REQ: Patch Notes?

General discussion related to the game goes here.

Moderators: Balthagor, Legend, Moderators

Post Reply
Aragos
General
Posts: 1431
Joined: Jan 13 2005
Location: Washington, DC

REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by Aragos »

Just asking Goats. Would be nice to track what has and has not been changed. :D
IHateThinkingUpNames
Warrant Officer
Posts: 34
Joined: Sep 20 2014
Human: Yes
Location: UK

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by IHateThinkingUpNames »

There's a post in Steam discussions with something of a changelog, though nothing massively detailed on every change.
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2394
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by Zuikaku »

SUT is not implemented yet! |O
Please teach AI everything!
mikeownage
Colonel
Posts: 273
Joined: Jun 25 2008
Location: United States
Contact:

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by mikeownage »

what about land trade!
Nitrous Oxide
Lieutenant
Posts: 55
Joined: Sep 11 2014
Human: Yes
Location: Canada

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by Nitrous Oxide »

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
User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 22083
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by Balthagor »

mikeownage wrote:what about land trade!
SUT is a higher priority.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com
Kristijonas
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 884
Joined: Nov 11 2011
Human: Yes

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by Kristijonas »

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.
Nitrous Oxide
Lieutenant
Posts: 55
Joined: Sep 11 2014
Human: Yes
Location: Canada

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by Nitrous Oxide »

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.
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.

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).
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by number47 »

[b][color=#BF0000]Balthagor[/color][/b] wrote:SUT is a higher priority.
Image
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
User avatar
number47
General
Posts: 2655
Joined: Sep 15 2011
Human: Yes
Location: X:913 Y:185

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by number47 »

Nitrous Oxide wrote:
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.
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.

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).
My fellow forum members, you need to be patient and persistent, and maybe your efforts will be rewarded.

Zuikaku, this one is for you :wink:
Image
"If everyone is thinking alike, someone isn't thinking."
- General George Patton Jr
User avatar
Zuikaku
General
Posts: 2394
Joined: Feb 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by Zuikaku »

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.
.
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.
Land trade shoul'd be closely tied with new peace treaty system that needs to be redone anyway...
Please teach AI everything!
SGTscuba
General
Posts: 2544
Joined: Dec 08 2007
Location: Tipton, UK

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by SGTscuba »

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
burock82
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 203
Joined: Sep 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: REQ: Patch Notes?

Post by burock82 »

Balthagor wrote:
mikeownage wrote:what about land trade!
SUT is a higher priority.


Uuuhaa!! I love you guys!!! :D
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion - SRUltimate”