techumseh
Deity
I think you may be right there.
Seelowe playtest comments.
- Thread starter techumseh
- Start date
tootall_2012
King
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Messages
- 923
Hi Tech,
As promised, I've attached my review to this thread (which includes the Seelowe Playtest PDF review document, the Seelowe Statistics excel file and the last save game of the scenario).
As usual, you are free to use as much or as little of my recommendations as you feel appropriate.
WARNING: For those testers who may still be playing, and don't want to be influenced, you may want to avoid reading the PDF as it contains many spoilers.
I tend to disagree. This is still 1940 and it's unlikely most of these British fortifications would have been anything on the scale of the ones built by the Germans for the Atlantic Wall. I suspect for the most part they would only have had time to build small to medium defensive installations and therefore wouldn't necessarily have required large assault teams to overcome them.
As promised, I've attached my review to this thread (which includes the Seelowe Playtest PDF review document, the Seelowe Statistics excel file and the last save game of the scenario).
As usual, you are free to use as much or as little of my recommendations as you feel appropriate.
WARNING: For those testers who may still be playing, and don't want to be influenced, you may want to avoid reading the PDF as it contains many spoilers.
I tend to disagree. This is still 1940 and it's unlikely most of these British fortifications would have been anything on the scale of the ones built by the Germans for the Atlantic Wall. I suspect for the most part they would only have had time to build small to medium defensive installations and therefore wouldn't necessarily have required large assault teams to overcome them.
techumseh
Deity
Hi Yves. Thanks for that comprehensive report. Truly an effort over and above! I'll deal with your suggestions in more detail later, but let me make three broad responses. a) The specific suggestions for modifications to unit factors look very useful, and I will incorporate a number of them. b) the wall of British units in the Midlands IS caused by an events error, which I hope I've rectified. My complements on your ingenuity in getting around it - very Pattonesque. c) I think we have a difference in design philosophy. I don't strive for perfect realism, but in creating an interesting challenge. Captain Nemo once suggested that for a balanced scenario, the AI had to be 3 times stronger than the human player. Unhistorical British production rates are on purpose, as are some other built-in British advantages. I note that you still managed to win on your 2nd attempt. 
Perhaps we can debate that over a beer the next time I get to Montreal!
Many thanks!
Perhaps we can debate that over a beer the next time I get to Montreal!
Many thanks!
What a fantastic playtest report Yves! This is the kind of feedback scenario designers thrive on. Interesting to read. Comprehensive in its attention to detail. Lots of helpful recommendations that will have Tech pondering what to tweak. I'm sure Agricola would have given this the nod of approval 
I've been really busy recently & haven't had a proper chance to do the same due diligence for John Petroski's Gallic Wars & I've not had a chance to play Seelowe at all. I've got a lot of time off this summer & intend to play both scenarios through properly.
A couple of years ago this forum seemed to be drawing its last breaths. It's great to see the effect the ToTPP has had on the community. It's buzzing with activity once again. We might be small in number, but we make up for that with enthusiasm & dedication. It's a pleasure to be associated with you guys & girls!
I've been really busy recently & haven't had a proper chance to do the same due diligence for John Petroski's Gallic Wars & I've not had a chance to play Seelowe at all. I've got a lot of time off this summer & intend to play both scenarios through properly.
A couple of years ago this forum seemed to be drawing its last breaths. It's great to see the effect the ToTPP has had on the community. It's buzzing with activity once again. We might be small in number, but we make up for that with enthusiasm & dedication. It's a pleasure to be associated with you guys & girls!
tootall_2012
King
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2012
- Messages
- 923
Hi Tech,
To be honest, though I believe my northern strategy was a perfectly legal and entirely plausible move (the Germans had just done the same thing a few months previously in Norway), I still felt like I had somewhat “stolen” the marginal victory. Why? Because, while I was fighting hundreds of British troops in the Midlands, the entire area of Scotland was defended by less than 20 units and there was evidently no reaction event to oppose such an invasion. Therefore, I felt my move is one that probably hadn’t been anticipated by the designer (and which I’m certain he will correct in his final version).
c) I think we have a difference in design philosophy. I don't strive for perfect realism, but in creating an interesting challenge. Captain Nemo once suggested that for a balanced scenario, the AI had to be 3 times stronger than the human player. Unhistorical British production rates are on purpose, as are some other built-in British advantages. I note that you still managed to win on your 2nd attempt.!
With regards, the play balance, I completely agree that designers need to make allowances for the AI weaknesses. But as I indicated in my final thoughts section, with the advent of the NoStackKill’s feature, Captain Nemo’s 3 to 1 ratio probably should be revised downward to 2 to 1 (or even in some scenarios 1.5 to 1).
What a fantastic playtest report Yves! This is the kind of feedback scenario designers thrive on. Interesting to read. Comprehensive in its attention to detail. Lots of helpful recommendations that will have Tech pondering what to tweak. I'm sure Agricola would have given this the nod of approval
No one could test the limits, and in my case flaws, of a scenario like Agricola. He was a true master. All the same, I hope my reviews are helpful. They should never been seen as being critical or negative, but simply as honest and respectful feedback.
I especially hope you find the “A brief history” section beneficial. Even though, it takes a certain amount of time to write them, I like to include them because I believe it may give the designer a possibly different perspective on how the scenario ends up being played from what they might have envisioned.
I know, many times when Agricola, and even you Drew, would give me feedback on your play testing of my scenarios, and I would think: “They did what? Man, I didn’t even think of that!”
A couple of years ago this forum seemed to be drawing its last breaths. It's great to see the effect the ToTPP has had on the community. It's buzzing with activity once again. We might be small in number, but we make up for that with enthusiasm & dedication. It's a pleasure to be associated with you guys & girls!
I fully agree! The quality and originality of the scenarios that are coming out is just fantastic. I think they would make the old guard proud!
Last edited:
techumseh
Deity
I resemble that! 
I remember when you were pretty young, collaborating with Harlan Thompson on 'Up the Deadly Boot' (I think that was it) dealing with the Italian campaign.
I remember when you were pretty young, collaborating with Harlan Thompson on 'Up the Deadly Boot' (I think that was it) dealing with the Italian campaign.
Last edited:
techumseh
Deity
Based on the comments from my playtesters, I've made the following changes:
I believe that a large proportion of the excessive British production is due to faulty events that are supposed to fire only once, but trigger each turn. I hope I've corrected this, but I'm not entirely sure. In my playtest game, several midlands cities seem to be producing 16 ground and 6 air units per turn each. If this is the case, and I've managed to correct the problem, then further reductions in British production are unnecessary and ill-advised.
Increased the DF of mines from 30 to 50, and Coastal Forts from 15 to 20. Adjusted Brandenburgers so they kill the Forts only 75% of the time, and 5+ Ju-88s are needed to take one out. Increased German medium tanks FP by 1. Increased HP of Matildas and Pz. Grens. by 1. Changed the AF and DF of the PzJg I to 0a, 6d, to reflect its (mobile) anti-tank function. Reduced the DF of Tomahawks by 1, and increased the FP of Wellingtons by 1. Increased the AF of Fallschirmjager, Gebirgsjäger and Luftlandetruppe by 1. Italian paratroops AF and DF increased by 1. Removed the 'X2 against air' flag from partisans, reduced their DF and MF by one, and made them invisible. Made Commandos invisible. Increased the AF and DF of Guards infantry to 6a, 5d. Added the King George V to the Home Fleet and the Hood to the Western Fleet. I've decided to not implement various other minor suggestions.
I've added the ability of the Germans to build the Air Base (Airport) improvement, and added an (optional) House Rule that Luftwaffe units may only base in British cities containing an Air Base.
Still to do: Create reaction events for German attacks from the Carlisle-Newcastle line and north. I had added flags for this, but never got around to adding the 'CreateUnit' events to go with them. Then, barring unexpected errors or omissions, the beast is done!
(edit) Reduced the carrying capacity of Ju-52s from 3 to 2.
I believe that a large proportion of the excessive British production is due to faulty events that are supposed to fire only once, but trigger each turn. I hope I've corrected this, but I'm not entirely sure. In my playtest game, several midlands cities seem to be producing 16 ground and 6 air units per turn each. If this is the case, and I've managed to correct the problem, then further reductions in British production are unnecessary and ill-advised.
Increased the DF of mines from 30 to 50, and Coastal Forts from 15 to 20. Adjusted Brandenburgers so they kill the Forts only 75% of the time, and 5+ Ju-88s are needed to take one out. Increased German medium tanks FP by 1. Increased HP of Matildas and Pz. Grens. by 1. Changed the AF and DF of the PzJg I to 0a, 6d, to reflect its (mobile) anti-tank function. Reduced the DF of Tomahawks by 1, and increased the FP of Wellingtons by 1. Increased the AF of Fallschirmjager, Gebirgsjäger and Luftlandetruppe by 1. Italian paratroops AF and DF increased by 1. Removed the 'X2 against air' flag from partisans, reduced their DF and MF by one, and made them invisible. Made Commandos invisible. Increased the AF and DF of Guards infantry to 6a, 5d. Added the King George V to the Home Fleet and the Hood to the Western Fleet. I've decided to not implement various other minor suggestions.
I've added the ability of the Germans to build the Air Base (Airport) improvement, and added an (optional) House Rule that Luftwaffe units may only base in British cities containing an Air Base.
Still to do: Create reaction events for German attacks from the Carlisle-Newcastle line and north. I had added flags for this, but never got around to adding the 'CreateUnit' events to go with them. Then, barring unexpected errors or omissions, the beast is done!
(edit) Reduced the carrying capacity of Ju-52s from 3 to 2.
Last edited:
techumseh
Deity
Sorry, wasn't able to get to it in time. I assume you don't have access to the internet at the lake. I hope you have a relaxing break.
John, when I'm away from home & need to access the internet I tether my phone to my laptop with a USB to download saves & small files. I'm sure there are other more high-tech ways of doing this also. (Apologies if I'm telling Granny how to suck eggs! 
)
)
techumseh
Deity
Need help. At my wits end!
Despite the lack of posts in the last few weeks, I have not been ignoring my project. In fact, I've been trying to solve an intractable problem with my events. The scenario is otherwise complete.
Certain events - actually parts of certain events - will not fire. Specifically, the British production events. There are 3 types: complex events based on the existence of particular factory and dock units, replacement events for aircraft, and turn-based reinforcements. I've tested these by adding text messages to see if they are triggered. And the text messages appear. But not the units.
I'm nowhere near the limit on the number of units, and other similar events do work properly, for both the British and Germans. I've updated my Rules file for ToTPP v.0.14, including events memory, and I've moved the locations of these events in the events file itself, since they were originally near the end of a 277,000 b. file.
Here's an example of an event where the text appears on schedule, but the units never do. I took out the randomized locations to make verification easier.
@IF
Turn
turn=3
@THEN
CreatUnit
owner=British
unit=Wellington
Count=4
veteran=yes
homecity=None
;randomize
locations
;71,139
;66,114
;96,102
;62,25
;70,62
;32,2
1,35
endlocations
TEXT
Turn 3 Wellingtons created at Belfast.
ENDTEXT
@ENDIF
If anyone can help, I'd really appreciate it. The scenario works fine, but British resistance declines quickly half way through. It is otherwise ready to post.
Despite the lack of posts in the last few weeks, I have not been ignoring my project. In fact, I've been trying to solve an intractable problem with my events. The scenario is otherwise complete.
Certain events - actually parts of certain events - will not fire. Specifically, the British production events. There are 3 types: complex events based on the existence of particular factory and dock units, replacement events for aircraft, and turn-based reinforcements. I've tested these by adding text messages to see if they are triggered. And the text messages appear. But not the units.
I'm nowhere near the limit on the number of units, and other similar events do work properly, for both the British and Germans. I've updated my Rules file for ToTPP v.0.14, including events memory, and I've moved the locations of these events in the events file itself, since they were originally near the end of a 277,000 b. file.
Here's an example of an event where the text appears on schedule, but the units never do. I took out the randomized locations to make verification easier.
@IF
Turn
turn=3
@THEN
CreatUnit
owner=British
unit=Wellington
Count=4
veteran=yes
homecity=None
;randomize
locations
;71,139
;66,114
;96,102
;62,25
;70,62
;32,2
1,35
endlocations
TEXT
Turn 3 Wellingtons created at Belfast.
ENDTEXT
@ENDIF
If anyone can help, I'd really appreciate it. The scenario works fine, but British resistance declines quickly half way through. It is otherwise ready to post.
Knighttime
Prince
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2002
- Messages
- 379
I'm not an expert at the events macro language, but it looks to me like "CreatUnit" may be misspelled -- shouldn't it be "CreateUnit" with an "e"?
techumseh
Deity
Sh*t! Right under my eyes! I looked for everything I could think of, but misspelling of 'create' was not one. Funny that it wasn't picked up by the Debug program. Anyway, that was the issue for everyone of the misfiring events. I can't thank you enough, Knighttime! 
Knighttime
Prince
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2002
- Messages
- 379
Glad to help! Sometimes a second pair of eyes is all it takes -- this type of thing has happened to me many times!
techumseh
Deity
I can report good progress in the last couple of days. Fixing the British production events (Thanks be to Knighttime!) meant the Brits became too strong, especially in the air. So I eliminated a number of reinforcement events to restore balance. Now just one more run through, and if all goes well, I should be able to release it early next week. Thanks to all who helped. Much appreciated.
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2011
- Messages
- 4,801
I think people will really love this scenario. Good to.see you eliminated some of the issues tootall brought up. Sorry I haven't provided a detailed report but I knew you were making some fundamental changes so I'm not sure that it would really have added value.
I do have to say that this scenario is unique in how the build up is conducted, and that is very fun. In most scenarios you are launching an invasion but here you're planning one. Totally different dilemma.
