships bombarded japaneses units to 1 HP

US Para kills conscript militia
US Para kills conscript militia
US Inf. kills militia (1/3)
US marine kills Field artillery (1/2)
US marine kills Hokkaido Coastal Def. (1/3)
US Inf. Corp kills flack (1/2) and capture the city.



Abashiri
Near the city :
Jap. Inf div bombarded by US ships,
Jap. Inf div killed by US Inf. div

City :
US marine captures Abashiri empty

Okinawa :

2 units bombarded to 1 HP.
US marine kills militia (1/3)
US marine kills coastal def and capture the city

Near the city in the mountain :
Static Def. bombarded by US Heavy bombers to 1 HP
US Inf. Div killed by Static Def.


Many tiles bombarded in China


Atlantic north

US ASW sinks Sub,
US ASW sunk by sub
US ASW sinks Sub,
CA Quincy sinks sub.
 
Why can't an MGL rush a building?

Panther Corp kills British Inf corp in Narvik. Invasion force near Oslo bombarded by field artillery.

2 HB bomb mech inf and T34 corp near Sevastopol. Rommel kills mech inf.
6th Army destroys blizzard near Tula. 2 Inf divs die against another blizzard, the third one finally destroys the blizzard.
 
Japanese Army crushed in Siberia!

4 Tiles E of Novosibrisk:
Bombardment by MB, 7 HA, 2 FA
Far East Front kills North China Army
4th Ukraine Front (11/13) Kills 11th Army
Far East Front (13/18) kills Marine Army
2nd Ural Front (10/13) kills Type 97 Tank Army
Loses - 2 T34/85 tank corps

Charkiw:
bombed by FB & MB, tank corp damaged

Kiew
road SE of city destroyed by partisan
2 workers freeze to death SW of city (Blizzard)

Sevastapol bombarded by 3 DD, CA, FA, MB, DB, FB
Rommel Army damaged 3/7
temple destroyed

Minsk:
FB shoots down ME109
8 workers freeze to death

Riga:
Road destroyed by FB

Vladivostok:
Mech Inf. attacks, loses to militia
 
My vote goes to: "call it a day".
I acknowledge the superiority of the Allied forces. :hatsoff:

If we decide to end it now, I will provide some more feedback on the scenario (hopefully on the weekend).

After a short break (and giving Eric some time to incorporate our feedback...) I would be ready for a new edition. This game is really a challenge, and I hope with the experience gained in this game, I will be able to do a little better next time... ;)

However we should ensure two things: I don't have enough time to play two nations, so we would need to find a replacement for semental. And we (including me...) should really try to proceed a little faster. At least one turn per week would be nice... It happened quite a few times that by the time I got the next turn, I had already forgotten what I did last turn and what my plans were for this turn... :crazyeye:

Thanks for a very challenging game!
Lanzelot
 
I'm okay with ending it now since I have the turn...plus I am having a Save issue with Civ3 Complete working with Windows 7. I'll play the turn, save it as usual. If I click the Load button the sav is there with all the others. However, when I go to find the .sav file to send via email then I can't find it in the Save directory?? Now this has been happening since I went to my new PC with Windows 7. But I would then do a search and I had been finding it in a temp directory. I'd then move it to the correct directory in Civ. But for the last two days..now Search can't find the file anywhere??? Yet when I run Civ, Click on Load...there the save is and I can load it??? I just can't find the damn file to mail it? Any suggestions?

Anyhow, as I said...I'm for calling it quits. Gathering feedback (here?) then starting a new game. I do want to play..just not the Minor Allies this time please!! I look forward to the "After Action Report"!!! I love everything Eric has done with HOF from the very first version!! My only gripe is the Nature units. Love the concept but as is they react way to abnormally...IMHO. So I look forward to see what the rest of you feel about them!

So to sum up here...if everyone agrees to a truce then the save ends with me (especially given my problem) otherwise I'll have Eric play my turn and forward on. I'm sure I've have this issue solved within a few days and will be all set to play a new game! Cheers!

Sully
 
Thanks Lanz...that was a good suggestion! I went in and changed the properties to allow read, write, etc! It worked! I just played the turn again, saved it, and now I see it to send along!! Thanks again Lanz!

So Boys...what do we want to do here?

Sully
 
Sully has had his say on what he thinks of the nature Civ but I would
like to get some feedback from others.
There are 3 basic options here:
1. Keep nature the way it is, but have it played by a human with
special house rules similar to the "Blizzard Rules". I wouldn't mind giving
nature a try myself if we have a full slate of players for the other civs.

2. Let the AI play nature again with weakened unit specs.

3. Eliminate the nature civ altogether, just leaving the Russian
blizzards as the only nature type unit (very easy to do in the editor).
 
Ok, congratulations to the winners for a well-played game!

For your convenience, Eric, here is my "collected feedback", the points that I already posted throughout the game as well as my final comments:

  • Right click on a "Division" unit shows the Civilopedia entry for the corresponding "Corps" unit. This was a bit confusing for me at first because the A/D/M values don't match and I was unsure about which source to "trust"...
  • I found the following quite confusing at first: for Germany the three "strength levels" are called "division" (base unit), "corp" (tripled unit) and "army". For Russia the same units are called "corp" (base unit), "army" (tripled unit) and "front". I was very frightened at first, when I saw so many T34 "corps" coming after me, until I realized they were only divisions... Can we unify this naming convention for all sides?
    E.g division and corps for the usual units, and then the armies can be called "Armee" for Germany and "Front" for Russia.
  • Two misspellings of German words: Fuhrer --> Führer, Kreigsmarine --> Kriegsmarine
  • Pedia entry for Yalta: The the Livadia Palace...
  • The game has a V1 unit, but how about the V2? I think the V2 was much more important, even after the war was already over: the Americans had captured Wernher von Braun and his team, and the V2 eventually became the foundation of America's Saturn and Apollo programs.
  • I noticed Armies only require 45 shields. Isn't that a bit too cheap?!
    On the same topic: why can't an MGL rush a building? I tried using it to rebuild my destroyed Pentagon, but it didn't let me. Then I tried rushing at least a Tiger Corp, but that didn't work either. In the end I had to convert it into an Army, which was kind of a waste, because Armies are so cheap that they can be built in 1 turn anyway... (And then I didn't even have appropriate units to fill into the Army, so I ended the game with one empty Army and one filled with a lone Panther Corp...)
  • "Streamline" the stealth attack feature for submarines. I think this isn't working as expected. A sub should be able to select its target from a stack of ships. (It was a bit "unpredictable", what ship got selected, whenever I attacked a stack...)
    Or perhaps the following idea is worth considering: I saw this in MoffJerjerrod's scenario: he gave the submarine "lethal sea bombardment" instead of having it "attack frontally". I think this is a better way to simulate subs. Or how about giving the sub "transport capacity" for lets say 12 "torpedo" units, which can be launched (e.g like cruise missiles) and which have lethal sea bombardment? (Similar to how in the standard C3C game the nuclear sub can carry tactical nukes.)
  • Either the victory point limit of 200000 is too high, or the 5 points per population when capturing a town is too low. As it is, I don't think anyone has a chance of reaching 200000 points in 46 turns. (Perhaps the number of turns should be doubled to 92, 2 turns per month like in the TGW scenario.)
  • I agree with Eric's suggestion of "No amphibious attacks on Antwerp or Vladivostok until 1943".
    Alternatively you could give a few immobile strong defense units to Germany, which would simulate the German "Atlantikwall", so that the allied forces would first have to spend some time building up a sufficiently strong marine force, before they can stage D-Day.
    As it was in the game, That-Guy's "operation amputation" pretty much broke my neck already in early 1942. I lost dozens and dozens of libraries, universities, marketplaces, banks, factories, plants, cathedrals, barracks a huge amount of shields and beakers and my Pentagon&Military Academy... After that the game was basically decided. I was able to survive until 1944 only because Knutis kept the Russian forces busy in Sibiria. But this resulted in Knutis paying the price and being overrun quickly by muzbang...
    So something like an immobile defense-12 "Atlantikwall" unit in every French coastal town would prevent something like this and cause Brittain/USA to slowly build up their forces until they are ready for D-Day. (And meanwhile concentrate their attention on operations like Torch, Husky or Avalanche.)
  • Nature. Well, I didn't really encounter it. Spotted an iceberg once in a while but always managed to stay clear of them... However, I can imagine that in other areas of the world it might be quite annoying, so I have full empathy for aksully...
    My two cents on this topic: a full-blown AI civ may be overdoing it, and having it controlled by a human might get boring for that player (not having any chance of winning the game at all). Perhaps we can have a few units like the blizzards:
    • Blizzards controlled by the Russians (to mimik their good exploitation of winter warfare)
    • Sandstorms controlled by the German Afrikakorps (to mimik the clever tricks of the desert fox)
    • Icebergs controlled by the British (to mimik their superior nautic experience)
    • Malaria controlled by the Japanese (to mimik their experience in jungle warfare)
    And of course we might need similar house-rules as for the blizzards, i.e unit may be used only in certain times and map regions.

Cheers, Lanzelot
 
Lanz..Well thought out indeed! As to your Nature comments..I believe your final spin/suggestions is what I had meant and had posted previously about "Human" control. That is, give a select number to use with restrictions as like the Russian Blizzards. I would prefer to see them stay as an AI generated that causes the randomness of their arrival and thus unpredictability. But there are flaws I see as well. I'm pretty sure that on this last turn I saw an iceberg in the SW Ocean area??? Now I don't icebergs show up near the PI often? Also, their ability to Capture cities and ports are just to unrealistic for me to accept in gameplay. In particular were the Typhoons. They apparently have tremendous movement factors not to mention nearly unbeatable defense factors and seem to last almost indefinitely? Even in the '40s there was some degree of warning as to detecting weather forces with pre-warning. In the game one has no idea a storm is within range unless; 1)-a unit ends up movement next to a Typhoon or 2)You get the turn and you see (or in some cases don't see) a Typhoon visible and your ship or ships are gone or badly mauled! Now I wouldn't have too much of a problem with this even if there was only 1 typhoon every 6 months. But I doubt the Editor allows for this type of option/charecter. Now...it may seem like I am overly sensitive/critical of these units. But I faced a lot of them as the Minor Allies. And I don't think anyone other than Eric would want to play them as a Civ. Eric is a "Creator/Developer" and Loves stuff like this. And I mean that as a compliment. I have been an avid and ardent follower of Eric since his Typhoon of Steel (TOS) creation. Still my all time Civ mod to be sure. I think Nature is a BRILLANT concept!! But as in this Test game...in their current status...I feel changes the gameplay in a very unrealistic way. I think I've beat this and my thoughts about the SNLF's long enough.

I love the Atlantikwall unit concept Lanz makes a lot!! Frankly I think TG's "early" Blitz was one of the most ingenious if not incredibly unbelievable moves I've seen in game play! It reminded of some of the great moves Spartaca would make! Usually against me! Remember Eric?

I had notes about Civpedia errors that I made while in the UK but with the move back to the US they are MIA. But I'll try to peek through it some time.

Knutis, Your play as Japan was fantastic especially in the opening and middle phases! You had Eric, Muz, and I all in a tizzy with your gameplay....Well Done!

As for Muz, you had an early "welcome" to HOF as a first time player! You also did fantastic regrouping from your earlies losses! This was very hard for anyone in their first HOF game to be learning and playing on the go. I know you learned a lot from your mistakes and I bet you will be a more dangerous player in the next game!

I need to think about comments about technology a little bit more before I put them down here. It kind of covers a couple of things Lanz mentioned above like, Sub attacks, rockets, advanced tech/units stuff. More to follow. Great game guys!

Sully
 
Lanzelot:
Thanks for the feedback.

You do know about the text file which describes the scenario? You can find
it in the first post of the HOF 3 thread. For example it says this about
Russian units:

Russia
2.14 The basic Russian infantry unit is the Soviet Rifle Corp. A rifle corp is the
equivalent of a full strength US or British division. The larger Russian infantry is the
Soviet Rifle Army. Tank units are similar with T-34 corps and Armies. Militias and
light tank units are used to represent individual Soviet divisions. Russian armies
are called "fronts".

This like a lot of things in the scenario are intended to add a little historical
"color".

The only use for generals (AKA MGLs) in this scenario is to create armies, this
was intentional, not a bug.

I could not see why a general, his staff and a few radio trucks should cost
more that an infantry division so I made the cost of an army roughly equal
to 1 infantry division.

There were a number of missing entries in the stealth attack list for U boats
which caused the problems you saw when attacking my Baltic Fleet.
This has been fixed in the newest version. But you should also know:

Invisible Subs and Stealth Attack
Submarines cannot be seen by destroyers until the Antisubmarine Warfare (ASW)
tech has been researched. Once this tech is complete, destroyers can
be upgraded to ASW destroyers which can "see" subs. The ASW tech also allows
construction of the ASW aircraft. An ASW aircraft will allow the carrier, city
or airfield it is based on to "see" subs.

Advanced Submarines can "see" subs.

Naval bombers such as the Avenger which become available with Naval Aviation 2
can also "see" subs.

Subs have stealth attack against all sea units except other subs, destroyers,
ASW destroyers, fast transports and invasion fleets. Advanced subs have
stealth attack against all sea units except other advanced subs and ASW
destroyers.

I will be looking into the Civilopedia issues and spelling mistakes you mentioned.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Recursive
  • Locked
New BETA Version - 4.17.8 (December 16, 2024)
5 6 7
Replies
131
Views
26K
Recursive
Recursive
Recursive
  • Locked
New BETA Version - 4.10 (June 25, 2024)
6 7 8
Replies
148
Views
29K
Recursive
Recursive
hokath
Hokath's Changes
8 9 10
Replies
190
Views
33K
hokath
hokath
Recursive
  • Locked
New Version - 4.2.7 (October 30, 2023)
16 17 18
Replies
350
Views
72K
andersw
A
Recursive
  • Locked
New Version - 3.7.12 (August 4, 2023)
13 14 15
Replies
283
Views
58K
Recursive
Recursive
Back
Top Bottom