Revised: 2194 Days of War

Captain Nemo · April 4, 2000, 08:36

I have revised 2194 Days of War with some upgraded graphics, new tech trees, a few changes to the rules and event files and a .bat loading program... Mostly I have made it more difficult by changing unit stats depending on whether it's played from the Axis or Allied side... Maybe it will be more challenging than the last version?
Anyone wishing to play it and give me feedback is welcome to.

You can get it at:

http://ourworld.cs.com/Captainnem0/
(This is not a website just a "place" to store files... You should find three zipfiles for 2194 Days of War).

klesh · April 4, 2000, 11:15

I'm on it Nemo!!!
1 Question though...Have you changed the future tech thing from the last version? I'm not sure if you remember, but when I first started conversing with you here, I mentiond that 2194 crashes upon completion of the last tech(for me as the Axis, it was radar). Many many hours down the tubes!!!
I've since figured that I just need to either sell science improvements, or put science rate at 0 to thwart those evil scientists.
I'll dl this when I get home...can't wait.

------------------
I am the Ukrainian Anti-Pope!

Mao · April 4, 2000, 15:41

Damn...well, I liked Xin's little 4-turn victory anyway...

DLing now!

Captain Nemo · April 5, 2000, 00:32

Yes, that's fixed...
But I can't guarantee that the game won't crash for some other reason since I haven't played it to the end.
I didn't finish my two first games (British and Germans) because I found errors half way through that needed to be corrected and required a restart, but those are now implemented... The most annoying thing about the game IMHO is that your Allied AI is just too dumb. The American AI doesn't seem to have a clue that he is supposed to invade Europe. He mostly patrols Canada and prevents my troops from getting from their cities to their port of embarcation, just useless!

Xin Yu · April 5, 2000, 00:39

Nemo, Nemo, did you know that there were other people who needed me? Now I'm hooked to your scenarios! No 4-turn victory in 2194 anymore, uh? I just got to start all over again

April 13, 2000, 17:03

Well after dl 2194 i didnt play it for some time, i did recently and found that when i captured Stalingrad the Soviets recieved Advanced Flight __ I remeber this from the last version which gave them I believe Yaks. But in this version it gave them Ki67 Medium Bombers. I payed little attention and dug my self in waitin for the T-34s(sending most my units to the middle east and Africa). When they discovered T-34s. I only saw one which attacked Minsk normally i saw 5-10 attacking along the enitre front

then the answer came when 4 Ki67 bombers attacked Stalingrad. Anyone else get this? And I hope this is the only error in the Tech Tree/Events.

Scott F · April 13, 2000, 17:13

Nemo, there is a glitch in the 2194 Days events. The tech numbers from the old events are still them same, even though you altered the tech tree.

KaR has an excellent example. The same happens with certain techs. The message about Tiger II tanks is set to appear for an advanced flight tech, etc.

For some reason, the Russians do not produce many T-34 tanks. A check of the production choices in computer controlled Russian cities revealed that T-34s were not even listed, though the proper tech had been acquired. I think that this has something to do with the Stalin tank being placed in the unit slot for Knights.

Other than that, I have found it to be very fun and playable.

Captain Nemo · April 13, 2000, 20:34

Excellent observation... I totally forgot to change the events to match the new technologies. Thanks for noticing. It must not affect play too badly since I played twice until 1943 without noticing... It could be a problem when certain techs are given by conquest. A Civ could get the wrong technology.
Yes both knights and musketeers have ill effects on the availability of other units... The fix is simple change the role of the T-34s to 3. In my last game only the Red Guards were affected.

klesh · April 15, 2000, 10:39

Nemo, could you explain further about changing the T34's role to 3. I'm assuming you mean in the rules, but I don't know exactly where. I don't want to mess up other stuff, so could someone explain this a little more?

Thanks

------------------
I am the Ukrainian Anti-Pope!
[This message has been edited by Field Marshal Klesh (edited April 15, 2000).]

Panda · April 15, 2000, 10:52

He means changing the role to air superiority. In the Rules.txt in the @UNITS section you'll see all the unit values, which are explained in the Rules.txt itself. The "role" of a unit is the last value before the flags, which for the T-34 will be changed from 0 to 3.

klesh · April 16, 2000, 10:50

Thanks Andrew, I'll see if it works; but why would a T34 need air superiority?

Anyway, I tried something really fun yesterday. I hooked this game up as a "hotseat" game. I just played by myself, but I controlled both Japan and Germany. It was quite interesting to have completely seperate armies but be able to semi-coordinate their efforts. I had more sucess with Japan. They captured all of the South Pacific, destroyed the Chinese civilization, struck deep into the Soviet Union along the Trans-Siberian Railroad, took Australia, India and are now fighting for Iraq. I also swooped along the northern Pacific rim, taking Anchorage, Vancouver, Seattle, San Francisco and LA. I destroyed Denver, Pheonix and Albaqurque(SP?). No A-bomb! (Manhattan Lost).
The Germans have taken Plymoth, but couldn't get to London. I lost 3/4 of my invasion force but costal assaults and airraids whilst I stacked them in Breast. Germany holds Baku, Stalingrad, Moscow, Rostov. But they are slowly loosing numbers. Tiger II's just don't get produced quickly. I have to say, I was concentrating more on Japan's game. Germany holds all of N. Africa, over to Jerusalem and Kuwait as well.
Operation Overlord has occured and The Americans and British are taking their toll.
You guys should try playing like this. It gives you complete controll of either the Axis or the Allies. Adds yet another layer of depth to these games.

*With this post, I shall step into Princedom*

------------------
I am the Ukrainian Anti-Pope!
[This message has been edited by Field Marshal Klesh (edited April 16, 2000).]

Captain Nemo · April 16, 2000, 17:12

Once the unit in the Knight slot becomes available to a Civ, no "Offensive" unit (Role 0) with move of 2+ and lesser attack capability than the Knight can be built.
Role 3 is kind of a catch-all role. The units will attack ground units (Like fighters do) and are not be affected by the Knight-mare (he-he). I have not seen any real difference in the role 3 and role 0 for a ground attack unit... except for a lower production priority. Maybe Andrew knows more.

Xin Yu · April 17, 2000, 03:03

I heard that role 3 is a helicopter unit which never loses its strength, like the native flyer units in TOT. I maybe wrong. Check if your role 3 units ignore terrian moving points and if they can go to sea squares.

Panda · April 17, 2000, 14:07

Xin Yu,

you're thinking of a units "domain" (0 is ground, 1 is air, 2 is naval, 3 is different).

Check out http://sleague.apolyton.net/Guides/sldt_domain_3.shtml

If used properly, D3 units could play an important part in a scenario. I had them in mind for a Star Wars scenario for mid-sized ships. You just have to remember that they use the default ground sound effect for whichever slot you use.

Nemo,

I've not messed around with this much. I have used it before, but only to produce Recon. Tanks which were less powerful than MBTs and the AI wouldn't build them both if they were both attack units.

But I've not come across any problems when the unit in the Musketeer or Knight slot becomes available, and I am interested to know just how restricting this is going to be. What have you found out? And what problem does the musketeer unit slot cause?
[This message has been edited by Andrew Livings (edited April 17, 2000).]

Captain Nemo · April 17, 2000, 20:12

Andrew,
The AI has a production priority algorithm that prevents it from producing lesser units when better ones are available. This seems to apply to land units only, but role 0 and role 1 are affected. It also differentiates between move 1 and move >1. So 4 ground units will typically be produced, 2 in role 1 and 2 in role 0. You can improve that by not giving the units an advantage in both a and d; for example role 0 3m,12a,6d and 2m,10a,7d will both be produced as well as role 0 1m,6a,4d and 1m,4a,6d.
Musketeers and Knights play a special role because they eliminate ALL lesser attack value units from production once they appear (Musketeers for move 1 and knight for move>1)and this applies to the AI AND the human player. For example after Knights role 0,3m,10a,5d appear, no units with less than 10a in an attack role CAN be produced. It renders the lesser units obsolete rather than just eliminating them from the AI production options. In scenarios I start by placing my crappiest units in those slots or I place "event only" units there...

Xin Yu · April 17, 2000, 20:21

Nemo and Andrew: Have you guys tried to change the knight/musk slot units to role 3 (or any role except 0 and 1) instead of changing other units? If that works it will be a lot easier

Captain Nemo · April 18, 2000, 00:27

Tried that, didn't work. Best to have very low stat units in those slots.

Cam · April 18, 2000, 02:46

Just as an aside - the Musketeers slot in my experience does not have the same effect as the Knights slot in eliminating lesser units.

Perhaps this is version dependent, but I have changed the Musketeers prerequisite to nil, and found that these appeared on the build list along with Warriors.

I'm uncertain if this is version dependent or if it's a myth spread from the early days. In one of the design tips I have left it in as "a danger slot" - but personally haven't found it to be a problem - and instead the issue is the Gunpowder advance.