REQ: Patch Notes?
Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators
-
- General
- Posts: 1431
- Joined: Jan 13 2005
- Location: Washington, DC
REQ: Patch Notes?
Just asking Goats. Would be nice to track what has and has not been changed.
-
- Warrant Officer
- Posts: 34
- Joined: Sep 20 2014
- Human: Yes
- Location: UK
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
There's a post in Steam discussions with something of a changelog, though nothing massively detailed on every change.
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
-
- Colonel
- Posts: 273
- Joined: Jun 25 2008
- Location: United States
- Contact:
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Sep 11 2014
- Human: Yes
- Location: Canada
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
http://steamcommunity.com/app/314980/di ... 555811047/
Supreme Ruler Ultimate Early Access Update 8.2.4
Changes in this update:
UK will no longer lose boatloads of electric power in Battle of the Atlantic
Resolved slowed frame rate when build unit panels open
Allies & Mutual Defense will no longer garrison regions when region not at war
Merchant Marine and Neutral Exit now respect PathAround Region setting
GUI skin is remembered for save games
Fixes to Strategic Target launch when no focus target is set
Fixed selecting scrap after rally point used
Prefix names ("British" etc) now saved in savegames
Trickle supply now also happens in WM land areas (ie intl bridges)
Various map fixes
User interface fixes
Increased use of gun emplacements in WWII era sandboxes and campaigns.
Corrections made to flags for regions
Some SR2020 based scenarios added, more to come.
Manual version 0.9 released
- Balthagor
- Supreme Ruler
- Posts: 22083
- Joined: Jun 04 2002
- Human: Yes
- Location: BattleGoat Studios
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
SUT is a higher priority.mikeownage wrote:what about land trade!
-
- Brigadier Gen.
- Posts: 884
- Joined: Nov 11 2011
- Human: Yes
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
Lack of land trading almost ruins the game. It leaves illogical country borders, negates ability to diplomatically transfer lands between allies after wars, it doesn't even allow players to simply give away lands they don't need or set countries free... Selective unit trading is just a small addition, a bonus.
I will create a poll to see what other players think, because I find it really hard to believe the developers genuinely believe land trading (together with broken loyalty system) are not top priorities. Maybe I just view the game in a much different way than the developers.
I will create a poll to see what other players think, because I find it really hard to believe the developers genuinely believe land trading (together with broken loyalty system) are not top priorities. Maybe I just view the game in a much different way than the developers.
-
- Lieutenant
- Posts: 55
- Joined: Sep 11 2014
- Human: Yes
- Location: Canada
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
Land trading wouldn't even be that huge an issue if the AI made a habit of colonizing instead of conquering. I was playing the Cold War as Israel, and on Normal speed with Medium initiative, I drew out a nice border around the Sinai peninsula during the Suez Crisis. Land trading wouldn't really fix much of the AIs mess, anyways, since coding something like that would be beyond complex... And for negotiating for territory, well nothing makes a stronger claim than actually having troops in the area.Kristijonas wrote:Lack of land trading almost ruins the game. It leaves illogical country borders, negates ability to diplomatically transfer lands between allies after wars, it doesn't even allow players to simply give away lands they don't need or set countries free... Selective unit trading is just a small addition, a bonus.
I will create a poll to see what other players think, because I find it really hard to believe the developers genuinely believe land trading (together with broken loyalty system) are not top priorities. Maybe I just view the game in a much different way than the developers.
That being said, it would be neat to see something more in that area. During that same Cold War, France had defeated North Vietnam, with most of the territory going to the now dead Laos (and to which I say, dead regions that have their capital city back, shouldn't be dead anymore at the very least)... but there were small patches of France bordering China... which was beyond weird. It happens because the two countries are both at war, and units move on city tiles, a garrison pops out, and the unit is moved to a non-bordering tile adjacent to the city, and creates its own patch of territory. Fix this and land trading is hardly required. Being able to liberate a new country (such as Kurdistan) would be interesting though (heck, even reviving an old one would be something).
- number47
- General
- Posts: 2655
- Joined: Sep 15 2011
- Human: Yes
- Location: X:913 Y:185
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
[b][color=#BF0000]Balthagor[/color][/b] wrote:SUT is a higher priority.
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
- General George Patton Jr
- number47
- General
- Posts: 2655
- Joined: Sep 15 2011
- Human: Yes
- Location: X:913 Y:185
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
My fellow forum members, you need to be patient and persistent, and maybe your efforts will be rewarded.Nitrous Oxide wrote:Land trading wouldn't even be that huge an issue if the AI made a habit of colonizing instead of conquering. I was playing the Cold War as Israel, and on Normal speed with Medium initiative, I drew out a nice border around the Sinai peninsula during the Suez Crisis. Land trading wouldn't really fix much of the AIs mess, anyways, since coding something like that would be beyond complex... And for negotiating for territory, well nothing makes a stronger claim than actually having troops in the area.Kristijonas wrote:Lack of land trading almost ruins the game. It leaves illogical country borders, negates ability to diplomatically transfer lands between allies after wars, it doesn't even allow players to simply give away lands they don't need or set countries free... Selective unit trading is just a small addition, a bonus.
I will create a poll to see what other players think, because I find it really hard to believe the developers genuinely believe land trading (together with broken loyalty system) are not top priorities. Maybe I just view the game in a much different way than the developers.
That being said, it would be neat to see something more in that area. During that same Cold War, France had defeated North Vietnam, with most of the territory going to the now dead Laos (and to which I say, dead regions that have their capital city back, shouldn't be dead anymore at the very least)... but there were small patches of France bordering China... which was beyond weird. It happens because the two countries are both at war, and units move on city tiles, a garrison pops out, and the unit is moved to a non-bordering tile adjacent to the city, and creates its own patch of territory. Fix this and land trading is hardly required. Being able to liberate a new country (such as Kurdistan) would be interesting though (heck, even reviving an old one would be something).
Zuikaku, this one is for you
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
- General George Patton Jr
- Zuikaku
- General
- Posts: 2394
- Joined: Feb 10 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
Lack of both of these features tends to ruin the game in the long run. Lack of SUT is especially game breaking when playing smaller regions. Both of these issues coul'd be implemented if BGs focus a bit more on diplomacy.Kristijonas wrote:Lack of land trading almost ruins the game. It leaves illogical country borders, negates ability to diplomatically transfer lands between allies after wars, it doesn't even allow players to simply give away lands they don't need or set countries free... Selective unit trading is just a small addition, a bonus.
.
Land trade shoul'd be closely tied with new peace treaty system that needs to be redone anyway...
Please teach AI everything!
-
- General
- Posts: 2544
- Joined: Dec 08 2007
- Location: Tipton, UK
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
Lol 47, sooooo true. At least the time may be about to come.
My SR:U Model Project, get the latest and post suggestions here:
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=28040
-
- Lt. Colonel
- Posts: 203
- Joined: Sep 10 2012
- Human: Yes
Re: REQ: Patch Notes?
Balthagor wrote:SUT is a higher priority.mikeownage wrote:what about land trade!
Uuuhaa!! I love you guys!!!