User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25433
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Public Beta Patch 1.05 RC1

Thu Oct 30, 2014 3:48 pm

Dear players,

Here is the first candidate for the 1.05 CW2 patch, which is due in some time (probably not before 2015), this will let us fine tune and improve further the game!
http://www.ageod-forum.com/downloads/latest/Patch_CW2_v1.05rc1.rar

Here is the list of changes:

Gameplay

Mescaleros recruited by decision can only appear in New Mexico or Texas. (fixed from 1.04)
Improved ammos distribution in supply phase
Improved naval supply distribution
Fixed reversed battle plans
Revised and improved retreat logic for stacks
Stack in retreat or doing MTSG can't cross blockaded river or pass through 'front' because of ZOC.
Traffic rule (in work)
Leaders will only lose seniority on January 1st and July 1st, this should help for promotion potential.

Interface

Faction history improvements
Can rename units with more characters than before
Improved battle report display
Added back random variation in display loss
Music sound volume can now be tweaked (inoMusicVolume in .opt file)
can't enter anymore (and erroneously) in structures not designed to handle sieges
when doing drag&drop, name of over region appears
can open saved game folder in Load Game Window, if doing a ctrl-click on the game icon
Fixed a display bug in region list leading to false infos
Innate supply production of a region is now shown in the first structure tooltip when checking structures by ctrl-click.
Also corrected supply and assets production not taking into account loyalty/alignment
better AB display in Forces & Units list, leaders sorted properly by name. Units ID sorted as expected (5th before 11st)
In Forces, Units, Regions listing, can scroll one page at a time with key up/down. Tooltip added to the scrollbar also.

AI

Several decisions are now using better AI (scorch earth, etc.)
AI: Improved Split Large Stacks
Ai fix on blockade run estimation

Modding / Script engine

Console can reliably be put back at the forefront
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
ohms_law
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 725
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Syracuse, NY

Thu Oct 30, 2014 5:02 pm

Huzzah! Huzzah! Huzzah!
Thanks Pocus!
:thumbsup:

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Thu Oct 30, 2014 6:15 pm

Ditto Image
Image

richfed
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:50 pm
Location: Marion, North Carolina, USA
Contact: Website

Fri Oct 31, 2014 6:24 pm

OK ... right off the bat, 2 things struck me, both in the settings panel.

1 - What is the "Traffic" slider for? The tooltip gives no clue

2 - There is an option to do something with the posture buttons [I forget the exact wording]. You can turn it on or off. Out of curiosity, I turned it on. The posture buttons were then stuck in the default stance. I restarted the game and then there were NO posture buttons. I tried restarting several times, and eventually gave up and turned it off. What is it supposed to do?

I applied this patch directly over the official 1.4 and started a new campaign.

User avatar
Ace
Posts: 3498
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Croatia

Sat Nov 01, 2014 6:34 pm

They were supposed to have "old" stance buttons, the ones where you have one click less.
Also, traf rules, this is still in testing, it's movement frontage. If too many troops pass through single region they will loose some cohesion due to congested roads. But, the effects are still in testing...

richfed
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:50 pm
Location: Marion, North Carolina, USA
Contact: Website

Sat Nov 01, 2014 7:52 pm

Thanks, Ace!

There is also a problem with the Battle Planner [graphic issue - see image].

And, I noticed that in the Unit Panel, leaders are often blinking when no promotion s possible.
Attachments
Battle Planner Graphic.jpg

User avatar
Captain_Orso
Posts: 5766
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 5:02 pm
Location: Stuttgart, Germany

Sun Nov 02, 2014 6:56 pm

With the "Alternate Buttons" turned on, I don't see any ROE buttons at all :blink:
Image

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25433
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Mon Nov 03, 2014 9:51 am

Some options done for EAW are missing their needed graphics in CW2, I'll check that. That's good to do public beta test :)
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
Ace
Posts: 3498
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Croatia

Mon Nov 03, 2014 11:04 am

Alternate.buttons could be little larger. I still use default ones because alternates are ao tiny

User avatar
tripax
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 777
Joined: Thu Aug 29, 2013 9:58 pm

Mon Nov 03, 2014 11:30 am

Can I ask, are the database files changing in this patch? If so, which ones?

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25433
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Mon Nov 03, 2014 11:39 am

richfed wrote:Thanks, Ace!

There is also a problem with the Battle Planner [graphic issue - see image].

And, I noticed that in the Unit Panel, leaders are often blinking when no promotion s possible.


That's fixed for next version, you'll get % details with little silhouettes and portraits.
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

richfed
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:50 pm
Location: Marion, North Carolina, USA
Contact: Website

Mon Nov 03, 2014 8:43 pm

That's good, Pocus!!! Thank you ...

Everyone keep an eye out - I'm not sure if I have suddenly become the worst player ever, or I'm just having bad luck, or if the AI is suddenly super-charged, or what - I am playing the full campaign as the CSA. In all my days of playing, and that is since AACW first came out, I never recall losing an entire corps. I'm talking all support units,batteries, independent brigades, 3-4 divisions, and a couple of leaders. Completely wiped out. That would be Jackson's corps in the Valley. I admit, I am playing somewhat carelessly, exploring this beta patch ... but he just got hammered again and again and could not, or would not retreat. So, I started rebuilding that force and then Longstreet's corps and Lee's Army stack got hit. I lost ANOTHER entire corps up near Manassas. Rushed Jackson back up there and he was hammered again - though not wiped out. Lee lost everything but his independent batteries and some partisans. So, two - and nearly 3 - entire corps wiped out by early 1863, plus a devastated Army stack.. These were about 2500 power, well supplied & cohesive [at least the first two times]. Just can't seem to keep pace with whatever is going on.


Basically set on "normal" settings. Never have seen the AI forces be so aggressive and STRONG. I know I am not giving much in the way of actually game under-the-hood stuff, I just wanted to know if anyone else experiences this wicked Athena!

User avatar
ohms_law
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 725
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Syracuse, NY

Tue Nov 04, 2014 5:03 am

That doesn't sound like Athena, just the changed retreat rules. Sounds like things are working great, to me!

User avatar
Pocus
Posts: 25433
Joined: Wed Oct 19, 2005 7:37 am
Location: Lyon (France)

Tue Nov 04, 2014 11:12 am

Depending of how long since you last played CW2, Athena can be significantly better (or less sub-optimal) on certain thinking processes because of the good work done for EAW.
Image


Hofstadter's Law: "It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account Hofstadter's law."

User avatar
Orphan_kentuckian
Sergeant
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:39 pm
Location: Kentucky

Thu Nov 06, 2014 8:49 pm

hey guys, not sure if i should be asking this here but its the only thread i've seen on the beta patch.
is it possible to download the patch even though i bought the game via steam? i dont want to overwrite anything because of current pbems. so was just curious before i unzipped it.

User avatar
Orphan_kentuckian
Sergeant
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:39 pm
Location: Kentucky

Thu Nov 06, 2014 9:14 pm

hey guys, i know steam will auto update to new patches, but as far as the beta patch goes is it possible to just unzip in the CW2 folder via steam?
i didn't want to mess anything up as im in a heated pbem atm and wanted to ask before i downloaded. thanks!

Merlin
General
Posts: 581
Joined: Sat May 17, 2008 2:41 pm
Location: St. Paul, MN

Thu Nov 06, 2014 11:06 pm

Just do what I do. Copy the game folder over to a new folder, create and rename the shortcut, download the public beta, patch your new copy, and you're now the proud owner of a non-Steam version of CW2. This works whether or not you have Steam, and I have three copies on my PC. One is the official game copy, another is for mods, and the other is for beta patches if opponents have problems with the current official version. AGEOD is the most cross-distributor friendly company out there. :thumbsup:

Edit: Also, if you don't change the saved game folder in the files, all your saves will still end up in the same place regardless of how many copies you have and where they're located. It may be an unintentional feature, but it's an incredibly convenient one.

User avatar
Orphan_kentuckian
Sergeant
Posts: 67
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2014 9:39 pm
Location: Kentucky

Fri Nov 07, 2014 3:31 am

ah nice call my good sir. i will most def try that. thanks! :thumbsup:

Barca
Private
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:57 pm

Fri Nov 07, 2014 11:41 pm

richfed wrote:I just wanted to know if anyone else experiences this wicked Athena!


Actually, I am experiencing the opposite with this new beta patch - the weakest Athena ever.

I'm playing on "Lieutenant" AI, give AI more time, plenty of detection and activation bonuses. Same settings I've been playing on for years.

But in my current game as the CSA, it's 1 September 1861 and already I have 7000 Union prisoners.

1. In Early May 1861, Athena sent one weak brigade (the Washington brigade) to attack J. Johnston's (still locked army) at Strasburg, VA. Result: the Washington brigade was annihilated. 123 CSA losses and 1201 Union losses, including 1000 Union prisoners.

2. In Late June 1861, Athena sent 700 Kansas Mounted Volunteers to attack three CSA cavalry regiments under Shelby at Springfield, MO. Result: the Kansas Mounted Volunteers were annihilated. 123 CSA losses and 830 Union losses, including 700 Union prisoners.

3. In Late August 1861, Athena sent 3900 Federals under General Hamilton to attack 9700 Confederates under General Longstreet at Fredericksburg. Longstreet was entrenched with no CP penalties. Result: the entire Union force was annihilated. 1045 CSA losses and 3936 Union losses, including 3400 Union prisoners.

I've never seen Athena make such blunders before, one after the other. It could be explained by poor detection, I suppose, but as I said above, I've given the AI a medium detection bonus. I guess it could also be explained by me playing better. But it's weird that Athena is throwing small forces at me piecemeal and getting them chewed up, and weirder that these forces are getting captured.

OK, it's great to finally be crushing Athena out of the box for a change :D , but still I find the feel of the game all wrong.

So I guess I would like to know:

1) Could the new retreat rules explain the fact that 3 of Athena's forces have already surrendered en masse? In each case above, the Union Athena had +70% MC in the area from which she attacked, and I don't see why her forces couldn't just have retreated back the way they came.

2) Was Athena somehow changed for this patch, in addition to the changes made to the retreat rules?

Regarding retreats, I'm starting to see why the beta testers of long ago argued for allowing retreat into regions with 100% enemy Military Control. These battles of total annihilation in one turn are not right for the Civil War. There were some instances of field battles in which thousands of prisoners were taken (mostly Confederates surrendering late in the war). But even then that it was rare that the entire force was annihilated. And the big CSA surrenders (until Appomatox) were after sieges. And encirclements were extremely rare (as was said).

So my early take on this beta: worse, not better.

User avatar
ohms_law
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 725
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Syracuse, NY

Sat Nov 08, 2014 11:23 am

Try turning down the detection bonus. That seems to really mess up Athena, from what I've seen people say.

Barca
Private
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2013 7:57 pm

Sat Nov 08, 2014 11:32 am

ohms_law wrote:Try turning down the detection bonus. That seems to really mess up Athena, from what I've seen people say.


Thanks! I will try that!

richfed
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:50 pm
Location: Marion, North Carolina, USA
Contact: Website

Sat Nov 08, 2014 9:17 pm

ohms_law wrote:Try turning down the detection bonus. That seems to really mess up Athena, from what I've seen people say.


I did try that in a new game ... things are progressing much differently this game. Changing it from medium to low bonus drastically affects Athena. As Barca noted, I have seen Athena send independent brigades, w/ a leader, on suicide missions.
[color="DarkRed"][SIZE="2"][font="Book Antiqua"]"We've caught them napping!"[/font][/size][/color]

richfed
Posts: 902
Joined: Tue Nov 21, 2006 9:50 pm
Location: Marion, North Carolina, USA
Contact: Website

Mon Nov 10, 2014 7:39 pm

I am pretty certain that something is out of whack. Well supplied, well led forces - albeit outnumbered - tend to get wiped out to a man. A healthy corps will have virtually all its division elements completely in the "red". Next turn, even though retreat is attempted, they are wiped out. Happens with individual divisions and entire corps. I thought it might be an anomaly, but after playing through September of 1863 in a second game with this patch, I have experienced similar behavior. Like I said up top, I never recall losing an entire corps before. Seems they do not disengage or retreat properly.

User avatar
ohms_law
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 725
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Syracuse, NY

Tue Nov 11, 2014 4:58 am

albeit outnumbered


And you're surprised about this? In the Civil War era (or any era, for that matter, but the ACW era is one of the worst about force strength considerations)? Why?

User avatar
Ace
Posts: 3498
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Croatia

Tue Nov 11, 2014 6:25 am

It's the new ZOC rules. If you engaged a massive enemy force with ZOC greatly bigger than your evasion value, you may need as much as 88% friendly MC to retreat. Perhaps, it is too big number, and an lower limit for blocking the retreat should be set to 5% friendly MC (a tweak in ZOC rules)

User avatar
pgr
General of the Army
Posts: 620
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:33 pm
Location: Paris France (by way of Wyoming)

Tue Nov 11, 2014 1:51 pm

Ace wrote:It's the new ZOC rules. If you engaged a massive enemy force with ZOC greatly bigger than your evasion value, you may need as much as 88% friendly MC to retreat. Perhaps, it is too big number, and an lower limit for blocking the retreat should be set to 5% friendly MC (a tweak in ZOC rules)


Lower limit? You are thinking 5% or more friendly would allow retreat, no matter what the ZOC situation?

User avatar
Ace
Posts: 3498
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Croatia

Tue Nov 11, 2014 4:42 pm

No, at present ZOC can block units moving if ratio evasion value/enemy patrol value is too low. There is MC 88% limit. If adjacent region MC value is above 88%, you can go there no matter how unfavorable evasion/enemy patrol ratio is. If that limit was set at lower number, we would not have so much fght to the death situation.

5% to allow retreat to was a temporary solution while ZOC checks were disabled in retreat.

As for the combat being more bloody now, before it was easy to disengage from combat.
Does the new combat model impose harsher checks for disengaging, the ones where you have to roll against enemy patrol value?
I don't know, maybe Pocus could shed some light, or I'll look up into battlelogs, new vs old version?
I am not sure if it did matter before how many cavalry you had to prevent the enemy from retreating. Maybe it does now...

User avatar
ohms_law
AGEod Veteran
Posts: 725
Joined: Sun Oct 19, 2008 5:42 pm
Location: Syracuse, NY

Tue Nov 11, 2014 4:45 pm

How do you know that the ZOC rules are affecting... well, anything, really?
I'm sure that they are, but how can you tell?

User avatar
Ace
Posts: 3498
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 4:33 pm
Location: Croatia

Tue Nov 11, 2014 4:47 pm

Pocus said in the change logs, he enabled zone of control checks in retreat. They were not enabled in 1.04.

User avatar
pgr
General of the Army
Posts: 620
Joined: Fri Jan 24, 2014 9:33 pm
Location: Paris France (by way of Wyoming)

Tue Nov 11, 2014 6:49 pm

Ace wrote:No, at present ZOC can block units moving if ratio evasion value/enemy patrol value is too low. There is MC 88% limit. If adjacent region MC value is above 88%, you can go there no matter how unfavorable evasion/enemy patrol ratio is. If that limit was set at lower number, we would not have so much fight to the death situation.


Ok I think I get it.... even if my evasion value is bad, I can still go to regions that I have at least 88% MC. I suppose if one played with the cap value, it would impact ZOC generally correct? (Making it simpler to infiltrate units across a front).

I am curious to know as well if the retreat roll is now being conditioned by the ZOC check...

Return to “Help improve CW2”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest