SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

Moderators: Balthagor, Moderators

Message
Author
burock82
Lt. Colonel
Posts: 202
Joined: Sep 10 2012
Human: Yes

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#61 Post by burock82 » Jun 20 2017

Hello

is it so hard to implement establishment of bases at foreign countries ? this kind of thing. Especially for cold war era and modern scenarios.

ı hope you understand what i mean :)

regards,

Burak

way2co0l
Brigadier Gen.
Posts: 637
Joined: Nov 29 2010
Human: Yes

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#62 Post by way2co0l » Jun 20 2017

It kinda is with the way it's currently designed to work. I did propose an option in one of my threads for foreign investment which could be similarly applied to this, but I'm doubtful it'll actually make it into any release version and maybe not even after that. There are bigger priorities I think, but it's always possible.

GIJoe597
Board Admin
Posts: 2816
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#63 Post by GIJoe597 » Jun 20 2017

burock82 wrote:Hello

is it so hard to implement establishment of bases at foreign countries ? this kind of thing. Especially for cold war era and modern scenarios.
Burak


I think this could be done, perhaps using the Colony management rules for military facilities. You can build them in a colony and the hex becomes yours. What I think is not common knowledge, is, you can scrap/destroy the military facility and the hex will still belong to you. You may then build civilian facilities there in the colony and you maintain control over them, unlike if you simply build civilian facilities in the first place.


Perhaps, the core mechanic or some of the code which allows this could be tied to a treaty enabling one to build military facilities in another country. It seems logical if the treaty was broken or war declared between the two powers, the military facility would revert to the host nations control. To prevent the human player from creating a treaty and then packing many units in a Barracks with the intent to declare war and steam roll the host nation, the units become property of the host if at war with the facility owner.


As we say here, I am just spit balling, first thing that came to mind.
https://www.youtube.com/user/GIJoe597


Older/retired gamers, who do not tolerate foolishness.

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/USARG

User avatar
SixthtySixthSix
Warrant Officer
Posts: 32
Joined: Jan 12 2009

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#64 Post by SixthtySixthSix » Jun 21 2017

I've posted in Supreme Ruler Ultimate suggestions that one of the most appealing aspects of SR2010 was the ability to remove/rebuild/build roads and rails... Please ReAdd the feature?

...and other planets with grand space strategy and 3d combat would be nice, too... jk.
Your mouse has moved. The system has to be updated for the changes to take effect. Restart now?

Terran1969
Warrant Officer
Posts: 33
Joined: May 27 2016
Human: Yes

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#65 Post by Terran1969 » Jul 29 2017

It would be nice if when a navy facility is destroyed the AI will attempt to build a new one basically the ai builds land and air facility's but never navy and missiles when they are destroyed.

Also my navy units like to try and sail off the map for example my Astute class sup sails north and keeps on going and going and then you fined it idle right at the top of the map this also happens with ai controlled navy assets i hope this is fixed for then new game.

one other thing id like to see is more relationship change if a new leader is elected to a nation so they may decide that they don't want to continue a formal alliance or free trade deal so cancel it when they are elected.

GIJoe597
Board Admin
Posts: 2816
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#66 Post by GIJoe597 » Aug 07 2017

After all these years, it is time.

Allow formal allies to use each others Barracks/Air Bases/Sea Ports to repair units. That is all, carry on.
https://www.youtube.com/user/GIJoe597


Older/retired gamers, who do not tolerate foolishness.

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/USARG

geminif4ucorsair
General
Posts: 1286
Joined: Jun 08 2005

Re: SRGW - great Samurai

#67 Post by geminif4ucorsair » Aug 08 2017

Zuikaku wrote:
Balthagor wrote:: D Are superior japanese forces in the game!? [_]B [_]B
Not unless YOU are a very great Samurai general.... :D
otherwise, too much generic similarity of all types of Infantry, engineers, cavalry, etc...
need more "national" characteristics (but its been beaten on before....).

nick-bang
Colonel
Posts: 345
Joined: Sep 07 2010
Human: Yes
Location: A dark and ominous room - only illuminated by the eerie light of a computerscreen

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#68 Post by nick-bang » Aug 09 2017

GIJoe597 wrote:After all these years, it is time.

Allow formal allies to use each others Barracks/Air Bases/Sea Ports to repair units. That is all, carry on.
+1 ... how hard can it be?

User avatar
Balthagor
Supreme Ruler
Posts: 20746
Joined: Jun 04 2002
Human: Yes
Location: BattleGoat Studios

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#69 Post by Balthagor » Aug 09 2017

Could be very hard. The data for storing units in a hex doesn't necessarily store the owner of the unit. Units could suddenly change ownership.
Chris Latour
BattleGoat Studios
chris@battlegoat.com

GIJoe597
Board Admin
Posts: 2816
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#70 Post by GIJoe597 » Aug 09 2017

Hook into the treaty code, when treaty is signed, unit ownership is changed to both or generic or dual/multiple when in the same hex as a repair facility. You would need to move the unit into the hex yourself, not just pressing repair. With the amount of times you are fighting on an allies territory and especially with SRGW and the difficulties involved in moving leg units across oceans or short ranged air assets, it needs to be seriously explored. It would be a wonderful thing to add to the game and would improve every iteration of SR, as well as give more impetus to defending allies.

Please.
https://www.youtube.com/user/GIJoe597


Older/retired gamers, who do not tolerate foolishness.

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/USARG

Undecided
Warrant Officer
Posts: 26
Joined: May 22 2015
Human: Yes

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#71 Post by Undecided » Aug 12 2017

Could we get a "max pollution output" value listed in the facility info card?

It feels pointless to have technologies that say "-10% pollution from X buildings" if we don't know how much of your national pollution that building produces in the first place. Ten percent less pollution from buildings that make up 1% of your national pollution is very different from the same bonus to buildings that produce 90% of your national pollution. This is particularly important for power buildings, since you have so many different choices for building with the same function. Knowing their pollution output would add more strategic depth to the decision of how to power your country.

Undecided
Warrant Officer
Posts: 26
Joined: May 22 2015
Human: Yes

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#72 Post by Undecided » Aug 12 2017

Any chance of getting some sort of static sub defense? It's a pain having a heavily fortified naval muster round to gather your fleet, and lose large numbers of ship without warning.

In reality harbours -- and to a lesser extent, coastal waters --- were well protected against submarines due to shallow waters forcing submarines close to the surface, and obstacles protecting against long-range torpedo attack, as well as highly restricting possible directions of escape after an attack (making it far easier to predict where submarines would be).

Obviously the game doesn't simulate this, as submarines and attack and move through shallow waters and canals just as easily as open sea. So maybe could we have some sort of static defenses to compensate? Hydrophones or sonar buoys to detect submarines (like radar but for water units), and possibly even torpedo batteries or anti-ship missile batteries.

Also, it's pain to fuss with micromanagement to protect each and every isolated island with its own anti-submarine patrol force, when you can protect such locations against surface or air attacks just by plotting down an AA site, gun battery, or garrison.

GIJoe597
Board Admin
Posts: 2816
Joined: Sep 29 2008
Human: Yes
Contact:

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#73 Post by GIJoe597 » Aug 12 2017

I agree it is a challenge to protect the far flung regions of your empire. And it should be. There are a myriad of things you can do without BG having to code new things into the game and take dwindling resources away from needed fixes/corrections.

I will build a Barracks and ensure there is an Air Field/Base on any island I want to protect. You could also build a Fortification, Gun Emplacement, or Emplacement with Arty units entrenched. I will then send 14 battalions of ground units with great close combat stats there and reserve them. They will pop out if the island is attacked and assist the Garrison and Arty. There is also a pop up which will alert you if this happens. That would be the only time you need to even think about that island.


Try playing HOI III as Great Britain on VERY HARD and you will see what a challenge protecting an Empire is. :P
https://www.youtube.com/user/GIJoe597


Older/retired gamers, who do not tolerate foolishness.

http://steamcommunity.com/groups/USARG

evildari
Colonel
Posts: 251
Joined: Aug 10 2017
Human: Yes

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#74 Post by evildari » Aug 12 2017

can the oldschool 2D hex-tiles somehow be enabled in the games SRGW and SRU ?
(that means i wont like to look at the 3d terrain and also not at the satellite images)
like the ones i can see in the mapeditor if i disable 3d terrain and imagery.

if it is already hidden in the options.ini file please point me to the value.
Thank you
my mods
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 79&t=25932 (even techs and units for everyone - AI will own you too)
http://www.bgforums.com/forums/viewtopi ... 87&t=26151 (MARSX1)

User avatar
Fistalis
General
Posts: 3298
Joined: Jun 23 2009
Human: Yes
Location: x:355 y:216
Contact:

Re: SRGW wishlists, feature requests and suggestions

#75 Post by Fistalis » Aug 12 2017

EVILDARI wrote:can the oldschool 2D hex-tiles somehow be enabled in the games SRGW and SRU ?
(that means i wont like to look at the 3d terrain and also not at the satellite images)
like the ones i can see in the mapeditor if i disable 3d terrain and imagery.

if it is already hidden in the options.ini file please point me to the value.
Thank you
There was a way to mod it out in the first version that the 3d stuff was implemented.. I can't remember the exact process off the top of my head ill have to go through and trial and error my way through it again to refigure out the process. IIRC it was as simple as removing the 3D map terrain folder or something like that.

Edit :::: Scratch that.. you also don't want the satellite images.. this method resorted back to the satellite images and was actually in one of the options files but had to be changed by hand rather than in the options menu. Some option that adjusted the amount of zoom that the satellite changed to 3d terrain. Added last bit for those who want the satellite images over the 3d terrain.
Si vis pacem, para bellum
my Supreme Ruler mods Site
Redistribution of my mods is prohibited. By downloading them you agree to not redistribute the file(s) without expressed permission.

Post Reply

Return to “Development - SRGW”