Download CORE 0.70.2

[Tegetthoff]

NOTICE TO PLAYERS: THIS IS AN EARLY DEVELOPMENT VERSION OF 0.70. USE ONLY IF YOU FEEL LIKE HELPING IN THE TESTING.

Download link:
http://www.gamefront.com/files/24822753/CORE2_0_7_0_2.exe

Checksum:
ZYJK

New Graphics Pack link as of Feb. 2, 2015:
http://www.gamefront.com/files/24775038/CORE_B&W_Graphics_070.exe

Changelog:

Armd´s map rework:

Realigned Province boundaries for Reims (64), Valenciennes (53) and Metz (72) in order to create new Provinces Sedan (224) and Verdun (223). Name of Valenciennes changed to Laon. Had to realign the Meuse and Moselle Rivers to align with amended Province boundaries. Note. All Rivers exist only along the borders of Provinces. Also cleaned up some of the River naming in this area.

Renamed an Area to Champagne_Ardennes (from Indiana) which now includes Reims (64), Sedan (224) and Verdun (223). Significant Area realignment and renaming was also performed by dec152000.
Realigned the Province boundaries of Seville (347), Málaga (349) and Gibraltar (348). Now, Málaga no longer appears to be adjacent to Gibraltar.

Split Province Yucheng (1213) in two. Western half still Yucheng, eastern half now Wuting (291).
Split Province Wadi Halfa (1028) in two. Western half still Wadi Halfa, eastern half now Dungunab (1810). They now also reside in separate Areas.
Removed Province Ngulu (1620) from the map and from whatever other text files (scenario, event, AI, etc) that the province was mentioned in.

Fixed on-map spelling of Provinces from Trebizond to Trabzon (450), from Constatine to Constantine (943), from Kassarine to Kasserine (937) and from Zaqazig to ZagaZig (902). If necessary, names were changed in the Province_Name file as well.
Changed an Italian River from Tiber to Garigliano.

Adjusted some of the Province symbol locations for the following Provinces: (Note: Province symbols are grouped in sets which don't seem to be amenable to further adjustments, e.g., Capital and both Forts share an XPos and YPos, so a Land Fort and a Coastal fort have a pre-defined relationship that limits custom placement).

Freiburg (315)		Cap/Forts	AA/Radar
Stuttgart (314)		Cap/Forts	Airfld/Rocket
Saarbrücken (74)	Cap/Forts	AA/Radar
Münster (81)		Cap/Forts	Airfld/Rocket	AA/Radar
Mulhouse (316)		Cap/Forts	Airfld/Rocket	AA/Radar
Metz (72)			Cap/Forts	Airfld/Rocket	AA/Radar
Antwerp (50)		Cap/Forts	Airfld/Rocket	AA/Radar
Warsaw (485)		Cap/Forts

Dec´s rework over Armd´s:

Adaptations of province file for Armd´s new provinces
Further adaptations of ai and event files for new provinces

Several comments from the forum (e.g. new Belgium scenarion text, Swiss minister changes)

Timing of German Partial Mobilisation shifted to end of CZE
MR Pact no longer causes German FM

Teg´s small changes:

CHI: shifting the industries costs less money
CHI: shifted social policy from conformism to ethnic
(dissent reduction of conformism is the opposite of the turmoil CHI experienced, IC bonus may be part of the overbuilding we see,
org regain and money production bonus of ethnic may help CHI where it needs it)
CHI: reduced the cost of Burma road and Haiphong RR supplies (there were loans and other aid to compensate)

GER: PM shifted to Sudeten Crisis (already discussed with Dec)

2015-02-22
**********************************
-> CORE 0.70.2 for AoD
********************************** 


State of Hagar´s 0.70 gfx:
* 79 new event pics
* 10 new model pics
* 60 new province pics (only for gfx pack)
* 5 new tech team pics 
* 2 new colour pics

 

[Zsar1]

Mmh. I noted the absence of the dynamic trade value system. Did we not want to expose it to more widespread testing?

BEL/HOL: Maybe add NAPs between GER and BEL/HOL expiring in September 1939?

That does not seem to be viable. Both an earlier attack date and a different attack focus should be preserved as options for a GER player.

Instead, POL should probably join the alliance of FRA (so usually the Allies) once GER is at war with FRA, if the political developments support it (that is, after accepting the "The UK offers a Guarantee" event 3600).
If memory serves, a joint french/polish attack plan did exist (and was the basis for France's aborted "Opération Sarre").

This would already neutralise much of the exploit without unduly restricting strategy.

... That whole part of the event chain could probably use a rework, considering that it is largely in a similar state as it was in vanilla HoI2.

 

[ArmdChair]

First Iteration: As USA. Current date 7 Jun 1942.

GER did not fully absorb CZE (not abnormal).

Apparently, ENG never DoW'd GER over POL. So, it is June of 1942 and the only "war" is between JAP and CHI (which JAP is winning handily, as usual). Is there any way to keep JAP from advancing beyond the RR provinces (which we can discover)? The JAP were pathetic at taking supply seriously, and in reality it showed. Plus, JAP shouldn't really be able to sweep across the northern desert provinces. Their supply trains, for what they were, would have collapsed from maintenance issues. And, a Player should not be able to "fix" that either. Too deeply ingrained into the military culture.

The 1940 USA election saw James Farley (!) get elected. An "interventionist" when the Isolationist slider was still fully on the right. Hmm. Besides, James Farley???? Perhaps you are overdoing the USA alternate paths? Unless a Player really tried, I doubt the USA would have elected anyone besides FDR. For the AI, rarely should the path change.

Teg, I think you need to update the text for the icon. It still says 0.62 I think.

Other than that, everything seems to be working fine. Kind of hard to tell when peace reigns supreme across the landscape.

 

[Tegetthoff]

Installer: found three more instances of 0.6.2 and changed them, hopefully this solves the icon problem.

 

[Zsumi]

Anything in particular that needs to be tested?

And thanks for the new version.

Edit: is the correct checksum YZJK or ZYJK? Asking as its 2 letters swapping place if more different id do a full reinstall.

 

[dec152000]

Hi,

Dynamic Trade: I was under the impression that you were looking at making at least one more revision. In any case, I expected you to submit the material to Teg. So it should be planned for the next build. I'm also still working on the initial Stockpiles. What would be helpful is a simple summary of where the Triggers shift the trading values over.

POL: I'm not sure why it is coded as is. But if GER doesn't take the rest of CZE than ENG does not Guarantee POL. This could indeed result in ENG not supporting POL. But this seems an odd line of events. Armd, what exactly went on WRT CZE in your game.

mm

 

[dec152000]

Hi,

JAP: There really isn't any way to prevent JAP from attacking along ahistorical lines. We could try and tweak the AI not to do certain things, such as the sweep across the north. But the fidelity of the supply system really doesn't enable what you want. What will help the issue in most games (AI JAP/AI CHI) is getting a solid JAP advance to the point of firing the Backoff AI for JAP. Then we need to make the JAP production focus on the future Pacific war. I haven't confirmed how this is currently working. But my testing always shows JAP having to commit way too many units to fight CHI. This may seem good initially, but JAP keeps building/upgrading/reinforcing and eventually gains superiority. Less total forces early on for both sides is IMO more like the rW and more likely to help CHI.

Farley: This happens when a general war doesn't break out and USA is not at RI for the Election. The idea here is that FDR got his third and fourth terms d2 the international situation rather than the domestic situation. So remove the looming war and you are left with "normal" US politics. This info supports that design:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1940

mm

 

[dec152000]

Zsumi,

Actually a historical FIN game would be nice as I've made changes there. Or SOV attacking FIN would be good as well.

mm

 

[Zsar1]

Ah, I see. Simple misunderstanding then. I fixed the oil trigger and uploaded that as RC3.

@Tegetthoff, could you grab it from the thread?

Further work will iteratively see the removal of top tiers as country-specific events are deployed; as that is neither a mandatory development nor part of the original design, I want to deploy the current version as a "v1.0", if you so will.

 

[Zsumi]

Did i miss info on the changes to the naval building? I am seeing the ships in the build queues. Are the work in progress ships no longer hadled by events?

3 South korean provinces have different names compared whit "map" and "map tooltip" seoul, daegu, Busan.

Will change to FIN and test it out.

 

[ArmdChair]

dec, Here is what I could see regarding CZE & GER.

8Sep38 CZE "Let Them" in our hand is lost in Henlein demands in the Sudetenland.

13Sep38 GER AI:GER Interventionism

Sep38 CZE Partition I-IV.

5Nov38 GER AI:GER CV 2

3Mar39 GER:AI Naval Attack 1

thru attack on POL.

Regarding my USA election, I would have expected to elect a Republican since my Isolationist slider was all the way to the right. And, likely NOT Willkie, but one of his primary opponents.

I will run another iteration now. First time after loading seems to have more low percentage occurrences for some reason.

More thoughts on JAP in CHI. The government fell quite often which could insert some dissent, if that would help. Also, it ought to be more than usually difficult for the JAP to gain Land Doctrine techs. Their military culture wasn't built THAT way either. This is reflected in the RW manner in which JAP units tended to be deployed. Notice they never had a corps structure, and there were as many independent brigades/regiments as they could get away with.

 

[Zsar1]

Made all inherit actions multiplayer-save according to this thread.
Should have caught all of them.

View attachment CORE2_0.70.2_fixedMultiplayerInheritActions.zip

 

[Kennelly]

So, it seems CZE took the 1%chance in 280035/10%chance in 280036 accepting Karlsbald Demands, thus triggering 280037 with "Let them, our hand is lost".

So no need for Munich and appeasements doesn't get discredited like it did OTL. So I guess it's conceivable the West wouldn't have intervened over Poland. But shouldn't GER have attacked SOV by now?And JAP the western powers since an aggressive Japan should still lead to the oil embargo etc.?

 

[Zsar1]

Did i miss info on the changes to the naval building? I am seeing the ships in the build queues. Are the work in progress ships no longer hadled by events?

Why, yes, apparently the naval construction events have been gutted.
... Huh, I really liked those. What was wrong with them? No mention on that change and sure enough it is not in the changelog.

--

Event 26033 is incomplete:
- should check for AI control
- should check for existence of 1a Armata
Currently it destroys the existing HQ without spawning another one (as that is removed as an "AI Tweak" in the corresponding event), if ITA is human.

 

[ArmdChair]

2nd iteration as USA to 8Oct40.

ENG does not DoW GER over POL (again). This time, there was a more normal dismemberment of CZE, though. The ENG AI just does not seem to be reaching the threshold to DoW.

JAP advancing deep into CHI (again). Whatever was done here seems to be having the opposite effect.

No USA (Naval) Tech Team images for Leahy and Lockwood.

 

[Kennelly]

Also loaded up as USA. Air leader Foulois is still in, just as #Foulois

CZE turned Paternal Autocrat by its 1936 election event 1000005, which is just wrong considering their stable democracy. Since there was no election at all 1935-1946, I suggest to simply scrap the event.

And the Belgium scenario description is still vanilla.

 

[ArmdChair]

LOL. I noticed that too. I guess the "#" does not comment a line out of the leader file like it does elsewhere. Later, I will just remove it after I tie down another group of USA leaders.

 

[Hagar]

No USA (Naval) Tech Team images for Leahy and Lockwood.

Apparently someone has been meddling with the tech team setup without informing the graphics department... Once again... Consider them added, along with Arleigh Burke. Other tech teams are under review, as these aren't the only ones that are missing out.

On a related note, the Netherlands got a new 'Fabriek van Signaalapparaten' tech team, it seems. The official name was 'NV Hazemeyer's fabriek van Signaalapparaten', or either 'Hazemeyer Signaalapparatenfabriek' or 'Hazemeyer Signaal' for short.

 

[dec152000]

Hi,

Naval Construction: These events were always somewhat problematic as they locked the RW naval build in place when the game could go off schedule. this was originally accepted as the build que method did not work right. At some point this got fixed in the hard code. By shifting these to the que we allow additional units to be built with gearing bonus. This sssems like a nice option and the AI does make use of it. Also, the production que units get proper credit for any new techs researched. Or changes in Sliders. All in all I think it is a substantial improvement. The one downside is that it lets a player scrap the entire plan. IMO this is generally a poor idea as a lot of these ships are pretty far along and can be useful. Maybe a no brainer for FRA. But otherwise it's a pretty good idea to keep them.

there are still a few event driven units. Most are associated with SPR/SPA. Also some minors get them via events.

mm

mm

 

[dec152000]

Hi,

USA Elections: These triggers aren't based on Sliders at all. While it would be a viable idea, every additional variable added generates a lot more complexity in the triggers and event structure. So right now it boils down to a look at who is in office, mobilization level, Dissent and progress on Recovery. This is a lot of variable to look at already and I think it gives a somewhat reasonable picture.

The issue may be your interpretation of the event naming. In this case, the Democrats get to keep the Presidency as they met the Recovery and Dissent trigger conditions. But since there is no war they switch leaders and the event is labeled Interventionist since Farley would likely continue FDR style policies for the most part. If they had performed more poorly they would have been replaced with Taft who is labeled Isolationist. This is definitely the sort of foreign policy he would have supported and it also reflects the Slider moves in the event. Do you have any better wording choices to reflect how these should be named?

mm