Erik's campaigns & mods

[Horst]

GGC: isn't it strange and unbalanced that you continue in 60Belgrade '41 from 59Reykjavik '42?
I'd rather continue in 74Vitebsk or where DLC42 starts. Sea Lion briefings already provide so many comments and certain objectives about Barbarossa that it feels weird to do a time walk. The player already made the choice not to continue with Belgrade after France.
Is there a plan to incorporate Afrika Korps as branch too?
I still don't think it was wise to merge all DLCs together; ignoring the fact that it blows up the buggy campaign editor. It might be easy to maintain and host, but there is really no challenge and fun anymore if your keep rushing your 5-star units through every scenario. I'd prefer separate DLCs where people can start/import wherever they like. Not everyone enjoys going through so many scenarios over and over again.
Separate DLCs also allow going the DLCWest path withouth turning the GGC into a triple time-walk.

[Horst]

Philippines, 0Agoo:
- if you may not loose more than 1 aircraft then you should increase the destroyed-counter from >0 to >1.
- the destroyer-undeployment trigger didn’t work somehow completely, although I received the event pic, my ships still stayed. Maybe it had something to do that the last Gato submarine was currently surfaced as the counter only checks for the submerged variant.
- what was also weird when I saw the last US aircraft was next to the airfield in the air that just took off again. I captured the airfield and the plane suddenly disappeared somehow. I don't know how and when exactly this happened.

Heh, this is really a love & hate scenario as first your units are inexperienced, second you don’t necessarily have the funds to use all CPs or I’m just rather doing it wrong by too expensive units, and third two destroy-all objects for a commanders each in a rather too tight turn requirement.
Maybe this scenario should be done with many more cheap infantry units together with puny AT-guns. This is a scenario where I wouldn’t mind at all if the player starts with historical units or at least as backup as advertised by the event pics. I seem to waste too many RP here.

[Erik2]

GGC: isn't it strange and unbalanced that you continue in 60Belgrade '41 from 59Reykjavik '42?
I'd rather continue in 74Vitebsk or where DLC42 starts. Sea Lion briefings already provide so many comments and certain objectives about Barbarossa that it feels weird to do a time walk. The player already made the choice not to continue with Belgrade after France.
Is there a plan to incorporate Afrika Korps as branch too?
I still don't think it was wise to merge all DLCs together; ignoring the fact that it blows up the buggy campaign editor. It might be easy to maintain and host, but there is really no challenge and fun anymore if your keep rushing your 5-star units through every scenario. I'd prefer separate DLCs where people can start/import wherever they like. Not everyone enjoys going through so many scenarios over and over again.
Separate DLCs also allow going the DLCWest path withouth turning the GGC into a triple time-walk.

I'm having my game PC repaired, so updates need to wait awhile.

The Sea Lion branch is a separate branch that is supposed to end the campaign.
Afrika Korps will be added as a similar separate branch.
I plan to do a West Front as a separate campaign branch.
So unit experience should not be a problem. I also add AI unit experience dependent on nation/year etc.

I'll see if I can add an event at the start of each campaign branch to warn players to do a manual save if they later want to go back and continue with a different branch.

I simply do not have the time to keep different variations of campaigns updated.
You guys already leave too much feedback, but please keep it coming

[Horst]

So unit experience should not be a problem. I also add AI unit experience dependent on nation/year etc.

Sorry, but it makes no sense to play on if the player core units are already 5-star in 40/41. It wouldn't also make sense to let Soviet units start with 3-4 stars. I'm still glad there is no overstrength-garbage from PzC. The campaign import features nicely offers the xp-reduction between the years what perfectly works with each PzC-DLC.
Too bad if you don't see the light there, Erik. This merging ruins the good PzC-DLCs. There shouldn't be much more work if you abandon the combination and separate each DLC again. There is no need for an update every other day if someone finds a bug while playing. I won't repeat a scenario while playing through a campaign anyway.
I still enjoy your other smaller campaigns though.

Phillipines
6Gapan: the secondary objectives still fail at start what doesn’t look good.
7Plaridel: destroying all US land units give a previously rewarded commander. Intention? One more exit zone for the aircraft would be nice there.

PS: these Filipino eat too much rice!

[Erik2]

Agoo:

Fixed air sec obj.
Added a few more turns.
Fixed Gato withdrawal.

Link updated to 1.4 in first post.

[GabeKnight]

Erik, actually I fully agree with Horst on splitting the GGC into smaller pieces: Ninety scens in one campaign's too much and you plan to add even more?

For one, the XP-reduction would be a nice treat. But more importantly

- with the core import working, the players could more easily decide, which part/branch of the GGC to start, without having to keep intermediate saves
- you'll keep the timeframes in check, like the mentioned "time jump" from the end of the Sea Lion branch
- there wouldn't be problems with the huge number of scenarios in the campaign editor, either.

Maybe, in the end, it could even make your life easier and reduce your workload, if you didn't have to care about separate parts of the campaign, which are (mostly) error free and finished. Like the SeaLion branch or the first part of the GGC. Most of the reported bugs I've read lately are rather minor and shouldn't hinder overall gameplay. Horst's right you know, there's really no need to fix smallish things like missing AI teams or some idle units or something trivial like that immediately on the next day.

Erik, if you change your mind about spliting the campaign (again ), I've put my mod on hold at the moment and I should have some free time again coming soon, so if you need some help with that, give me a PM.

[terminator]

- with the core import working, the players could more easily decide, which part/branch of the GGC to start, without having to keep intermediate saves

Where is the feature "core import" ? I looked for it but I did not find it ?

[Erik2]

I'm doing doing a complete revamp of the Philippines campaign.

Thinking about splitting the Germany Great into 'normal' campaigns...

[bru888]

Thinking about splitting the Germany Great into 'normal' campaigns...

For various reasons, I second this idea.

[Horst]

I'm glad I'm not alone about splitting the GGC. This baby has already grown to 300 MB size, and no idea how many scenarios it could still take before blowing OOB and its bugs up.
I'm looking forward to import core units from DLC '40 to AK.
Campaigning can take a while, so I better report issues frequently before I forget about them again or have to stop playing for various reasons and don't report them at all anymore. No stress with updates!

[GabeKnight]

- with the core import working, the players could more easily decide, which part/branch of the GGC to start, without having to keep intermediate saves

Where is the feature "core import" ? I looked for it but I did not find it ?

(v7)

Screenshot 734.jpg (268.95 KiB) Viewed 2668 times

[terminator]

From where was taken your screenshot ? What campaign ?
I don't have this option (Importable Cores) in my Campaign Editor ?

Screenshot 830.jpg (184.42 KiB) Viewed 2661 times

[bru888]

From where was taken your screenshot ? What campaign ?
I don't have this option (Importable Cores) in my Campaign Editor ?

Yes, that is a head scratcher. Perhaps he is using the Campaign Editor from beta? But in that case, I see that you are over there as well, so you should also have the same Campaign Editor if you are participating in beta.

[Horst]

8Mabatang: you receive a commander without any stats
While the first half of the campaign isn't that hard, the mayhem slowly begins from 7Plaridel on. A new year starts with 9Orion that already offers the first inf-upgrade. Unfortunately, I wasted too many RP on elite repairs on inf before that I ran out of cash.
It can't really hurt to give some RP on each scenario start; not only in this campaign but generally in everyone. Maybe income *10? In particular upgrading infantry is quite critical.
The secondary objectives with their meager bonus of 10 RP could also slightly be boosted to like 20. I haven't started 9Orion but I still remember the scenario too well that these secondaries to the airfield are way underpaid compared to the losses you are going to receive when going for them.

I know It's quite work, but I somehow miss the little rewards from PzC when taking whatever flag, like giving the same amount of RP as the supply amount once. Oh, this should be fun cashing in on your way to victory. I'd find this more rewarding and rather more plausible than a too generious income/turn, but hey the income in Philippine is meagerly okay.
In PzC-AK, I once created a supply system that is based on owned flag types. The income was constantly updated according to the current process. At beginning, you started rather low while the AI had plenty cash per turn. The faster you finished a scenario, the more income you could gain in the end. Speed was rewarding quite well this way how it should be.

[terminator]

From where was taken your screenshot ? What campaign ?
I don't have this option (Importable Cores) in my Campaign Editor ?

Yes, that is a head scratcher. Perhaps he is using the Campaign Editor from beta? But in that case, I see that you are over there as well, so you should also have the same Campaign Editor if you are participating in beta.

The beta is actually closed. I wait for his answer.

[Horst]

From where was taken your screenshot ? What campaign ?
I don't have this option (Importable Cores) in my Campaign Editor ?

Yes, that is a head scratcher. Perhaps he is using the Campaign Editor from beta? But in that case, I see that you are over there as well, so you should also have the same Campaign Editor if you are participating in beta.

The beta is actually closed. I wait for his answer.

Please continue leaking info about the beta!
Great, in the end, I'm the only guy left here that hasn't been banned yet!

[Erik2]

Philippines

General changes:
Added Allied unit experience.
Added US commanders.
Added (all) Japanese commanders at start in the first scenario and replaced commander rewards with specialisation rewards.
Reduced Japanese specialisation 'income' pr scenario from 7 to 1.
Added Allied specialisations.
Replaced rice pad with fields wherever there is a road in the hex.
Added 20 resource points reward for primary objectives.
Note that all minfields are US-owned. This means the AI may move units through minefields using their minefield maps...


6Gapan:
I couldn't find any errrors with the sec objs, but I have added scenario end triggers to all sec objs. Scenario opening is OK.

7Plaridel:
Added another air exit

Link updated to 2.0 in first post.

[bru888]

Please continue leaking info about the beta!
Great, in the end, I'm the only guy left here that hasn't been banned yet!

Remember, beta is beta. Just because you are seeing a new feature, which may or may not be from beta (but I think that's a good guess), it does not mean that the feature will make it into final production. Stuff is floated, fails, and gets pulled all the time in beta. Remember skirmish mode?

[Horst]

9Orion: Holy air crash! Erik, do you actually let all player aircraft in the air being destroyed in turn 10, sending all pilot-commanders to hospital too by the way?!
"Kill" was definitely the wrong trigger command!
Destroying the whole player air fleet with its gained experience can’t be compensated somehow. I’m going to fix this myself and repeat the scenario. It’s only turn 10, so not much to repeat. I guess "Undeploy" is the right command. "Remove" possibly sends units into nirvana? I'm going to test it later.
You should also remove all air-cps and most importantly any leftover AI aircrafts too while it's raining.

6Gapan: you should change the secondaries under enemy control to "Open" status instead of "Failed". That’s all. I remember to have suggested this year(s) ago for all objectives, but it seems you have have forgotten it there.

Good idea with the roads without rice paddies.
PS: Oh, I've already noticed the new hero pilots of the AI. That requires more RPs!

[Erik2]

9Orion:
Fixed air withdrawal

6Gapan:
Fixed secondary objectives.
Years ago? I can hardly remember what I did last week

Link updated to 2.1 in first post.