Welcome Guest Search | Active Topics | Members | Log In | Register

working on MEM 2.04 Options · View
durruti
Posted: Friday, June 12, 2009 9:06:41 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
Ok guys i just wanted to give you a chance to suggest stuff on a 2.04 MEM patch, Im currently looking at zsolo's edition and will most likely take a lot of stuff from there. Now is the time for suggestions.

Main thoughts as they come
* I will admit I was a bit over enthusiastic on bomber morale, I will raise bomber morale.
* Maybe it would be a good idea to make upgrades a bit cheaper? Tank supply costs should make the old two stepped tank builds impossible anyway.
* Maybe it would be a good idea to give USSR and Germany another mp boost somewhere mid game, for example 300 German and 500 USSR mp on barbarossa. Maybe this could delay manpower issues until 1942-1943 and also make the difference between allies and USSR/GER a bit bigger.
durruti
Posted: Friday, June 12, 2009 9:09:11 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
im going to just add the hungarian naval system, one question though. How well do the high CAG values on subattack work?
SilverBolt
Posted: Friday, June 12, 2009 10:09:44 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 4/24/2008
Posts: 710
Location: Great Nation Of Romania
upgrade dont really work at all....cept free market. or having infantry 41 and upgrading 18 to 36 or 39.

its alot cheaper and effective to just build new stuff as central planning.Lets not mention the gearing.
Sch
Posted: Friday, June 12, 2009 11:47:57 AM
 Major

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 1/22/2009
Posts: 481
Location: Hungary
1. UPGRADE

What exactly is the problem with the current upgrade system?

The allies and Germany(due to her 700+ IC) can keep their armies up to date while Japan, Italy and the USSR cant.
I think this makes perfect sense.

2. + MANPOWER

Again. Why is it nescesary?

3. AIR

Oh yeah, that really needs to be done. Poor aircraft suck ass in your mod. Annonym


"The Pope? How many divisions has he got?"
durruti
Posted: Friday, June 12, 2009 5:54:00 PM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
1)
Upgrades: Im not talking about big changes, i was thinking maybe 0.9 time instead of 1.0. Reason i'd like to do this is to see more upgrades being made that are not from double obsolete units (36 to 39 when the 41 tech is researched) another incentive would be to make the difference between unit models bigger but that's a rather big operation. Things have become more expensive and also upkeep, with air being necessary i think it would be a good thing to make upgrades more of an option.



2) Manpower: Im just looking at our current game - as tanks and mechs become very supply heavy. Players cant just go all in on tanks, thus we see more inf and inf bleed manpower. From my horizon, the divs get depleted too fast, a little more manpower for the big guys could delay that depletion by a few months.



3) Bombers: I dont agree that they suck ass. I have used air in the current campaign and it has helped me a lot. The interdiction mission is very effective in battles up to say 10-12 divs and beyond that it can have an important impact on how fast a battle ends, very useful in crossing rivers for example. Interdiction is also very important now on landings. I have also killed a lot of divisions - not like in the days of vanilla where 40-50 divs could be bombed to smithereens but say 10 divs or so have died the ground attack death.

My conclusion is that air is potent enough - and there is a line to cross where air just becomes the wonder weapon. Where you just have to force the enemy to move and then kill off 8 divs while he is moving and digging in. So let's not over do it. Also be careful when checking how good your starting lvl 1-2 tacs are doing, I have consciously let the ww1 - interwar bombers be a couple of steps below the lvl 3+ bombers. So the starting tacs dont tell you very much. Attacking both day and night is also not a good idea (same goes for forests).

That said, I do think I went too far. The air take both a lot of org damage from battle and loses org while in the air. That makes the reorg times too high even if you keep an air groups in reserve. what I do like though is that lower morale makes planning necessary, building a matching air base and more importantly improving infra in provinces you think will be key.


cueball
Posted: Friday, June 12, 2009 8:12:07 PM
 Tribunus laticlavius

Forum Supporter Medal 1st ClassOne Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership MedalInspiring Poster '08 AwardAuthor of 10000th Post

Joined: 11/30/2007
Posts: 2,498
Location: Canaduh
System seems good to me, overall. I'd like to play with it with Zsolo's air values at some point.

I think its good that you have renovated the tank system. That is one solution, and it is working. I think I would prefer one, which detuned tanks and made infantry more effective. I am thinking your idea of increasing infantry defensiveness might be appropriate, but that would be something to do experimentally.

Ballance wise its pretty good I think.

For a straighforward copy over zip version go here: Goerings Delay -- NZQS -- 1.3b.rar

The Mod can also be set up with the Jones Generic Mod Enabler and has worked fine in that mode in my tests. This version has everything in it, 1.3beta, JSGME and the East is Red patch, and can be installed straight to your Armageddon 1.2 (ZBLV) folder without disrupting vanilla at all. It has the 1.3beta exe update and JGSME Mod system right in it. Just unzip to your main doomsday folder, copy the contents of the folder, then past into the main folder, then enable the mod using the JSGME system. Once you execute the JSGME it is pretty self-explanatory: EIR NZQS --ARMA 1.3beta complete 1.3b

Small patch from XTPS or NZQS 1.2 to NZQS 1.3b: Goering EIR -- Patch 1.3b

It would be a dangerous folly for the British people to underrate the enduring position in world history which Mussolini will hold; or the amazing qualities of courage, comprehension, self-control and perseverance which he exemplifies.

Sir Winston -- 1937
durruti
Posted: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:08:00 PM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
ill be gentle here then. I'd like to bust as many glitches as possible though, so any suggestions are welcome. One thing I have done is to add conditions to rom,hun, bul switching sides. Paris and rome must now be occupied. I need more suggestion of this kind of irritating stuff
durruti
Posted: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:13:06 PM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
2.04 changes sofar:


1. Added conditions to Rom, Hun, Bul switching sides. Paris and Rome must now be occupied (not owned by ger/ita)
2. Increased bomber morale
3. Implemented Zsolo's increased interdiction efficiencies. Sum of efficiencies are the same as 2.03
4. Lowered the factor by which air units take org damage
5. Took away the random blueprint USSR gets from the M-R agreement and fixed it to Imp med tank.
6. Took away the +1 or -1 hawk for Germany in Operation Weserubung
7. Increased the trickleback effects from hospital techs
8. Max Hq speed lowered to 6
9. HQ's were made a lot cheaper to upgrade due to the small change in stats
durruti
Posted: Monday, June 15, 2009 1:47:42 PM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
with the change to UK professional slider in 2.03 i think it would be possible to change the upgrade time/cost factors a bit. All nations except for USSR now have about the same upgrade "bonus". I think it would be strategically more interesting if upgrades were faster but more expensive. right now were often looking at 100 percent of the time and 11 percent of the IC cost. I'd like to change that a bit, maybe to double the IC cost and use the corresponding time.




Zsolo
Posted: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 9:56:49 AM
 Lieutenant Colonel
One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 1/26/2009
Posts: 641
Location: Budapest
durruti wrote:
im going to just add the hungarian naval system, one question though. How well do the high CAG values on subattack work?


It works fine. I gave the sub attack from CV to CAG beacuase for a starnge reason CV doesn't seem to make use of its sub attack value. Crazy
Zsolo
Posted: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 9:59:04 AM
 Lieutenant Colonel
One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 1/26/2009
Posts: 641
Location: Budapest
durruti wrote:
ill be gentle here then. I'd like to bust as many glitches as possible though, so any suggestions are welcome. One thing I have done is to add conditions to rom,hun, bul switching sides. Paris and rome must now be occupied. I need more suggestion of this kind of irritating stuff


These additional triggers are great idea IMHO. Cool
Zsolo
Posted: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 10:03:20 AM
 Lieutenant Colonel
One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 1/26/2009
Posts: 641
Location: Budapest
durruti wrote:

3) Bombers: I dont agree that they suck ass. I have used air in the current campaign and it has helped me a lot. The interdiction mission is very effective in battles up to say 10-12 divs and beyond that it can have an important impact on how fast a battle ends, very useful in crossing rivers for example. Interdiction is also very important now on landings. I have also killed a lot of divisions - not like in the days of vanilla where 40-50 divs could be bombed to smithereens but say 10 divs or so have died the ground attack death.

My conclusion is that air is potent enough - and there is a line to cross where air just becomes the wonder weapon. Where you just have to force the enemy to move and then kill off 8 divs while he is moving and digging in. So let's not over do it. Also be careful when checking how good your starting lvl 1-2 tacs are doing, I have consciously let the ww1 - interwar bombers be a couple of steps below the lvl 3+ bombers. So the starting tacs dont tell you very much. Attacking both day and night is also not a good idea (same goes for forests).

That said, I do think I went too far. The air take both a lot of org damage from battle and loses org while in the air. That makes the reorg times too high even if you keep an air groups in reserve. what I do like though is that lower morale makes planning necessary, building a matching air base and more importantly improving infra in provinces you think will be key.


As described in the old patch thread, my tests lead me to mission efficiency values (interdiction: 5.0, ground attack 0.5) where bombers are potent even against 16-18 divs. With these values even dug-in units can be efficiently bombarded (only interdcition), which appear more than realistic for me - compared to the present situation where bombers are unable to hurt stacks larger than 8 divs or units dug-in..
Zsolo
Posted: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 10:30:55 AM
 Lieutenant Colonel
One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 1/26/2009
Posts: 641
Location: Budapest
durruti wrote:
ill be gentle here then. I'd like to bust as many glitches as possible though, so any suggestions are welcome. One thing I have done is to add conditions to rom,hun, bul switching sides. Paris and rome must now be occupied. I need more suggestion of this kind of irritating stuff


So far, all the changes seem to be nice.

First of all, here are my ideas not oncluded in the HUN mod:
- in general allaince chances could be raised a bit for a few countries (FIN, BUL, BRA, ARG)
- 'Persian coup' event trigger: if IRQ doesn't exist (=annexed by Axis) then PER should not be able to align with UK, USSR

All my other ideas can be found here:
- http://forums.ederon.net/default.aspx?g=posts&m=37947
- http://forums.ederon.net/default.aspx?g=posts&m=38241
- http://forums.ederon.net/default.aspx?g=posts&m=41791

What I consider as outstanding changes from the above:
0) TAC and CAS became able to bomb with interdiction larger stacks, even dug-in
1) GER has no peactime penalty + receivers +10% IC minister from start
2) USSR gets full interventionalist from events by the time Barbarossa starts
3) CAN, AUS is given additional rare and metal production
4) PAR beacme an elite figting unit with increased production time & cost
5) sea zones are rearranged so that NAV really can patrol only coastal areas
acme
Posted: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 12:15:44 PM
 Captain

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/25/2008
Posts: 356
Location: Budapest
Zsolo and Dur, i would like to see the two mods to merge....

There are good ideas both sides, and imho u guys should discuss them and make a common new version of MEM. If there are undecided questions Cueball and Me can moderate and act as judges. opinion?



Bureaucracy is expanding, to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.
acme
Posted: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 12:19:47 PM
 Captain

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/25/2008
Posts: 356
Location: Budapest
durruti wrote:
2.04 changes sofar:


7. Increased the trickleback effects from hospital techs
Confused exactly how much % ?

8. Max Hq speed lowered to 6

It wont solve the HQ overraning problem. The problem is that the Scenario startup HQs speed differs from what they should be. Ger Hq's speed is 8 and it comes from scenario startup settings.. same to russia's and others...



Bureaucracy is expanding, to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.
acme
Posted: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 12:55:51 PM
 Captain

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 11/25/2008
Posts: 356
Location: Budapest
my ideas:
1. remove mp from voronezh and reloc it to sverdlovsk
2. think about evacuating some mp with industry evac events.



Bureaucracy is expanding, to meet the needs of the expanding bureaucracy.
Tiger
Posted: Wednesday, June 17, 2009 1:47:33 PM
 Leutnant

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 1/24/2009
Posts: 134
Location: Hungary
acme wrote:
Zsolo and Dur, i would like to see the two mods to merge....



Yes, it is a good idea, but the problem that the two groups have different players, different houserules etc.

For example in Tuesday series puppet is enabled while in Zsolo series not, or in Zsolo series there is airport limit, redeploy rules etc.
So it is not easy...

But I support this conception.Cool

About mp:

What I realise in the current GC that UK may have 0.86 mp/dayConfused (in war, without getting mp from India!) since '41 with +25% manpower minister, this seems too bit for me... (especially if there is human CAN/AUS) Mainly because JAP get only 0.45-0.5 mp at war.
(ok in peace he has about 0.9/day from China with mp minister for 2-3 years...)

Si deus nobiscum, quis contra nos?
durruti
Posted: Thursday, June 18, 2009 8:42:04 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
a lot of ideas here, ill try to handle them piecewise.

I agree that me and zsolo should work on one MEM and I also think we have been cooperating closer and closer which is good. I think the big advantage with having only one version is that it will be no confusion when suggestions are made for a new patch. Right now I think we risk having comments on balance issues that only exist in either the MEM or the Hungarian MEM patch. Balancing will be much easier if we can gather
impressions from all MEM games. On the downside, as said earlier, there are differences in house rules. But that's a problem in all versions of HOI. Another positive thing with a lot of different versions is that players can find the patch they like. But I think we're a too small community to split up. If we can iron out a joint patch and then zsolo and I continue working together I'm 100 percent for it.



Quote:
Acme:
my ideas:
1. remove mp from voronezh and reloc it to sverdlovsk
2. think about evacuating some mp with industry evac events.


I think it's a good idea, I think a 20 mp voronez must be a mistake from the start. I will change that right away. On suggestion nr 2 I need to check if it's possible to move manpower via event. It's a good concept though.


Quote:
2.04 changes sofar:

7. Increased the trickleback effects from hospital techs
Confused exactly how much % ?

8. Max Hq speed lowered to 6

It wont solve the HQ overraning problem. The problem is that the Scenario startup HQs speed differs from what they should be. Ger Hq's speed is 8 and it comes from scenario startup settings.. same to russia's and others...


7: Trickle back right now works like this, you have a base of 0.5 trickle back and then you can get additional trickle back from the trickle back mod. If you research for instance great war hospital you get a mod of 4 percent. the increase in trickle back is 0.04 time 0.5 plus 0.5 = 0.52....and increase of 0.02. if you have all techs (last one is a 44 tech) you get a mod of 0.2 or 0.5 times 1.2 = 0.6. I changed the steps a bit adding the mods to 0.32 which will with all hospital techs give 0.66.

8. I think the hq speed has to do with the increase in HQ speed that comes with doctrines. I have taken away one speed increase per doctrine tree and also made all hq's have a base speed of 4. This adds up to a speed of 6 or in Germany's case 7 (with the 43 tech spearhead HQ's).











durruti
Posted: Thursday, June 18, 2009 8:43:34 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
Tiger wrote:
Yes, it is a good idea, but the problem that the two groups have different players, different houserules etc.

For example in Tuesday series puppet is enabled while in Zsolo series not, or in Zsolo series there is airport limit, redeploy rules etc.
So it is not easy...

But I support this conception.Cool

About mp:

What I realise in the current GC that UK may have 0.86 mp/dayConfused (in war, without getting mp from India!) since '41 with +25% manpower minister, this seems too bit for me... (especially if there is human CAN/AUS) Mainly because JAP get only 0.45-0.5 mp at war.
(ok in peace he has about 0.9/day from China with mp minister for 2-3 years...)


I will check this out, I agree it seems off. But I also dislike Germany having an +25% minister in 1942. That should be pushed to 43 imo
durruti
Posted: Thursday, June 18, 2009 9:42:49 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
OK guys, having a couple of hours off here I've begun merging DurrMEM and ZsoloMEM. Right now I'm comparing the versions using WinMerge, I'm copying files from Zsolo's version in every place where I fully agree or where I dont have an opinion. Ill post questions here as I go along.

Paratroopers: How do you handle the paratrooper bug in the hungarian clan games?
mechs: mechs are still cheap in production and upkeep in zsolo's version. Frankly i dont know where to go with mechs. IMO either make them an elite unit or a unit between mots and armor. Personally I prefer the latter. I think a good idea could be to make them a bit softer. Maybe from 60 to 70. I would then agree they could be cheaper.
Light tanks: Our values are very close on medium tanks, on light tanks however, zsolo's are rather much cheaper in supplies. With cheaper upkeep on light tanks I think we risk having players go around the problem of keeping massive armored forces by building long lines of light tanks and then upgrading them to basic medium tanks when improved medium tank tech is researched. I'd prefer all tanks costing 8-12 supplies including the representation of breakdowns.
CHINA: China's GDE is set to 0.92 in the zsolo patch, I dont like the fact that the chinese theatre has been sacrificed on the altar of comfortable prewar build up. What should be our aim here? should we let china be a challenge or should we let china die fast so we can speed up to danzig?
Germany: Taking away the peace time mod for germany is a good idea imo as it makes it less likely that france becomes a game stopper. How about balance, should USSR be compensated?
Vichy: I've chosen to kill the operation torch event. Does it work proper in the zsolo patch, should I copy it ?
France: Im not so fond of the french GDE loss, I understand it's a way to save games where france is too strong but it gives me a feeling of the game being rigged. Wink
cueball
Posted: Thursday, June 18, 2009 11:27:14 AM
 Tribunus laticlavius

Forum Supporter Medal 1st ClassOne Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership MedalInspiring Poster '08 AwardAuthor of 10000th Post

Joined: 11/30/2007
Posts: 2,498
Location: Canaduh
SilverBolt wrote:
upgrade dont really work at all....cept free market. or having infantry 41 and upgrading 18 to 36 or 39.

its alot cheaper and effective to just build new stuff as central planning.Lets not mention the gearing.


It's true. Don't know what you can do about that, since any upgrade bonus you give to CP will go to FM as well. I prefer the slow upgrade, because I think it benefits the CP countries more, just because of the strategic dynamics. Both SU and German already do there main builds right before war, and so they tend to depend on building new anyway.

For a straighforward copy over zip version go here: Goerings Delay -- NZQS -- 1.3b.rar

The Mod can also be set up with the Jones Generic Mod Enabler and has worked fine in that mode in my tests. This version has everything in it, 1.3beta, JSGME and the East is Red patch, and can be installed straight to your Armageddon 1.2 (ZBLV) folder without disrupting vanilla at all. It has the 1.3beta exe update and JGSME Mod system right in it. Just unzip to your main doomsday folder, copy the contents of the folder, then past into the main folder, then enable the mod using the JSGME system. Once you execute the JSGME it is pretty self-explanatory: EIR NZQS --ARMA 1.3beta complete 1.3b

Small patch from XTPS or NZQS 1.2 to NZQS 1.3b: Goering EIR -- Patch 1.3b

It would be a dangerous folly for the British people to underrate the enduring position in world history which Mussolini will hold; or the amazing qualities of courage, comprehension, self-control and perseverance which he exemplifies.

Sir Winston -- 1937
durruti
Posted: Thursday, June 18, 2009 11:29:59 AM
 Centurion

One Year Membership Medal

Joined: 12/19/2008
Posts: 468
Location: Sweden
when we set UK to 0 professional I think we dealt with those problems. The differences are a lot more marginal now except for USSR and maybe Italy.
TheWretchedMass
Posted: Thursday, June 18, 2009 8:30:49 PM
 Major

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 5/22/2008
Posts: 455
Is it really necessary to have so much fuel use by tanks? Burning 500 oil/day as germany is ridicolous.
TheWretchedMass
Posted: Thursday, June 18, 2009 8:38:44 PM
 Major

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 5/22/2008
Posts: 455
durruti wrote:
OK guys, having a couple of hours off here I've begun merging DurrMEM and ZsoloMEM. Right now I'm comparing the versions using WinMerge, I'm copying files from Zsolo's version in every place where I fully agree or where I dont have an opinion. Ill post questions here as I go along.

Paratroopers: How do you handle the paratrooper bug in the hungarian clan games?

mechs: mechs are still cheap in production and upkeep in zsolo's version. Frankly i dont know where to go with mechs. IMO either make them an elite unit or a unit between mots and armor. Personally I prefer the latter. I think a good idea could be to make them a bit softer. Maybe from 60 to 70. I would then agree they could be cheaper.

Yes definitely nerf mechs. Make them inbetween tanks and mots. They need to cost more in supply and oil.

Light tanks: Our values are very close on medium tanks, on light tanks however, zsolo's are rather much cheaper in supplies. With cheaper upkeep on light tanks I think we risk having players go around the problem of keeping massive armored forces by building long lines of light tanks and then upgrading them to basic medium tanks when improved medium tank tech is researched. I'd prefer all tanks costing 8-12 supplies including the representation of breakdowns.

8-12 supplies is fine but how about back to the old oil consumption?


CHINA: China's GDE is set to 0.92 in the zsolo patch, I dont like the fact that the chinese theatre has been sacrificed on the altar of comfortable prewar build up. What should be our aim here? should we let china be a challenge or should we let china die fast so we can speed up to danzig?

Let china die fast

Germany: Taking away the peace time mod for germany is a good idea imo as it makes it less likely that france becomes a game stopper. How about balance, should USSR be compensated?

Soviet Union is already too powerful

Vichy: I've chosen to kill the operation torch event. Does it work proper in the zsolo patch, should I copy it ?

France: Im not so fond of the french GDE loss, I understand it's a way to save games where france is too strong but it gives me a feeling of the game being rigged. Wink

French units should suck because french are nothing but a bunch of nancy girls



TheWretchedMass
Posted: Thursday, June 18, 2009 8:41:27 PM
 Major

One Year Membership MedalTwo Year Membership Medal

Joined: 5/22/2008
Posts: 455
cueball wrote:
It's true. Don't know what you can do about that, since any upgrade bonus you give to CP will go to FM as well. I prefer the slow upgrade, because I think it benefits the CP countries more, just because of the strategic dynamics. Both SU and German already do there main builds right before war, and so they tend to depend on building new anyway.


Wacko

You're saying that Germans and Soviets upgrade their units less than the other countries?
Users browsing this topic
Guest


Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.

Powered by Yet Another Forum.net version 1.9.0 (NET v2.0) - 10/10/2006
Copyright © 2003-2006 Yet Another Forum.net. All rights reserved.
Copyright © 2005-2007 Daniel "Lord Ederon" Scibrany. All rights reserved.