Dictator - Rolling Into Action!

[curtsibling]

A NEW UPDATED ZIP IS NOW READY!

Anyone playing, please DL the new files and let me know what you think!

[kobayashi]

Is the entire thing the two sound zips and the file dictator-v3?

[AGRICOLA]

@kobayashi
That's all that I could find. The major changes appear to be in RULES, EVENTS and PEDIA.

@curt

As I am playing the scen with mainly vanilla city improvement names and entirely vanilla improvement and wonder descriptions I can't comment on changes in any of these except that the new EVENTS and PEDIA still need both grammar and spell checks.

The new unit designations are great, I didn't know about the A.12 and A.34 numbers for the Matilda and the Comet. For consistency, you may want to change Sturmovik to Il-2 Sturmovik, Yak to Yak-9 and Me-262 to Me-262 Schwalbe (IIRC Schwalbe = Swallow).


My game is in October 1942. 90% of North America is in German hands. Excepting a couple of Turkish cities, the Mediterranean is a German lake. There are only 3 or 4 techs that need to be researched at a research rate of 0.9 techs per turn. The treasury has 3500+ gold. The sun is shining. Life is good. Would you believe that Stalin actually "trusts" that great man of his word, our beloved Fuehrer?

Originally posted by curtsibling

Originally posted by AGRICOLA 3. Descriptions of wonders are vague at best. I find it a major stretch of the imagination to deduce that the Palembang Refinery, described as “Located in the Dutch East Indies. Important industrial facility. Prime target for the Japanese”, is actually the Hoover Dam. It has been my impression that refineries produce lots of petroleum products but not a heck of a lot of electricity.

The oil is next to the city -
The wonder is just there as a flavour target for the player...

The flavour seems to resemble good German beer more than Japanese saki. An invasion convoy is now east of Aden and should arrive at Palembang in 4 months. Getting the Hoover will save the German economy 250+ gold each month.


OK, now about combat balance. 95% of the fighting has been done by Super Battleships and aircraft, mainly Me-264's. The only ground units used have been Waffen SS. All units have been vets. Casualties have been negligible despite Coastal Fortresses, the odd AA, and Flak Defences. It seems a bit too easy, although it takes a lot of patience and much time to build enough of the really good units before using them.

I am wondering if attack numbers should not be decreased for some units. The basic fact is that no matter which country is played by a human, it will have to go on the offensive after withstanding the initial barrage of AI attacks and that it will spend the rest of the game on the offensive. Consequently, the difficulty of the game will be determined by the attack strength of the best units available to any of the playable countries. It seems to me that if the attack strengths of heavy bombers and super battleships were reduced, it would better balance combat.

You have commented that heavy bombers are not invicible. I agree, but I think it would take a fortified, vet AA battery in a city with Flak Defences to shoot down a vet B-17 or Me-264. So far, I haven't encountered any cities like that.

The first two British Lancasters (almost certainly non-vet) that I have seen just attacked Damascus which was defended by an unfortified vet AA. One Lanc was shot down and the other damaged before the AA was eliminated. Had they been vet units, I doubt that one would have been shot down. With A = 20 they are very powerful units.

Anyway, it is your call.


There are a number of units that are not worthwhile building, either because they are too expensive for what they can do or because they are too slow to keep up with offensives spearheaded by aircraft.

All types of Artillery and the V 2 still seem greatly overpriced for one-shot units. The AI has used a couple Artillery against German cities to no gain. I would suggest unit costs of 5,10, and 15 for the 3 Artillery units and 20 for the V 2. I still would not build any of them, but maybe the AI would.

I experienced some difficulty during the North American campaign because Mv=1 AA batteries could not keep up with the speed of the advance. From this, I am thinking that building Mv=1 Tiger I or II tanks may be a waste of resources. Why are the German heavy tanks Mv=1 while the Pershing and JS-2 are Mv=2? Were the Tigers really that slow?

I mentioned that tech research is almost finished. This is because the V 2 and Elektro Boat cannot do anything that can't be done by existing units and, consequenly, will not be researched.


The only other thing that I have found that might be questioned is that Oslo, Stockholm,Washington are port cities that cannot build ships. What is worse is that Stochholm cannot even build a Coastal Fortress despite having Leningrad and the Soviet fleet just across the Baltic. Meanwhile, "technological and industrial powerhouses" like Oran and Tunis in the Mediterranean apparently have the huge shipyards and the expertise for building super battleships.


The best news is that I have found no more bugs of any kind. The scen is playing as it should. Congrats. Have a cold Canadian brew.

Edit1: Typo
Edit2: Thou shalt put thy brain into gear before posting.

[AGRICOLA]

The Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again!

After writing the previous post, I returned to playing the scen, using the new files, and found to my great amazement that despite my contiuous micromanaging, there was suddenly a lot of excess food production in most cities.

Cities that had been building Harbours no longer needed them. Instead of a maximum of 115 Einsteins producing 2127 flasks per month, it was now possible to have 224 who produce 2479. This boosted the tech rate to over one tech per turn.

Fortunately the sub-folder that contains all month-end saves also has all the old Dictator files needed to open the saves. Converting the old and new RULES to MS WORD files and using the compare function made it quick and easy to see the changes that you have made.


The miraculous increase in food production originates from changing the # of foods/citizen/turn from 2 to 1. This change completely overshadows the effect of reducing the food production of plains and grassland squares by 1.

The scenario becomes considerably easier because it is now possible to have more specialists, thus speeding up research or increasing cash flow. In my game, a few turns from now when research is shut down, 224 Einsteins are converted to an equal number of bean counters and the tax rate is increased from 20% to 80%, the monthly tax revenues will increase by 1800+ gold. That will be more than enough to make the German economy very healthy and allow considerable RB.

You may want to take a very hard look at the change.


Increasing of the number of rows in the food box from 10 to 20 will not have much effect on the scen. The need for research and/or money is so great that any excess food is immediately converted into specialists. Growth is very much a secondary concern. I would venture that this is a pretty neutral change as I do not consider Dictator to be a "growth" scen.

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by AGRICOLA As I am playing the scen with mainly vanilla city improvement names and entirely vanilla improvement and wonder descriptions I can't comment on changes in any of these except that the new EVENTS and PEDIA still need both grammar and spell checks.

I have added most of the vanilla content into the pedia file to make it clear what each improvement does.

Checking the spelling and grammer today...
Knew I had forgot something!

Originally posted by AGRICOLA The new unit designations are great, I didn't know about the A.12 and A.34 numbers for the Matilda and the Comet. For consistency, you may want to change Sturmovik to Il-2 Sturmovik, Yak to Yak-9 and Me-262 to Me-262 Schwalbe (IIRC Schwalbe = Swallow).

As far as I have found out, A.12 and A.34 are the class designations for those Brit tanks.

Fairline may be the man to ask about this.

I will implement the other unit names too.

Originally posted by AGRICOLA My game is in October 1942. 90% of North America is in German hands. Excepting a couple of Turkish cities, the Mediterranean is a German lake. There are only 3 or 4 techs that need to be researched at a research rate of 0.9 techs per turn. The treasury has 3500+ gold.

The Reich never had it so good!

Originally posted by AGRICOLA The sun is shining. Life is good. Would you believe that Stalin actually "trusts" that great man of his word, our beloved Fuehrer?

I am sure you will put him wise soon!

Originally posted by AGRICOLA The flavour seems to resemble good German beer more than Japanese saki. An invasion convoy is now east of Aden and should arrive at Palembang in 4 months. Getting the Hoover will save the German economy 250+ gold each month.

Good luck!

Originally posted by AGRICOLA OK, now about combat balance. 95% of the fighting has been done by Super Battleships and aircraft, mainly Me-264's. The only ground units used have been Waffen SS. All units have been vets. Casualties have been negligible despite Coastal Fortresses, the odd AA, and Flak Defences. It seems a bit too easy, although it takes a lot of patience and much time to build enough of the really good units before using them.

Builidng a super-elite navy, army and airforce tends to make war easy.

Take the USA's modern force for instance...

You have built the WW2 Germanic version.

Originally posted by AGRICOLA I am wondering if attack numbers should not be decreased for some units. The basic fact is that no matter which country is played by a human, it will have to go on the offensive after withstanding the initial barrage of AI attacks and that it will spend the rest of the game on the offensive. Consequently, the difficulty of the game will be determined by the attack strength of the best units available to any of the playable countries. It seems to me that if the attack strengths of heavy bombers and super battleships were reduced, it would better balance combat.

Perhaps reduce all the heavy bomber attacks by 4-5 points?

I am open to suggestions...

Originally posted by AGRICOLA You have commented that heavy bombers are not invicible. I agree, but I think it would take a fortified, vet AA battery in a city with Flak Defences to shoot down a vet B-17 or Me-264. So far, I haven't encountered any cities like that.

Cheaper AA costs?

Originally posted by AGRICOLA The first two British Lancasters (almost certainly non-vet) that I have seen just attacked Damascus which was defended by an unfortified vet AA. One Lanc was shot down and the other damaged before the AA was eliminated. Had they been vet units, I doubt that one would have been shot down. With A = 20 they are very powerful units.

Anyway, it is your call.

Seems not too bad a ratio for a bomber attack on AA defences.
But I could reduce the attack for all heavy bombers as suggested.

I would consider your opinion to be important here.

Originally posted by AGRICOLA There are a number of units that are not worthwhile building, either because they are too expensive for what they can do or because they are too slow to keep up with offensives spearheaded by aircraft.

All types of Artillery and the V 2 still seem greatly overpriced for one-shot units. The AI has used a couple Artillery against German cities to no gain. I would suggest unit costs of 5,10, and 15 for the 3 Artillery units and 20 for the V 2. I still would not build any of them, but maybe the AI would.

I will look to the rules and make some tweaks.

Perhaps I might give the V2 some extra boom too.

Originally posted by AGRICOLA I experienced some difficulty during the North American campaign because Mv=1 AA batteries could not keep up with the speed of the advance. From this, I am thinking that building Mv=1 Tiger I or II tanks may be a waste of resources. Why are the German heavy tanks Mv=1 while the Pershing and JS-2 are Mv=2? Were the Tigers really that slow?

The tiger family was infamous for it's slow movement, and crap engine.

That and the 52 tons of tank made for a trundling pillbox with tracks.

The are tough buggers, but very slow.

For speed, use the Panthers and PzKw IV.

Originally posted by AGRICOLA I mentioned that tech research is almost finished. This is because the V 2 and Elektro Boat cannot do anything that can't be done by existing units and, consequenly, will not be researched.

One of the things I wanted in Dictator is the choice of war strategies.
There is no obligation to build certain techs/units.

Originally posted by AGRICOLA The only other thing that I have found that might be questioned is that Oslo, Stockholm,Washington are port cities that cannot build ships. What is worse is that Stochholm cannot even build a Coastal Fortress despite having Leningrad and the Soviet fleet just across the Baltic. Meanwhile, "technological and industrial powerhouses" like Oran and Tunis in the Mediterranean apparently have the huge shipyards and the expertise for building super battleships.

Aha!
Time to look into civ-city again!

Originally posted by AGRICOLA The best news is that I have found no more bugs of any kind. The scen is playing as it should. Congrats. Have a cold Canadian brew.

Cheers!


I will make the changes today, post haste!

If you have suggestions for the super units, I am all ears.

[curtsibling]

Re: The Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again!

Originally posted by AGRICOLA
After writing the previous post, I returned to playing the scen, using the new files, and found to my great amazement that despite my contiuous micromanaging, there was suddenly a lot of excess food production in most cities.

Cities that had been building Harbours no longer needed them. Instead of a maximum of 115 Einsteins producing 2127 flasks per month, it was now possible to have 224 who produce 2479. This boosted the tech rate to over one tech per turn.

Fortunately the sub-folder that contains all month-end saves also has all the old Dictator files needed to open the saves. Converting the old and new RULES to MS WORD files and using the compare function made it quick and easy to see the changes that you have made.


The miraculous increase in food production originates from changing the # of foods/citizen/turn from 2 to 1. This change completely overshadows the effect of reducing the food production of plains and grassland squares by 1.

The scenario becomes considerably easier because it is now possible to have more specialists, thus speeding up research or increasing cash flow. In my game, a few turns from now when research is shut down, 224 Einsteins are converted to an equal number of bean counters and the tax rate is increased from 20% to 80%, the monthly tax revenues will increase by 1800+ gold. That will be more than enough to make the German economy very healthy and allow considerable RB.

You may want to take a very hard look at the change.


Increasing of the number of rows in the food box from 10 to 20 will not have much effect on the scen. The need for research and/or money is so great that any excess food is immediately converted into specialists. Growth is very much a secondary concern. I would venture that this is a pretty neutral change as I do not consider Dictator to be a "growth" scen.

Just a little experiment by me, to see if I could prevent the wipeout of cities with growth.

I too see the problems now with this change.

The next zip will have the old values restored...

[jim panse]

@ Curt: Is Mandalay still not British? I think I told you before that Britain controlled the Burma Road until the Japs took it in 1942 ....

[curtsibling]

*adds to quick fix list*

[AGRICOLA]

I am continuing the game with the old values of 2 foods per citizen, plains producing 2 foods, grasslands producing 3 foods and 10 rows in food box.

I'm also going to try some new A/D numbers (present numbers in brackets) for the following units:

Bomber 11/1 (12/1)
B-17 14/3 (16/3)
Lancaster 17/2 (20/3)
Me-264 15/2 (18/2)

Cruiser 7/7 (7/8)
Battleship 10/10 (11/12)
Super Battleship 13/13 (14/14)

The numbers for Bombers and Battleships have been reduced slightly in order to create a bit more separation with the better units so that players have a reason to upgrade. Reducing by 3 the A's for all three heavy bombers may be as far as one can go and still have values that reflect the relative attack strengths of all bombers.

The Lancaster's D has been reduced because, AFAIK, it had neither the defensive firepower of the B-17 nor its rugged construction. Also, in this scen, it will have to be used mainly for daylight attacks rather than only night operations that require a great deal of preparation and infrastructure to have any hope of hitting the target.

There isn't much room to decrease the A/D numbers of Super Battleships unless both Battleships and Cruisers are downgraded slightly.

@curtsibling
Please check your PM.

[Heresson]

I like the title image

[curtsibling]

@AGRICOLA:
Nice work! - Looking over the new settings, they seem more rounded in the light of in-game 'combat experience.'

I will add these values right now.

PM has been checked and answered!

@Heresson:
I will be also including the new title.

[fairline]

Originally posted by Heresson
I like the title image

Curt is the master title creator, with Sarsstock close on his heels.

To see just how good an artist Curt is, check out his 'Bad Trip' comic book art website. It's the dog's danglers

[Heresson]

I'll ask Him to do my titles then.

[fairline]

A tank geek speaks...

Originally posted by curtsibling
As far as I have found out, A.12 and A.34 are the class designations for those Brit tanks.

The British had a confusing array of designations for their tanks. First off, all tanks had an 'Axx' designation; the Matilda II was an A12 and the Comet was an A34 as Curt has it.

Confusingly, tanks were also classed as 'infantry tanks' (close support tanks with heavy armour and slow speed like the Matilda and Churchill, which equipped the Army Tank Brigades), 'cruiser tanks' ( fast with poorer armour to equip the armoured divisions, examples being the Cruiser Mks I - IV, Crusader and Cromwell) and 'light tanks' which were poorly-armed recce vehicles.

As a result, the Matilda II was also termed 'Infantry tank Mk II' as well as 'A12'. The Cromwell was also known as 'Cruiser tank, Mk VIII' or A27M. The Comet was termed 'Cruiser tank, Comet' as well as A34.

Confused?

[curtsibling]

Originally posted by fairline
Curt is the master title creator, with Sarsstock close on his heels.
To see just how good an artist Curt is, check out his 'Bad Trip' comic book art website. It's the dog's danglers

Cheers, fairline! - Yer too kind!

Sarsstock too is very well-versed in the ancient craft of Photo-Shopism!
Many are the awesome screens he has made for a whole generation of scens!