I will mod the RUS Drang nach Osten scenario after having achieved SVF 2.0. Don’t expect it before October at best.
But you may yet help me now by posting your remarks about AI failures in Drang, possible improvements in events, units, etc.
Archive for August 19, 2011
1
About FY, as the official team has announced they will treat the last bugs in the following weeks, I just want to inform I’ve squashed most of those related to data in FY in the last months, by using my QA definitive weapons: Scriptreport and NOTEPAD. On this point, FY is more advanced than the official version.
As some of you will remember, in the first AACW version, Kentucky neutrality was very poorly addressed: both sides roamed into this so-called neutral State, and fought amidst several bugs…
WIth the .09 version of AACW,I created the system which has been since copied in the official version, by using a unit as Trigger to invade Ky which begins in blocked status, no side being able to enter in.
SVF 2.0 will just refine this a bit more, on the Fatal Years Allied Intervention Level model.
Kentcky Preference Level will start at 8 and may raise until 15, signifying Ky joins Union, when 0 the contrary.
This level will vary randomly each turn, representing evolution of Ky people. There are more chances Ky sentiment evolve toward Union support, as in reality.
Each side will have the possibility to invade at any time Ky, with consequences on Loyalty level in Ky regions. CSA will gain or lose VPs, without knowing exactly how, and the greater losses if CSA invades in the first turns.
Union will have 2 options, Fremont and Blocus. Both lower the KPL and the Foreign intervention Level. Blocus will cut some resources for CSA, Fremont will raise Loyalty on some other States.
From October 1861, Ky, if yet neutral, will join the Union anyway.
The KYL will be notified to players each turn:
Last, Kentucky will have, above strategic value, 10 WSU. It was one of the most industrialized State in 1860, and CSA could receive a serious industrial boost by controlling this State.
SVF 2.0 will be available here and may be discussed at matrix forum for AACW:
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=2866276
Of course, no thread will be opened in the AGEOD forum, for obvious reasons.
Next time, I will talk about options: conscription, industrialization, money, etc
Red military reform option and the Fatal Years design
Posted: August 19, 2011 in Mod Workshop, Rus Mod, UncategorizedThe military reform initiated by Trotsky is hard to simulate.
Not for the effects, ie better quality for Red units. That’s simple.
What’s difficult is such an event is a no-brainer. Which player will play without a full game? Whatever the cost of the option, any Red player will try to enforce it soon.
Giving a very high cost is detrimental for balancing, as much resources will be devoted to fulfill the conditions, and anyway it doesn’t feel right. After all, most of the negative effects caused by a great cost were created by the reform rather than the contrary. Bolsheviks were divided about this reform for ideological and personal reasons ( Trotsky being unpopular), but the crude truth was a reform was necessary and I bet it would have been done anyway a few months later, even if Trotsky hadn’t existed or if he has lost this political struggle.
So the option must be playable quickly, during the first turn. It must yet be a player choice, because an automated upgrade of units doesn’t fulfill the game axiom, which is you’re Lenin when you’re playing Reds, or the Politburo. For the sake of simulation, this remains a choice you have to make.
That’s more. We know, in retrospect , the reform was necessary and did much for the Red success. neither Lenin, Trotsky, Stalin did known. They faced the unknown and some of the arguments of the Military Opposition weren’t worthless. To simulate the conditions of this critical choice of the military reform, Fatal Years must reintroduce some of the uncertainty Politburo was confronted.
Hence the choice of negative then positive random consequences of the military options. You know the reform will reinforce your units, but you ignore exactly at which cost in NM, other penalties.
Once the option chosen, you have to cope with possible harsh results. The plan isn’t perfect as in real life. At least, each game will be different.
AS I said yesterday, Fatal Years is now from my point of view complete and certainly playable until the end against AI or in PBEM.
Now, there are certainly some bugs remaining, so please just point out them to me. Being alone, I can’t test anything. Normally, these bugs should be rather minor now.
Then the next Fatal Years work belongs to game balancing. Once again, I can’t run games as much as I would need to fine tune Victory conditions, event effects and so on. Here too your remarks will help me by saving a precious time.
Last, if I’ve run out of ideas, you have maybe other suggestions. I’m not promising to agree with, but at least I will explain why I will not use them.
Last, if you like or not FY, there are 2 anonymous polls on this blog. They are really helpful for me too.
If you have harsh remarks about FY, once played, be assured you will not cause me to stop my work on FY. I’ve a great advantage pushing me to continue this mod, whatever the circumstance:I Love playing it. The AI is tough even for me. The options are as much choices I have to think about before enforcing them. The first lesson in game design is the simplest: work on what you love. If you don’t play anymore the game you design, or if you don’t love playing it, and you’re just working on and testing without real committment from the pleasure to play it, you will just create a poor game, leave the field or find a scapegoat for the failure.
