CORE 0.60.2 alpha testing starts

Tegetthoff

General

14 Badges

Apr 14, 2006

2.101

4

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jan 28, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #1

Devs and Betas who look here rather than on Terranova, please have a look over there since a very rough 0.60.2 is out, with a lot of changes and many opportunites to help and hunt bugs.

 

Hister

General

95 Badges

Jan 2, 2008

1.703

7

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jan 29, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #2

Already!!?? That's really a pleasant surprise. Thank you.

 

Tegetthoff

General

14 Badges

Apr 14, 2006

2.101

4

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jan 29, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #3

Well, don´t get too excited. It is a loadable alpha with tons of new brigades and destroyer flottillas instead of single ships that crashes Sept. 7, 36. This is a couple of months worth of single effort by Dec15200, now we have reached the stage where it can be distributed to get more people to work on it.

Remember that 0.50 reached version 36 before release!

 

adfs

Captain

11 Badges

Sep 20, 2009

489

57

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jan 29, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #4

What's the goal of CORE 0.60?
Use all the feature of AOD?

 

Tegetthoff

General

14 Badges

Apr 14, 2006

2.101

4

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jan 29, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #5

Yes,

Use all user-defined brigades
Use synthetic fuel plants etc.

 

Hister

General

95 Badges

Jan 2, 2008

1.703

7

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jan 30, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #6

Yeah I read you - 1 more year before it is released for the masses I suppose, right?

 

Tegetthoff

General

14 Badges

Apr 14, 2006

2.101

4

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jan 30, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #7

Well, not so long, I hope.

The goals are ambitious, but also clear-cut. We will remove single DDs and single SSs, modify the tech tree, betatest it all and release it.

This is a lot of work, but also very focussed.

T.

 

Hister

General

95 Badges

Jan 2, 2008

1.703

7

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Jan 31, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #8

Very impressive! Good luck and thank you.

 

Serenissima

Major

146 Badges

Aug 14, 2009

620

3

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Feb 2, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #9

In a sense, I quite like the single destroyers and submarines; but I can see why it shouldn't be done that way for gameplay reasons.

 

Tegetthoff

General

14 Badges

Apr 14, 2006

2.101

4

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Feb 2, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #10

I like them, too. The main killer argument was watching the naval Ai being unable to handle those singls ships.

 

Mattias

Occasional gamer

30 Badges

Jul 27, 2001

411

39

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Feb 5, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #11

I'm very glad you skipped the single destroyers and subs becaused it seemed to slow down the game to a unplayable crawl on my old computer. Now i hopefully can try your mod again! /Mattias

 

Serenissima

Major

146 Badges

Aug 14, 2009

620

3

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Feb 5, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #12

I'm just too much of a naval history geek... I liked knowing the exact names of what destroyers I sank; and which destroyers of mine were the most heroic.

 

unmerged(63886)

@ my Swedish HQ

Dec 26, 2006

2.622

1

• Feb 11, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #13

No plans on switching patching policys to have open alphas as well? Sure most of people would just take it and never be heard again but giving the small yet dedicated following, I'm sure some feedback would help out. Dont have any hope but it would be nice so just thought I ask.

 

Tegetthoff

General

14 Badges

Apr 14, 2006

2.101

4

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Feb 19, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #14

Well, we shifted our development policy to open betas for 0.50, no way we can go for open alphas.

The public will certainly see a Beta version before official release.

 

Hister

General

95 Badges

Jan 2, 2008

1.703

7

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Feb 19, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #15

It's really the only proper way to handle this matter.

 

Fürstbischof

General

17 Badges

Jan 25, 2009

1.748

88

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Feb 29, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #16

CORE 0.50 Release - typos in core_Republican_Spain.txt

While making some minor changes to the E3 files I also cross-checked how the beginning of the SCW is handled in CORE I've stumbled across these two oversights. It seems to be worthwhile to fix them during the alpha testing of your new version if you haven't spotted them before.

event 690011:

command = { type = add_corps which = "Milicias CNT/FAI" value = land when = 0 where = 356 } # Tarragona
command = { type = activate_division which = 12060 value = 1050 where = 359 when = 0 }

Click to expand...

359 is Toulouse...


event 690010:

command = { type = research_sabotaged }

Click to expand...

This event doesn't have enough of these lines to entirely erase all research process of SPR.

 

Tegetthoff

General

14 Badges

Apr 14, 2006

2.101

4

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Feb 29, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #17

Thanks for pointing this out!

I added another three lines of research_sabotaged.... How many do you think are needed?

T.

 

Last edited: Mar 2, 2012

Fürstbischof

General

17 Badges

Jan 25, 2009

1.748

88

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Mar 1, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #18

Tegetthoff said:

I added another three lines of research_sabotaged.... How many do you think are needed?

Click to expand...

3 should have worked in my case iirc, but to be absolutely sure another 3 might be better.

 

Last edited by a moderator: Mar 2, 2012

Fürstbischof

General

17 Badges

Jan 25, 2009

1.748

88

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Apr 29, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #19

CORE 0.50 Release

two examples from core_Nationalist_Spain.txt:

command = { type = add_corps which = "1a División Orgánica" value = land when = 0 where = 339 } # Valladolid
command = { type = activate_division which = 12067 value = 1001 where = 339 when = 0 }

Click to expand...

command = { type = add_corps which = "Legión Cóndor" value = air when = 470 where = 334 }
command = { type = add_division which = "Bombarderos Legión Cóndor" value = tactical_bomber when = 2 }

Click to expand...

Heavy fighting in Spain starts immediately once the SCW has been initiated. Units which are activated by event will have to survive for at least 7 days without having a leader if the 'when = 1234' argument of their add_corps command hasn't been used. Almost none of your newly added nationalist corps gets a leader assigned. You should reconsider using it for all activated units of SPA if you think it's necessary to shift the balance a little bit in favour of the nationalists.

 

Tegetthoff

General

14 Badges

Apr 14, 2006

2.101

4

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

• Apr 29, 2012

• Add bookmark
• #20

Interesting that you point this out today, I just stumbled across a similar issue with the Japanese garrisons in Indochina today.

I am unsure what happens if you assign a leader that is already assigned to another division. He is probably just moved over ...