GS Beta Bug Reporting

Moderators: firepowerjohan, rkr1958, Happycat, Slitherine Core

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2272
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Morris » Wed Mar 28, 2012 1:57 pm

Kragdob wrote:Morris,

Soviet mobilization was not dependant on capital. Mobilization were conducted in Military disctricts based on their MP and equipment assigned by STAVKA. One of the disctric was North Caucasus and it included in general all Russia south of Rostov + Caucasus republics (today independent states) like Armenia, Georgia etc.

So even if cut off this disctrict were fully able to conscript as it had access to MP(local)/supplies (from Middle East/trhough Caspian Sea).

I think the issue here is that you cannot rail in England/France when capitals are cut off. I think for GS2.2 rail rule should be that if city is connected with another one you can rail there.
yes , you are quite right about the information of Soviet military mobilization situation . I knew about it & agree with you . But why I point it out is that the change of this will effect the balance of the present game engine .I did remember it was not like this before . Would you please tell me which patch did this change happen ? I checked out but did not find it .

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Kragdob » Wed Mar 28, 2012 6:51 pm

Morris wrote:Would you please tell me which patch did this change happen ? I checked out but did not find it .
I'm too new to know what was before :-) Developers should answer this one.
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2272
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Morris » Thu Mar 29, 2012 4:57 am

Kragdob wrote:
Morris wrote:Would you please tell me which patch did this change happen ? I checked out but did not find it .
I'm too new to know what was before :-) Developers should answer this one.
Yes, I am waiting for the answer .Thanks in advance !

rkr1958
General - Elite King Tiger
General - Elite King Tiger
Posts: 4262
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:20 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by rkr1958 » Thu Mar 29, 2012 12:14 pm

Morris wrote:
Kragdob wrote:
Morris wrote:Would you please tell me which patch did this change happen ? I checked out but did not find it .
I'm too new to know what was before :-) Developers should answer this one.
Yes, I am waiting for the answer .Thanks in advance !
What exactly is the question?

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2272
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Morris » Thu Mar 29, 2012 3:49 pm

Morris wrote:
Kragdob wrote:
Morris wrote:Would you please tell me which patch did this change happen ? I checked out but did not find it .
I'm too new to know what was before :-) Developers should answer this one.
Yes, I am waiting for the answer .Thanks in advance !
rkr1958 wrote:What exactly is the question?
the question is when did we change the rule of deploy in Caucasus ? Before the rule is that : if Caucasus was cut off from Moscow & Omsk , it was impossible to deploy new unit in Caucasus . but now they can . Also I think this change effect game balance , It seems we had not made any discussion about this change . Maybe I miss it ?

pk867
Colonel - Ju 88A
Colonel - Ju 88A
Posts: 1598
Joined: Fri May 08, 2009 3:18 pm

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by pk867 » Thu Mar 29, 2012 6:12 pm

Hi,

This probably occurred in RC11when we added more cities to Russia. The Caspian sea received a port on the East.

A port was added to Persia. This opened up supply to Omsk and / or Moscow ofn the Eastern side of the map. That is why reinforcements can be placed.

I guess you have to drive and capture the port on the east side .

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4693
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Fri Mar 30, 2012 12:01 am

I think it happened earlier. The reason you can place reinforcements in the Caucasus is because the area has supply level 4. The reason they get it is because they can draw supply from Basra (supply level 5 source). I think it has been like that for quite some time. At least from the time we allowed minor power rail networks to be used.

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4693
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Fri Mar 30, 2012 12:02 am

It doesn't matter when the change appeared. What matters is that the rules are like that and I don't see any reason to change it.

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2272
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Morris » Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:01 am

Stauffenberg wrote:It doesn't matter when the change appeared. What matters is that the rules are like that and I don't see any reason to change it.
Sorry sir , I don't quite understand your second sentence . If you don't see the reason , I can tell you . It will make USSR invincible . Because the best way for the Axis to defeat USSR is to seperate it & concentrate to deal with one of them to gain the part advantage . But if with this rule , USSR can't be cut to seperate . So USSR can gather his power at any side he needs to launch an offense to defeat Axis . USSR is able to afford for 1-3 compaign's failure( USSR will recover soon ) ,but Axis is not able to afford any one of big compaign's failure ! That's the reason I insist on my topic !!! That's why I said this effect the game balance . If you just want to defeat my strategy , you did it ! I have given up of my original strategys for so many times . But I will have new strategy . Your words was quite right that : it should defeat my strategy on the battle field ! not by changing rules !

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4693
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Fri Mar 30, 2012 10:23 am

I don't believe we have any game evidence about this.

I have regularly got to the Caspian Sea with my Axis and got to the Caucasus. The Allies have struggled to push me back despite the rules being what they are. As the Germans you need to make sure the Russians are pressed north of Stalingrad too so the Russians will have to place reinforcements there.

Eventually the Germans will have to withdraw from the Caucasus. Then they can run back to the Don. If you can be in the Caucasus in 1943 then the Russians will probably run out of time getting to Berlin in time.

The Germans simply have to change strategy once they run out of steam. Making a fighting retreat seems to be their best option. If your goal is to make Russia fall then having the Russians get reinforcements in Baku seems to make that task even harder, but how often should Russia surrendere in a GS v2.1 game? I feel it should be an achievement you see so rarely so you will remember it well when it happens. At least if you play against a skilled opponent.

The most important job for the Germans is to destroy enough Russian units so they don't get the upper hand until it's too late. It doesn't matter where it happens. If you can grab Maikop and Grozny in the south then you have enough oil to last quite a bit longer. Seeing the Russians place reinforcements in the south won't make a big difference.

If we had changed the placement rules then we would have had to change the map and place Krasnovodsk on the map and allow Russia to rail into Persia to get new units to the Baku area via Persia. Then Russia could place a new unit in Krasnovodsk and Aktau and sail them to Baku. They could even rail to Krasnovodsk / Aktau and sail to Baku again.

With that you will see that Russia could reinforce the south regardless. So I don't see the big difference about the current rules and changing the rules with my suggestions above. The outcome would be that Russia could build up a force in the south to push Germany back. Air units can simply fly in from Siberia to trans-Caucasus.

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2272
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Morris » Fri Mar 30, 2012 11:43 am

Stauffenberg wrote:I don't believe we have any game evidence about this.

I have regularly got to the Caspian Sea with my Axis and got to the Caucasus. The Allies have struggled to push me back despite the rules being what they are. As the Germans you need to make sure the Russians are pressed north of Stalingrad too so the Russians will have to place reinforcements there.

Eventually the Germans will have to withdraw from the Caucasus. Then they can run back to the Don. If you can be in the Caucasus in 1943 then the Russians will probably run out of time getting to Berlin in time.

The Germans simply have to change strategy once they run out of steam. Making a fighting retreat seems to be their best option. If your goal is to make Russia fall then having the Russians get reinforcements in Baku seems to make that task even harder, but how often should Russia surrendere in a GS v2.1 game? I feel it should be an achievement you see so rarely so you will remember it well when it happens. At least if you play against a skilled opponent.

The most important job for the Germans is to destroy enough Russian units so they don't get the upper hand until it's too late. It doesn't matter where it happens. If you can grab Maikop and Grozny in the south then you have enough oil to last quite a bit longer. Seeing the Russians place reinforcements in the south won't make a big difference.

If we had changed the placement rules then we would have had to change the map and place Krasnovodsk on the map and allow Russia to rail into Persia to get new units to the Baku area via Persia. Then Russia could place a new unit in Krasnovodsk and Aktau and sail them to Baku. They could even rail to Krasnovodsk / Aktau and sail to Baku again.

With that you will see that Russia could reinforce the south regardless. So I don't see the big difference about the current rules and changing the rules with my suggestions above. The outcome would be that Russia could build up a force in the south to push Germany back. Air units can simply fly in from Siberia to trans-Caucasus.
you always teach me lessons . It always sounds reasonable . but this time I have to insist on my point . We will see whether my point is wrong on the battlefield .

Peter Stauffenberg
General - Carrier
General - Carrier
Posts: 4693
Joined: Sun Jul 08, 2007 4:13 pm
Location: Oslo, Norway

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Peter Stauffenberg » Fri Mar 30, 2012 5:42 pm

You can insist as much as you want, but we've stopped making changes to GS v2.1. :P If something is indeed broken then it will be dealt with in GS v2.2

Morris
Major-General - Tiger I
Major-General - Tiger I
Posts: 2272
Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2011 11:00 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Morris » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:28 am

Stauffenberg wrote:You can insist as much as you want, but we've stopped making changes to GS v2.1. :P If something is indeed broken then it will be dealt with in GS v2.2
No problem ,sir ! Of cource this is the discussion of a future develpomant in 2.2 or 3.0 ! Our fans keep asking me of the official release date . I asked Iain . The reply is May . I really do not let it be delayed by any effect of mine !( although I know I should hold part of the responsibility for the previous delay) :D

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Kragdob » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:03 pm

I would like to remind my question and ask some good soul for confirmation.
Kragdob wrote:Does increase in Soviet techs affects new games only?

Is enemy forces screen visible also for final release? Should e.g. Axis not be aware of US builds until they recon them or meet on the battlefield?
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

rkr1958
General - Elite King Tiger
General - Elite King Tiger
Posts: 4262
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:20 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by rkr1958 » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:34 pm

Kragdob wrote:Does increase in Soviet techs affects new games only?
Yes. Games started before the change are unaffected by the tech change.
Kragdob wrote:Is enemy forces screen visible also for final release?
Yes.
Kragdob wrote:Should e.g. Axis not be aware of US builds until they recon them or meet on the battlefield?
No. The axis definitely had spies in pre-war USA, USSR and other neutral countries. Just consider these force estimates are derived from information gained from that spy network.

Schnurri
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Sergeant First Class - Panzer IIIL
Posts: 398
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2010 4:39 pm

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Schnurri » Sat Mar 31, 2012 2:57 pm

The force estimates are pretty off sometimes anyway - one time I noticed Morris had built a new BB, DD and several subs and fortified Britain for a Sea Lion only to see some time later that there were just 3 subs.

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Kragdob » Sat Mar 31, 2012 3:45 pm

Schnurri wrote:The force estimates are pretty off sometimes anyway - one time I noticed Morris had built a new BB, DD and several subs and fortified Britain for a Sea Lion only to see some time later that there were just 3 subs.
Is this a hidden knowledge to know how much they differ from reality? I heard of +/- 2 Is it true?
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

rkr1958
General - Elite King Tiger
General - Elite King Tiger
Posts: 4262
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:20 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by rkr1958 » Sat Mar 31, 2012 4:22 pm

Kragdob wrote:
Schnurri wrote:The force estimates are pretty off sometimes anyway - one time I noticed Morris had built a new BB, DD and several subs and fortified Britain for a Sea Lion only to see some time later that there were just 3 subs.
Is this a hidden knowledge to know how much they differ from reality? I heard of +/- 2 Is it true?
That is correct. It was early in the GSv2.10 changes and not worded very well by me.
13. Implemented the show units in statistics panel and the tooltip shows the [enemy forces] composition. Spread is determined by last digit of techs (different combination for each unit type and country so not a group increases or decreases); 0: -2; 1: -2; 2: -1; 3: -1; 4: 0; 5: 0; 6: 0; 7: +1; 8: +1 and 9: +2
Let me translate my own words. :(

The screen cap below was taken form the start of a game (1939) during the German's turn. The counts shown for the Germans and Italians are exact. The ones shown for the allies (including the USA and Russia who are still neutral) are estimates. My rambling description above (i.e., change 13) boils down to: (1) enemy estimates can vary +/-2 for truth, (2) they will never go below 0 and (3) (and this is very important), these estimates are fixed for a given turn; but do change randomly from turn to turn (but NOT within a turn). This means that you can track these numbers and get a pretty good estimate of the enemy forces. How you use this intel is up to you.

The second screen cap is from a spreadsheet I built to take the raw estimates from each turn and average them out over time. Also, it might be possible using two back to back measurements from two consecutive turn (remember measurements only change turn to turn) to exactly determine a specific count. For example, maybe you get an estimate of 8 u-boats and then 4 u-boats. Since you know that each estimate has to be withing +/- 2 of the truth then you know for use that the German player has exactly 6 u-boats. Now, isn't this fun!

Image

Image

Kragdob
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
2nd Lieutenant - Panzer IVF/2
Posts: 678
Joined: Sat Aug 20, 2011 7:55 pm
Location: Poland

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by Kragdob » Sat Mar 31, 2012 6:54 pm

Thank you Sir!

One more about below. What does 'Spread is determined by last digit of techs' mean?
13. Implemented the show units in statistics panel and the tooltip shows the [enemy forces] composition. Spread is determined by last digit of techs (different combination for each unit type and country so not a group increases or decreases); 0: -2; 1: -2; 2: -1; 3: -1; 4: 0; 5: 0; 6: 0; 7: +1; 8: +1 and 9: +2
Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.

rkr1958
General - Elite King Tiger
General - Elite King Tiger
Posts: 4262
Joined: Wed Dec 12, 2007 2:20 am

Re: GS Beta Bug Reporting

Post by rkr1958 » Sat Mar 31, 2012 7:19 pm

Kragdob wrote:Thank you Sir!

One more about below. What does 'Spread is determined by last digit of techs' mean?
13. Implemented the show units in statistics panel and the tooltip shows the [enemy forces] composition. Spread is determined by last digit of techs (different combination for each unit type and country so not a group increases or decreases); 0: -2; 1: -2; 2: -1; 3: -1; 4: 0; 5: 0; 6: 0; 7: +1; 8: +1 and 9: +2
It basically means that the "random" number used to determine the spread is the last digit of a country's tech. Since tech will only change from turn to turn then the force estimate stays fixed for a given turn. This is to prevent a player for opening and closing the force screen several times in a turn in order to get several samples.

Post Reply

Return to “Commander Europe at War : GS Open Beta”