WW2: World in Flames [REVISED]

Level 3
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
49
There are still bugs in the version.

USSR troops suffer winter penalty.
Domination trigger does not work.
Timer not paused during cutscene, and the text can not be read through in the 5 seconds you give.
 
There are still bugs in the version.

USSR troops suffer winter penalty.
Domination trigger does not work.
Timer not paused during cutscene, and the text can not be read through in the 5 seconds you give.

The winter penalty is an issue with Wc3 and not something i can really help. The choice is to either have Russia own the aura dummy unit (and have it only affect enemies), or have Finland own it. I'll maybe give it to Russia next version.

The Domination mode only works in Axis and Allies mode AFAIK, because there is no real way of measuring what players are in a team if everyone can ally everyone. I will check on it still, though.


Glad to hear that. I totally agree that better win conditions are necessary, because the game does tend to drag. Perhaps there is even a better option for this, better suited for the other modes as well. Suggestions are welcome. Perhaps each faction should have war goals? Like, a faction-wide "capture and hold these 10 cities to win", or maybe there would be some way of defeating a player by capturing certain cities. The disadvantage of this though is that you won't have those interesting scenarios where some player completely changes land and ends up having to retake Germany from North Africa - but then again, maybe that's a good thing.

I agree about changing Domination goal to 60%. Maybe also some way of checking exactly what your progress on this is (perhaps in the multiboard).
 
Level 3
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
49
The American Carrier has no death animation.

And the Japanese event carriers can not harbour planes, so they are useless.
 
Level 3
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
49
Boom Tetris for Jeff!

You can also maybe also fix the bug where if an allied leaves it removes the Date and Resource Panel and replaces it with allies resources, I also think when that happens you no longer get notifications for missions. Also do the russian winter buff dummy and add tribute for capital so you can give allies capital back after you recapture it.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
You could change Sudden Death for Axis & Allies to trigger a win only when all capitals are captured. Currently only domination is played because it is too easy to capture some Capitals (Helsinki, Moscow, Chongqing) and otherwise you can spam paratroopers and hold it for 5 minutes.

Could Carriers get option to only allow Dive Bombers or Fighters to land and not mix. Though a launch all button may also fix this.
Also you could add a new diplomacy button to share control entirely to one faction, this way nations that are eliminated early like China or Finland can then help other factions micro better.
 
Last edited:
Level 3
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
49
You can also make unique Carrier for America by changing stats and renaming it to Enterprise class.
Also Submarines, each nation could have unique submarines, Germany submarines should be stronger. You could make only German Submarine be unique.
 
Last edited:
You can also make unique Carrier for America by changing stats and renaming it to Enterprise class.
Also Submarines, each nation could have unique submarines, Germany submarines should be stronger. You could make only German Submarine be unique.

The Essex is an American carrier, so it's more likely i'd add an "Ark Royal" carrier for the British. The Corageous-class is otherwise a very striking-looking RN carrier which i'd enjoy modeling. Subs for other nations will come at some point, but not for the hotfix.

Boom Tetris for Jeff!

You can also maybe also fix the bug where if an allied leaves it removes the Date and Resource Panel and replaces it with allies resources, I also think when that happens you no longer get notifications for missions. Also do the russian winter buff dummy and add tribute for capital so you can give allies capital back after you recapture it.

I will try to fix the multiboard thing and the buff dummy. I could add a tribute option for capitals if it isn't the capital of the player who owns it. I just want to avoid letting players donate their capital in case they are in Sudden Death mode.

You could change Sudden Death for Axis & Allies to trigger a win only when all capitals are captured. Currently only domination is played because it is too easy to capture some Capitals (Helsinki, Moscow, Chongqing) and otherwise you can spam paratroopers and hold it for 5 minutes.

Could Carriers get option to only allow Dive Bombers or Fighters to land and not mix. Though a launch all button may also fix this.
Also you could add a new diplomacy button to share control entirely to one faction, this way nations that are eliminated early like China or Finland can then help other factions micro better.

The sudden death thing seems fair, i will look into that. Shared control could also be nice. Fixes for carrier controls are planned, although it has lower priority than some of the other things.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
There is something troubling and worth noting which is that China has more troops and can regroup them faster than Japan leading to a unstoppable rush that Japan has no easy way out. Japan has troops from Shanghai to Korea which if you try to regroup them all in the middle will still take time and a lot of effort, keeping in mind that Japan also has other priorities.

While the Added defences may have let China keep their airport I feel you haven't compensated Japan enough for it in it's own defences. Keeping in Mind that Japan is alone against 4 players. I feel I may have overlooked some very important details regarding this point, while China could have survived with their airport taken, Japan can not survive if it is pushed from China, or at the very least it will have an even harder time competing.

Another way to look at it is if you had both new players be China and Japan, China would have a significant easier time as it is rather straightforward to regroup it's armies and then push the enemy.
It is a tricky balance, buffing either side may end up with having a rampaging Japan or a rampaging China though out of the two I would rather see a rampaging Japan, for China if defeated could offer to help Soviet Union to control it's units.
 
Level 2
Joined
Jun 3, 2014
Messages
18
The winter penalty is an issue with Wc3 and not something i can really help. The choice is to either have Russia own the aura dummy unit (and have it only affect enemies), or have Finland own it. I'll maybe give it to Russia next version.

Maybe it can be helped with ancient or suicidal unit classification.
 
Maybe it can be helped with ancient or suicidal unit classification.

Suicidal is already used for naval units and Ancient is used for submerged submarines in the last few versions.

There is something troubling and worth noting which is that China has more troops and can regroup them faster than Japan leading to a unstoppable rush that Japan has no easy way out. Japan has troops from Shanghai to Korea which if you try to regroup them all in the middle will still take time and a lot of effort, keeping in mind that Japan also has other priorities.

While the Added defences may have let China keep their airport I feel you haven't compensated Japan enough for it in it's own defences. Keeping in Mind that Japan is alone against 4 players. I feel I may have overlooked some very important details regarding this point, while China could have survived with their airport taken, Japan can not survive if it is pushed from China, or at the very least it will have an even harder time competing.

Another way to look at it is if you had both new players be China and Japan, China would have a significant easier time as it is rather straightforward to regroup it's armies and then push the enemy.
It is a tricky balance, buffing either side may end up with having a rampaging Japan or a rampaging China though out of the two I would rather see a rampaging Japan, for China if defeated could offer to help Soviet Union to control it's units.

You are right about this. When i started making this map, i had the idea that adding too much defenses for any player was bad, because investing in defenses would have to be an active choice which required investment. In hindsight though, i realize that this was a stupid reasoning which just lead to a rushfest at the start of the map. Adding more defenses would both encourage careful play at the start of the map and force players to consolidate and build their forces before an attack.

By the way, i think i might have solved the multiboard issue. I haven't been able to test it, but i did some research and find a method which should work.

So. Will the map be ported to Warcraft 3 Reforged in the future?

I had no idea that this was a thing until just now. Looks cool, though i'm not sure if my models will fit in with the increased graphics quality.
 
Level 3
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
49
Hotfix when?

Also I'm not sure about sea points, they don't seem to provide their advertised income.
 
Last edited:
Italian Destroyer Sea Mines do not work.

Are you sure? I tested them thoroughly before releasing that version, and they worked fine for me.

Hotfix when?

It is already finished, though i need to test it before i can upload it. You can sneak peak at the changelog here:

WIF Changelog | HIVE

Also, i think i found the issue with sea control points, along with the issue of Domination mode not working. Both should be fixed in the upcoming version.
 
Level 3
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
49
Are you sure? I tested them thoroughly before releasing that version, and they worked fine for me./QUOTE]

I also encountered this problem and It kinda made me lose Africa. I put 3 seamines in same place and then when the british cruiser and destroyers went through they simply walked past them.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
Great changes, and some that may actually see the change of the current old and repetitive meta.

Though now the UK will have to face the power of 2 airfields in a very tight and small area, which means the UK will have to scramble for the Turkish Airport and may even need to build a carrier to compete.
I feel that besides being handsomely compensated with units it should also gain some ships to balance the dominance of the Italians from the Mediterranean.

The carrier price reduction I would argue to be unneeded. From both a historical and a gameplay stance, Capital ships should be powerful but very hard to amass. Carriers do exactly that with, with the improved dive bombers they can easily destroy masses of unprotected ships and as such it has become an integral part of the naval combat.
I would even argue that ships in general should have an increased building time so that they can not be easily replaced and require a more careful approach and should not be expendable.

On land the unit spam can be kept in check by Airplanes, specifically heavy bombers and due to the limited number of airfields there is a balance. On sea however until the recent improvement to dive bombers mass battleships and destroyers was key, currently this tactic is slowly dying due to the Carriers which themselves are kinda limited due to their affordability and micro intensiveness. Currently losing a carrier a significant emotional event, and I wouldn't like it to become similar to losing a battleship which only means you have to build more.

I am of the belief that decreasing the prices of the ships will not at all improve on anything and may in fact generate more problems late game.


It is already finished, though i need to test it before i can upload it.

Perhaps in the future the community can help you test so as to give active feedback while the version is still in progress and not after it's done. There is a small community there that would be more than willing to help.
 
Level 3
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
49
There is also a bug with the voting menu which I am not sure if this one was specifically addressed in the changelog where the final vote seems to dictate the gamemode. As in 7 people vote Axis & Allies then the eight votes Historical and the game becomes Historical.

I also think you should add more defences to moscow as unlike in real life it doesn't have the vastness of terrain to hide behind and it is in fact quite a frontline city.

I'm curious for Brit northern territories being neutral, I mean Italy would have taken it anyway if it rushed with all it's troops including those in italy, but it did keep italy busy from creeping the balkans and gave the Brits time to regroup and build up in Egypt. I hope there are significantly more defences in morroco so as to stop an early easy creeping of the place.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717

The panthers seem rather unnecessary given that Germany already has plenty of toys to play with already, being the only nation with access to heavy tanks that barely see usage in the game and that Germany already has an upgrade for their medium tanks which.
Not to mention that because Germany gets 1 tank more than the rest of the world their factories are rather buggy as you don't have the minimum two slots freed (1 for flag and 1 for cancel) the light tanks become untrainable after you train some units, only way to get around this is to set it to auto produce which fixes it but not that well.

Maybe if the Panther upgrade will not upgrade the Panzer IV's that were already made and will simply just give you the ability to produce from now on Panthers, it could be a late game thing as even if they are available in 1943 due to the price Germany may opt for the cheaper upgrade or postpone it until later.

One of the many things you have done right was keeping the game simple, and unlike other WW2 maps that had every possible version of the Panzer IV in it which just serves to confuse the player. New player can learn the basics relatively fast and can after enjoy the game.

Besides that I support the idea of Moscow having more defences, one of the reasons Sudden Death didn't work was that some capitals were easier to capture than others, for example the Chinese, Finnish and Russian capitals are very easy to reach, while America and Japan are quite difficult to get. And perhaps you could entertain the idea of Fighters giving an aura boost to units and perhaps receiving the same treatment as Dive Bomber and gaining some extra HP or a change to heavy armour as they are very weak to AA fire.

Winter could also be harsher giving -2 or -3 armour, for anyone else besides Russia it could cause a halt in offensive operations as the units die too fast to be able to micro and watch other areas of the map and thus encouraging building of fortifications and creation of frontlines. Though there could also be a HINT message that tells this information for newer players.
 
Great changes, and some that may actually see the change of the current old and repetitive meta.

Though now the UK will have to face the power of 2 airfields in a very tight and small area, which means the UK will have to scramble for the Turkish Airport and may even need to build a carrier to compete.
I feel that besides being handsomely compensated with units it should also gain some ships to balance the dominance of the Italians from the Mediterranean.

The carrier price reduction I would argue to be unneeded. From both a historical and a gameplay stance, Capital ships should be powerful but very hard to amass. Carriers do exactly that with, with the improved dive bombers they can easily destroy masses of unprotected ships and as such it has become an integral part of the naval combat.
I would even argue that ships in general should have an increased building time so that they can not be easily replaced and require a more careful approach and should not be expendable.

On land the unit spam can be kept in check by Airplanes, specifically heavy bombers and due to the limited number of airfields there is a balance. On sea however until the recent improvement to dive bombers mass battleships and destroyers was key, currently this tactic is slowly dying due to the Carriers which themselves are kinda limited due to their affordability and micro intensiveness. Currently losing a carrier a significant emotional event, and I wouldn't like it to become similar to losing a battleship which only means you have to build more.

I am of the belief that decreasing the prices of the ships will not at all improve on anything and may in fact generate more problems late game.




Perhaps in the future the community can help you test so as to give active feedback while the version is still in progress and not after it's done. There is a small community there that would be more than willing to help.

I wouldn't mind getting help testing new versions, the problem is that I don't want to have multiple iterations of the same version circulating. All in all, releasing versions more often and integrating feedback would have the same result.

Regarding UK balance - Malta was an important allied airbase during the north Africa campaign, maybe I should add one there, unless it is too close to Italy. Other than that, the neutral Morocco has been given a sizeable defensive line, so the Italians will of anything be even more occupied with that.

The reduction of carrier cost was mainly from the realization that carriers were often converted from half-finished cruiser or battleship hulls - it felt unreasonable that they should be more expensive than battleships. Then again, carriers were the most valuable capital ships. I am all for making all ships take longer to produce, though.

Panther tanks replace the panzers slot in the factory, but they don't replace existing panzers. The panzers are also made slightly weaker.

Winter could also be harsher giving -2 or -3 armour, for anyone else besides Russia it could cause a halt in offensive operations as the units die too fast to be able to micro and watch other areas of the map and thus encouraging building of fortifications and creation of frontlines. Though there could also be a HINT message that tells this information for newer players.

Way ahead of you - winter effects are already increased and might also involve movement speed reduction.

There is also a bug with the voting menu which I am not sure if this one was specifically addressed in the changelog where the final vote seems to dictate the gamemode. As in 7 people vote Axis & Allies then the eight votes Historical and the game becomes Historical.

I also think you should add more defences to moscow as unlike in real life it doesn't have the vastness of terrain to hide behind and it is in fact quite a frontline city.

I'm curious for Brit northern territories being neutral, I mean Italy would have taken it anyway if it rushed with all it's troops including those in italy, but it did keep italy busy from creeping the balkans and gave the Brits time to regroup and build up in Egypt. I hope there are significantly more defences in morroco so as to stop an early easy creeping of the place.

The voting bug was fixed, I think this was mentioned in the changelog.

I will look at adding more defenses at Moscow, good point.
 
Level 3
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
49
Other than that, the neutral Morocco has been given a sizeable defensive line, so the Italians will of anything be even more occupied with that.

Panther tanks replace the panzers slot in the factory, but they don't replace existing panzers. The panzers are also made slightly weaker..

Well Italy doesn't need to take Morocco now, it can now expand in the balkans or use it's transport ship to stop Britain from taking it's only airfield left in turkey, good game Brits. They do need ships to stop that. In HOI 4 they have a whole fleet in Egypt so I think It would be fitting to add it here too.

Do you mean the Panzers are slightly weaker than Panthers or that you made Panzers slightly weaker than before? I feel you just added Panthers just because you made a model for it, and it serves no real gameplay point. Why does Germany now have to spend more money just to be even as in the old version. Panthers should be a choice not a necessity, a gambit to say, you spend a lot more money now so that later you can earn more, now you force Germany to get Panthers because their tanks are weaker, what about other nations Panzer IV's, how will that affect the balance of the game. What happens to old Side Skirt upgrade, do Panthers also get Side skirt upgrade? I mean some version did have side skirts but still.
You could even make it so after upgrade it behaves like Russian Flag bearer having chance to spawn either Panzer IV or Panther.
Anyway Panzer IV should remain the same.

Also reducing speed will just mean it's open season for Heavy Bombers, the Fighters on patrol do quite a bad job at intercepting them. I would not advise for that.

At least make models for paratrooper plane, C-47 for everyone except Italy, Germany and Finland which will get the JU-57. Or make models for Japanese Tank Destroyer and Artillery so it doesn't have to use USSR ones.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
Well Italy doesn't need to take Morocco now, it can now expand in the balkans or use it's transport ship to stop Britain from taking it's only airfield left in turkey, good game Brits. They do need ships to stop that. In HOI 4 they have a whole fleet in Egypt so I think It would be fitting to add it here too.

Do you mean the Panzers are slightly weaker than Panthers or that you made Panzers slightly weaker than before? I feel you just added Panthers just because you made a model for it, and it serves no real gameplay point. Why does Germany now have to spend more money just to be even as in the old version. Panthers should be a choice not a necessity, a gambit to say, you spend a lot more money now so that later you can earn more, now you force Germany to get Panthers because their tanks are weaker, what about other nations Panzer IV's, how will that affect the balance of the game. What happens to old Side Skirt upgrade, do Panthers also get Side skirt upgrade? I mean some version did have side skirts but still.
You could even make it so after upgrade it behaves like Russian Flag bearer having chance to spawn either Panzer IV or Panther.
Anyway Panzer IV should remain the same.

Also reducing speed will just mean it's open season for Heavy Bombers, the Fighters on patrol do quite a bad job at intercepting them. I would not advise for that.

At least make models for paratrooper plane, C-47 for everyone except Italy, Germany and Finland which will get the JU-57. Or make models for Japanese Tank Destroyer and Artillery so it doesn't have to use USSR ones.


I think what Jeff is trying to say here is that Panthers were really not needed and even more at the cost of weaker Panzer IV's. It just seems unnecessary for Germany to get more tanks while America and USA use the same tanks.
Also the movement speed reduction may lead to some Heavy Bomber abuse.

I don't think malta could be added, it would be too small and Italy could easily take it due to it's size. UK should get a Carrier in Egypt though it would have no way to load said carrier with planes unless they capture the Ankara Airport which could be stopped by early italian aggression.
 
I'd like to tone down on the whole "panzers weaker" thing, their HP were barely reduced, and in general they were actually buffed (slightly faster production speed, among other things). When i started this map, i had this illusion that german tanks were overall superior, when in reality they weren't, and right now they are too expensive. They will still be stronger though, to compensate for the changes in crew quality.

Well Italy doesn't need to take Morocco now, it can now expand in the balkans or use it's transport ship to stop Britain from taking it's only airfield left in turkey, good game Brits. They do need ships to stop that. In HOI 4 they have a whole fleet in Egypt so I think It would be fitting to add it here too.

I am actually thinking of moving the airfield from Turkey down closer to Cairo, since that was the main airbase of the Desert Air Force. i am also giving Iraq and the rest of the middle east to Britain, since they owned that historically. Sure, they can get some more ships too, but remeber that they have two cruisers and a destroyer at Gibraltar, and if they bring the fleet from England, they can easily outmatch the Italians. If battleships can bombard the Italian mainland, they will have problems.

Do you mean the Panzers are slightly weaker than Panthers or that you made Panzers slightly weaker than before? I feel you just added Panthers just because you made a model for it, and it serves no real gameplay point. Why does Germany now have to spend more money just to be even as in the old version. Panthers should be a choice not a necessity, a gambit to say, you spend a lot more money now so that later you can earn more, now you force Germany to get Panthers because their tanks are weaker, what about other nations Panzer IV's, how will that affect the balance of the game. What happens to old Side Skirt upgrade, do Panthers also get Side skirt upgrade? I mean some version did have side skirts but still.
You could even make it so after upgrade it behaves like Russian Flag bearer having chance to spawn either Panzer IV or Panther.
Anyway Panzer IV should remain the same.

Also reducing speed will just mean it's open season for Heavy Bombers, the Fighters on patrol do quite a bad job at intercepting them. I would not advise for that.

At least make models for paratrooper plane, C-47 for everyone except Italy, Germany and Finland which will get the JU-57. Or make models for Japanese Tank Destroyer and Artillery so it doesn't have to use USSR ones.

Like i said, it's not like that. Panzer IV is still slightly superior to all other medium tanks, and the actual change was something like -10 hit points for a few seconds faster build time (i'm not even sure why i mentioned it). What i wanted was for Germany to have the option of choosing between quality or quantity, much like they did in the war - the Panthers are the best medium tanks in the map by a wide margin, and it's generally a good trade if you have the factories and the resources. I also reduced the research point cost of side skirts to 8 (from 10). Side skirts don't apply to Panthers - again, it is a choice between upgrading the tanks you have and getting a different version. The side skirts upgrade disappears from the Research menu after you have upgraded Panthers, and if you already researched it, it will also be kinda wasted. But like i said, it's a trade.

Regarding other models, i actually made the Panther as a side project while i was modeling a Churchill tank (which will be released by next week). My plan is to add the historical difference in tank discipline which Britain had - with "Infantry Tanks" which are slow and armored, and "Cruiser Tanks" which are fast and light in order to storm defenses. The Crusader will likely be the cruiser tank i make. I'll possibly add an upgrade for the British (called something like "Lend-lease tanks" allowing them to use Shermans instead, since to be fair, they were largely superior to British domestic tanks up until 1945.

A japanese SPG is already modeled but not textured or animated (Type 4 Ho-Ro). Same goes for an italian SPG (Semovente 90/53). We will see about paratrooper planes in the future.

By the way, do we want strategic bombers to be more vulnerable to flak? Because i might do a switch where strat bombers have medium armor and fighters have heavy armor.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
I'd like to tone down on the whole "panzers weaker" thing, their HP were barely reduced, and in general they were actually buffed (slightly faster production speed, among other things). When i started this map, i had this illusion that german tanks were overall superior, when in reality they weren't, and right now they are too expensive. They will still be stronger though, to compensate for the changes in crew quality.



I am actually thinking of moving the airfield from Turkey down closer to Cairo, since that was the main airbase of the Desert Air Force. i am also giving Iraq and the rest of the middle east to Britain, since they owned that historically. Sure, they can get some more ships too, but remeber that they have two cruisers and a destroyer at Gibraltar, and if they bring the fleet from England, they can easily outmatch the Italians. If battleships can bombard the Italian mainland, they will have problems.



Like i said, it's not like that. Panzer IV is still slightly superior to all other medium tanks, and the actual change was something like -10 hit points for a few seconds faster build time (i'm not even sure why i mentioned it). What i wanted was for Germany to have the option of choosing between quality or quantity, much like they did in the war - the Panthers are the best medium tanks in the map by a wide margin, and it's generally a good trade if you have the factories and the resources. I also reduced the research point cost of side skirts to 8 (from 10). Side skirts don't apply to Panthers - again, it is a choice between upgrading the tanks you have and getting a different version. The side skirts upgrade disappears from the Research menu after you have upgraded Panthers, and if you already researched it, it will also be kinda wasted. But like i said, it's a trade.

Regarding other models, i actually made the Panther as a side project while i was modeling a Churchill tank (which will be released by next week). My plan is to add the historical difference in tank discipline which Britain had - with "Infantry Tanks" which are slow and armored, and "Cruiser Tanks" which are fast and light in order to storm defenses. The Crusader will likely be the cruiser tank i make. I'll possibly add an upgrade for the British (called something like "Lend-lease tanks" allowing them to use Shermans instead, since to be fair, they were largely superior to British domestic tanks up until 1945.

A japanese SPG is already modeled but not textured or animated (Type 4 Ho-Ro). Same goes for an italian SPG (Semovente 90/53). We will see about paratrooper planes in the future.

By the way, do we want strategic bombers to be more vulnerable to flak? Because i might do a switch where strat bombers have medium armor and fighters have heavy armor.

Well that's a good trade. And could I also mention that the American Battleship can not target Infantry with it's main guns.

Italy can easily defend from the gibraltar fleet if it sticks around it's islands, with the help of the coastal batteries and sea mines (if they work) Italy can sit comfortably, UK also has to worry about the German navy so if it decides to push the Mediterranean it may lose ground elsewhere.
I think moving the airfield closer to Cairo and in UK's control would be the best solution, it is very hard to survive without an airfield.

Well I wouldn't really know, a fighter buff would sure be appreciated, anything to stop the AA from wrecking it. Though maybe it could be tried. One thing to note it is a lot easier to get a bunch of AA trucks the mix them in your army than to micro any fighters to cover you, plus the AA trucks splash damage will kill/decimate most dive bombers and fighters formations just passively.

Strategic Bombers should perhaps have a more strategic role, though due to this game not basing itself around building an economy it is hard to do so. In game it's a army duster, though it's not bad it makes for quite a good game.

A thing to note: World in Flames doesn't have the spell micro of games like Azeroth Wars and LTA, the units don't really have any abilities so you only need to point and click (Just point us at 'em), thus people could be lead to believe the game is not very skillful.
Those people would be wrong. What World In Flames offers is a different kind of play, the skill here is tracked by how well you can control vast amount of units in completely different areas and the real skill comes from doing that while you control the extraordinary airplanes that are found in this game and trying not to fall prey to them as well.
I couldn't really imagine how the game would play if you could focus on a single battle.
I feel that's what you should accentuate upon.
 
It is live, people! The map can now be hosted on MMH!

A picture of the new Panther tank:
pantherrender-jpg.309255

Version 1.6b changelog:
  • Northwestern Africa is now neutral instead of British, since it would have historically been owned by the French. The British get more units in Egypt as compensation, as well as Iraq.
  • Moved the Turkish airfield to Egypt and gave it to Britain.
  • Added a small British fleet at Cairo.
  • New unit: the Panzer V Panther. Germany can choose to research Panthers, which will be produced instead of Panzer IVs.
  • Reduced the cost of Carriers by a small amount.
  • Reduced the cost of Tank Destroyers.
  • Added more static defenses for Japan, Italy, Russia, and Britain.
  • Added "Air Superiority" aura to fighter planes, which gives +1 armor to nearby ground units.
  • Reduced the attack speed of most paratrooper types.
  • Heavy bombers now count as Medium armored instead of Heavy. Th
  • Increased the pause duration during the intro text.
  • The "Team Resources" panel should no longer replace the game multiboard when an ally leaves.
  • Soviet units should no longer be affected by the Winter debuff. Finns however are not affected by their own winter.
  • Reduced the amount of land required to capture in Domination mode from 75% to 65% for Axis and Allies, and from 75% to 40% per player for the other modes.
  • Enhanced defenses on multiple places, including Moscow.
  • Fixed a bug with the extra AA attack for Battleships.
  • Fixed a bug which would prevent Carriers earned through objectives from harboring planes.
  • Fixed a bug which prevented the Domination victory mode from triggering.
  • Fixed a bug which caused the voting menu to prematurely select game mode.
 
Level 2
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
32
Now let me talk about my translation of the map.
I hope to translate this map into Chinese to facilitate the spread of this map in China. Do you agree?
I don't need you to give me an unprotected map because I have my own way to translate the map.
I once translated the 1.4 version of this map.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
You forgot to give UK the Airport, it starts neutral.

There is also some units in Algiers that get attacked during the cinematic, and a Flak Cannon in Morocco near the Airfield still belongs to UK. I suspect the Shipwright was intentional and is to help UK hold Gibraltar.

The sea mines also do not work.
 
Last edited:
Level 1
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
58
PERFECT! finally morroco has been removed. God that made the game so imbalanced, as uk would always rush Italy through there and win africa in a moment.
Now italy may stand a chance in africa, or atleast not get rushed immediately.
Tho you should probably remove the airport from morroco too, and some uk ships as well.
Tho the airport in turkey were important, for whoever wished to fight in the balkans had needed that airport.
 
Level 3
Joined
Jul 14, 2017
Messages
49
This version is very good, the Air combat works better now with Heavy Bombers easier to counter and Fighters being more resistant you can use them in battles now. I think the main problem with planes in general is that you can only have so many of them so when you lose some it can be quite frustrating unlike infantry where it's easy to replace.

But yes, the game plays a lot better and I hope there are more updates like these. Morocco not being UK is very good choice.

Overall I think it's best version yet, just need bugs fixed.
 
Level 1
Joined
May 30, 2014
Messages
3
Regarding sense of balance this is the worst version of World in Flames that has ever been released so far. Other then that, it's really nice to see you working and developing this great map once again.. adding new models and various things
upload_2018-11-12_16-1-33.png

Anyway check this out 6 neutral bunkers added to stop Italian bltizkrieg to Morrocon city. I honestly thought intention of giving Morrocon city to neutrals was to nerf UK's superiority in both Africa and resource income and balance African battlefield. Also it's really amusing that Morrocon shypiard is still under British control.. was this intentional or accident bug? Either way this imbalanced event enables UK to train, already in the 2nd income of the game, a transport ship + an infantry squad and rush for Morrocon city right away. Considering the fact that Neutral units are all spread out here, UK can easily aim down those 2 light tanks and then aim the city (because bunker and neutral infantry man and AT gun wont be alerted) and masspam more inf and easily take rest of Northern Africa. While the Italy has extreme hard time going for it against 5-6 bunkers and neutral units.
What i suggest for balance in northern Africa: Move down that shypiard next to Morrocon city on the left side and put it neutral. If UK wants to land Africa then he should be forced to get Portugal and its port. Another suggestion regarding balance in this region - remove that extra bunker that you added on Spanish-French border above Barcelona. 2 bunkers here are completely enough and even with those 2 it was pretty hard for Italy to succesfully land and take Barcelona with only 1 transport ship.

Italy is very poor nation starting with almost 1k gold income and to be honest it doesn't have gold to spare for additional transport ships and just imagine how easy it is for UK to walk in the small Mediterranean with 3 ships from Gibraltar and 3 ships from Egypt and aim down the italian transport ship right away. Due to the fact that naval warfare is completely odd and imbalanced in this map - meaning Italian ships can't stop faster British ships which btw outnumbered them, Brits easily destroy Italian transport ship and disable them transportion from Italy to Spain/Africa/Crete wherever else.
My suggestion regarding naval warfare: Make all ships have drastically bigger damage so in that case naval battles would last quite shorter and therefore some meme players wouldn't have the option to walk through enemy navy while still being unsignificantly harmed and swiftly aim down and destroy the enemy transport ships. You might also want to rethink wether its wise or not, to give UK another port and a battleship and a cruiser in northern GB and make game even more in favour of allies. UK can rapidly regroup entire his fleet in Roman sea and destroy Italian fleet in blink of an eye while GE fleet would probably be stucked at that time, somewhere between 2nd and 3rd sea line in atlantic. You should also take a consideration of moving 1 sea line from Atlantic to Baltic sea because almost literally always Allies have domination in Atlantic ocean.. especially in latest version where you added more British ships.

As a perennial WiF veteran, I couldn't help but notice the sad fact you disabled avaliability of having Full Shared Control when one of your ally leaves. Most definitely you need to put back in order FULL share units ability and not only when your ally leaves but also while all players are in the game and gameplay is active. So you should probably add commands in game, e.g -share red, -share orange, -share blue.. you get my point.
I should also note that right now in current state of this game, only SU/China, Italy/GE, Finland/Japan can share between themselves cause they are in the same teams(in the lobby). So my suggestion would be remake teams in lobby -> Team 1 (SU,US,china,UK) , Team 2 (GE,Ita,Fin,Jap) respectively.

upload_2018-11-12_16-40-22.png

Smoke grenades ability is super op and imbalanced even though it gives "only" 25% evasion. Make it to 10-15% maximum and raise up facility points cost up to twice times - 12 facility points at least.. and make it more expensive in currency/oil terms. This is urgent as allies can easily research this upgrade and defeat any army that axis forces train due to the massive amount of dodged attacks.

China - Japan (im)balance
. (urgent). Ever since 1.4d China had easy game vs Japanese. Japan is the faction that's facing alone 4 factions in Pacific Asia. And it was always the China that rushes Japan, not vice versa. It's the China that has op flamethrowers and decisive advantage in Infantry numbers at the beginning of game (over Japan). China's job is to blitzkrieg Japs across from Shangai to Beijing and try to push them to Seoul. Well skilled Japan can sometimes withstand Chinese rush and push them back from Seoul up to Shangai / Xi'an, but only if he's skilled and has all three supremacies naval,infantry and air. While at this time either US or UK(sometimes both of them) had already captured dozens of cities/islands and they are preparing to face Japanese fleet and land Okinawa and Japan. Your idea of Japan, seizing Islands in pacific and at the same time fighting/withstanding/destroying Chinks is non existent in gameplay reality. The only option Japan has is to mass their OP light tank which has damage 12-13(for some reason the strongest tank in the game).

Now that i touched the subject of light tank warfare(urgent), let me elaborate it extensively in details. I can't seem to understand why does GE have the most pleb light tank PANZER I with damage 8-9 while Allies have superb light, stuart tank with damage 10-12. Soviet light tank t-26 doesn't straggle behind neither.. with excellent 10-11 damage. It's not that much of a problem when GE mass spams inferior light tanks but if Allies or SU or Japan does it(not to mention what hell happens if they upgrade tank doctrine) it's hell of a mess. Fingolfin, you even made Italian light tanks stronger then Pz Is with damage 9-11. Beside that GE has unserviceable and inferior light tanks, i wanted to point out the imbalance of 'mass spam light tanks, tactic' in general. Whoever masses light tanks mixed with some infantry doesn't stand a chance against enemy who mass spammed infantry mixed with medium tanks. This happens due to the fact, when light tanks hit infantry they do MASSIVE splash damage, so you need to work on this out, reduce it a bit,on all light tanks. What i also want to point out is the long amount of time that medium tanks have to destroy light tanks. As from what i've seen so far, all medium tanks have unsignificant 9-11 damage against other tanks/machines. Raise that +2 = make it 11-13. I also wanted to add the following: like take away -10 hp on all light tanks, but if you add +2 damage on medium tanks and reduce light tank's splash damage slightly, it's not neccesary.
You also need to rework Japanese light tank(damage 12-13). Make it 11-12 maybe, everything sounds good if you reduce the amount of splash damage. You should also keep in mind that Soviet, UK, US, Jap (nations that have super op light tanks) literally never care to train their medium tanks. Why would you when you can have light tanks which in high number have same effect as several medium tank. I doubt that Italy is forced to make any PZ IVs now that they have pretty solid FiatL6/40s.
So due to the irrelevance of medium tanks in this game, besides you could upgrade them +2 damage on their damage done against other machines/tanks, append on them like +30 hp.
Also i have to ask you this, why is Japanese medium tank intentionally made so bad and useless? They are the worst medium tanks in the game even tho Japs are alone in pacific facing 4 other factions. I am bothered here with sense of balance in the game and not by historical accuracy. Besides this game isn't even historical accurate not even close...
Jap Medium Tank has the lowest amount of HP among all mediums = 200 hp.. work this out, give them more damage .. they are completely useless and inferior to chinese pz IVs

Panther tanks seem nice at first glance, but then again we never got them actually to be trained in the game, cause game ends up way too quick due to the op light tank spam.
If you are planning to add more tanks into the game(which is always more then welcome, you are the best model editor wc3 ever had and will have), consider making an ability in factory, an upgrade named Factory#2, which when you click it, it'd upgrade factory to another factory where you can train new various type of tanks and out there ofcourse you can choose option to upgrade back to Factory#1.

Another thing i don't like in new version is your fetish for bunkers.. Why do i not like it? Because it affects pretty much only Axis powers who need to expand in order to win, while on the other hand allies just need to steal land and income from axis(pretty much) in order to win. So beside removing bunker on Spanish-French border you should also remove few neutral bunkers in Northern Africa and a bunker which you added right next to Oslo.
upload_2018-11-12_17-42-49.png


And maybe add a Oil reffinery at Transylvanian city and remove 1 anti air flak gun(so strategic bombers can actually try to bomb it without dying), due to the fact it's being guarded by plenty of neutral units and 2 bunkers(on the hill). As Germany i never cared to take out those neutrals exactly because of amount of neutrals that are stacked here just for a shitty small city. Either way i always regretted it cause i lack that factory(cuz GE doesnt have as much factories avaliable as SU for example has). Consider adding oil reffinery out there and make that place more significant, it should be noted that GE is hardest nation to play and has obligation to expand in all 3 directions with all type of ground and air units(inf,ATgun,lighttank,mediumtank.. artillery) and this gets pretty much impossible due to the massive oil upkeep GE gets driven into over time.

You did pretty well and solid with balancing planes(except the fact that UK has cheapest planes) - regarding fighter/dive bomber armor reduction to anti air flak guns and batteries. Im grateful for this. But then again i have to make you pay attention to paratrooper imbalance (URGENT - ever since 1.4d i ban paratroopers in all my games and people are thankful for that), i am sure you are aware of this, i'm trying to explain you their superiority over all other units, ever since you invented them. Now i remember what you said in your defense - that Paratroopers were historically best trained and elite soldiers. But that doesn't mean you should affect their attack speed ratio. All infantry among themselves(paratroopers,waffen SS included) should have equal attack speed ratio, otherwise in high numbers those 'elite' troops/paratroopers completely rape the enemy army no matter what just due to increased attack speed. I know that you did do something related to paratrooper imbalance but that's completely irrelevant. Here's my suggestion and i think most of people who play this game will agree with me on this one: All paratrooper units should have same stats, same hp, same damage, same attack speed and paratrooper planes should have equal resource cost. I completely agree with you that they're elite soldiers of a nation, therefore i propose they should have 30hp more then regular infantry making it 130hp and respective damage of 7-9. And also unable units like mortars,flamethrowers to drop out from paraplane.. it's completely out of order and unrealistic.

At the same time, the thing that's most urgent and that triggered me to write such a huge and perspective post is the new russian winter that you added making completely insane and superhard for GE to withstand against Soviet army during the winter months(pinch me if im not correct, but that's 6 out of 12 months). This winter spreads all across from Russia to Germany - meaning whenever i played German Reich in 1.6b version i ended up inevitably defending the last defensive line against Soviets back in Berlin. Winter aura that freely affects half time of a year all German units in both attack speed/movement speed aspect is just way too much, game was broken already before, in favour of team 1, due to the fact Allies can easily mass fund SU(and if SU kills Finland fast enough, it grabs easily and swiftly northern Scandinavia which doesn't have any extra bunkers and then it gets over 3k currency income). So this is what i propose: Make three winter aura areas, 1 area that covers up land spread from Germany to Estonia-Kiev, and this one should make GE units lose only -1 armor. The other aura would cover up lands from Viborg-Arkhangel'sk up to Kiev-Kharkov and it would affect GE army by besides reducing their armor for -1, it could also slow their movement speed for 15-20% while 3rd winter aura would affect only German troops in Stalingrad and it'd make them lose -2armor, 15-20% movement speed and 10% attack speed. Also you should make a capital city for each of those winter areas, like Vilnius for 1st winter area, Moscow for 2nd winter area, Stalingrad for 3rd winter area. And once GE army captures each capital, winter debuff should expire once and for all. Sounds good and fair
 
Version 1.6c is out! Major changes in this version are the fact that i got rid of the crappy old alliance modes and replaced them with simply "locked" vs "unlocked" alliances. In both modes, players start in 4v4 teams just like in the old Axis and Allies. Ships were also rebalanced to make naval battles a bit faster and to make coastal batteries not suck. Finally, paratroopers were nerfed once again and tanks were rebalanced to reduce the prevalence of light tanks.

Changelog:
  • "Alliance Mode" is now "Diplomacy Mode", and the options are only "Locked" or Unlocked". Starting teams are always grouped in Axis vs Allies.
  • Teams are now divided into two forces in the lobby.
  • Drastically reduced the health of all naval units.
  • Coastal batteries now deal piercing damage instead of normal. This means they should do significantly more damage, especially to battleships.
  • Moved UK shipyard from Gibraltar to Morocco. It is now Neutral.
  • Added 2 more infantry units at Casablanca and moved the 2 light tanks to the capture point.
  • Moved one sea capture point from the Atlantic to the Baltic sea.
  • Reduced HP of all paratrooper types. Some other paratrooper stats may also have been nerfed (like attack speed).
  • Reduced the negative effects of winter to -15% movement (from -20% movement speed and -15% attack rate).
  • Removed one flak gun and added an oil field in Transylvania.
  • Moved one factory from Shanghai to Beijing. Added a factory to Hokkaido.
  • Fixed a pathability bug which was present in the previous version.
  • Paradrops no longer drop mortars or flamethrowers.
  • Tweaked some damage, health and speed values of medium tanks and light tanks.
  • Tweaked some damage table values to make Medium armor slightly stronger against infantry fire.
  • Fixed a bug which prevented allies from getting full share when a player left.
 
Level 2
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
32
Military technology should be changed to a maximum of two.
It can be combined under different technologies, which can greatly enrich the gameplay.
 
Level 2
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
32
Yes, if two doctrines combined to each other, which can make the game more rich in gameplay and make the game more varied.
such as:
Infantry and tank combination
Infantry and Air Force combination
Navy and air force combination
Tank and air force combination
Navy and tank combination
And so many more.
 
Level 2
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
32
Another point.
1.I think that if all buildings fail to function properly below 350HP(except for defense buildings), they can increase the value of the Air Force.
The Air Force should not only support the battle, but also bomb the enemy's rear building.All buildings should automatically recover HP, recovering 1 or 2 points per second.(except for defense buildings)
2.The Air Force Doctrines should add HP instead of Armor because the fighter and cruiser attacks ignore Armor.
 
Last edited:
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
In relation with the Bunker placement in Asia I would make the following changes.

full

The Hainan peninsula is a very important outpost for Japan allowing it to target and expand in Southeast Asia. China can rush it down with it's starting units thus crippling japan. Adding a Bunker here would greatly help alleviate early Chinese aggression.

full

This region never gets used due to not giving enough advantages compared to going through the main line north, removing one bunker from the area could give Japan some flanking alternatives though not without risk as the Chinese can simply advance themselves and trap the Japanese army running south.

full

These two bunkers are the only thing that keeps Japan afloat after the inevitable capture of Shanghai by the Chinese, this only really help stop a rush from China as those bunkers can be easily bombed so they should remain where they are now.

Follow up suggestions:

Now with Ships having less HP and coastal doing pierce damage things are not looking too well. The Coastal Batteries can 1v1 a battleship something that for it's price should not be able to do.
Instead of Increasing the price of Coastals I feel you should reduce their Armour and Hit Points significantly, somewhere between 250 HP and 0-1 armour. Considering there is an upgrade that can increase both HP and armour by 200/2 I would also suggest for the damage to be slightly reduced if only against Battleship as for other ships the damage is good especially for Transports.

Waffen SS limit is redundant and unnecessary, nobody even makes Waffen SS to begin with. Given that no other unit has that limit. (You can for example have infinite Tigers and Paratroopers)
 
Last edited:
Level 1
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
58
Great job job Fingolfin, the map is great and even tho needs to be more polished in the balance section, it is very well made.
Now, have you ever thought of adding more players and more factions into the game? 4v4 is nice and all, but the map is fairly big and could fit more players into it.

As for my opinions about balance, I think that at the end of it, it comes down to skill, as the fight is usually around unit-counters and air suprmecy or naval.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
Part two:

full

The reason why Paratroopers were so OP in old versions is not because of the extreme stats but due to the extreme range. At the moment they have the same range as AT Guns and outrange everything except artillery, while normal infantry have around 280-290 (Rifles) range. Due to this reason they were so powerful against Light Tanks which were meant to be their counter, when massed the units in the back could also fire as the Light tanks had to get closer having only 280 range meaning you could get 3 lines of infantry firing at once.
I would suggest the range to be more appropriate to the average Infantry and get a 290 range (meaning they will still outrange SMG infantry but not be as good against light tanks)
Due to this you could revert some of their stats back considering they won't be able to out range their counters anymore.\

Sea Control Points

full

Instead of being another way to boost your income they could serve as strategic points that will allow you to monitor the enemy fleet movement by giving you vision over large areas of the sea. This could also resolve the issue for those that complain about the Allied dominated Atlantic by giving them less resources but still be important for the Axis by making them have a larger vision and thus giving the Axis more information about incoming Trade or Transport ships.

There could also be more Sea points on the map to put more emphasis on building ships. One important Sea line was the Atlantic as it gave the Axis important information regarding American movement, therefore I feel that the point moved to the baltic should be returned or have another one added to take it's place.

full

Overall this is just something to consider and not a fact.

Other suggestions made by the community for sea points include:

-Giving Sea points an aura to boost ships similar to planes
-Keeping the Sea points just as a way to boost income.



Current Bugs:

Sea Mines are still bugged, they will not trigger even if next to enemy ships.
Air supremacy buff is being given to ENEMY units as well.
 
Last edited:
Part two:

full

The reason why Paratroopers were so OP in old versions is not because of the extreme stats but due to the extreme range. At the moment they have the same range as AT Guns and outrange everything except artillery, while normal infantry have around 280-290 (Rifles) range. Due to this reason they were so powerful against Light Tanks which were meant to be their counter, when massed the units in the back could also fire as the Light tanks had to get closer having only 280 range meaning you could get 3 lines of infantry firing at once.
I would suggest the range to be more appropriate to the average Infantry and get a 290 range (meaning they will still outrange SMG infantry but not be as good against light tanks)
Due to this you could revert some of their stats back considering they won't be able to out range their counters anymore.\

It was only German paratroopers which had this insane range (i think the reasoning was that they used scoped FG42s), the others had pretty normal ranges. But yes, thank you for notifying me of this, i also noticed that in some cases i had been nerfing the wrong attack - some paratroopers use "attack 2" instead of "attack 1" in the object editor. I will adjust this, and also reduce German paratrooper range.

Air supremacy buff is being given to ENEMY units as well.

I see no evidence in the object editor that this should be the case.



Great job job Fingolfin, the map is great and even tho needs to be more polished in the balance section, it is very well made.
Now, have you ever thought of adding more players and more factions into the game? 4v4 is nice and all, but the map is fairly big and could fit more players into it.

Thanks! I won't add any more players to this map since there is no way to balance it up well without splitting certain factions into two (which i don't want to do). There is no proper axis team to be added.

In relation with the Bunker placement in Asia I would make the following changes.

The Hainan peninsula is a very important outpost for Japan allowing it to target and expand in Southeast Asia. China can rush it down with it's starting units thus crippling japan. Adding a Bunker here would greatly help alleviate early Chinese aggression.

Sure, good think you've reached a conclusion to the bunker issue. I can agree with that.

Now with Ships having less HP and coastal doing pierce damage things are not looking too well. The Coastal Batteries can 1v1 a battleship something that for it's price should not be able to do.
Instead of Increasing the price of Coastals I feel you should reduce their Armour and Hit Points significantly, somewhere between 250 HP and 0-1 armour. Considering there is an upgrade that can increase both HP and armour by 200/2 I would also suggest for the damage to be slightly reduced if only against Battleship as for other ships the damage is good especially for Transports.

Waffen SS limit is redundant and unnecessary, nobody even makes Waffen SS to begin with. Given that no other unit has that limit. (You can for example have infinite Tigers and Paratroopers)

I did reduce their damage by about 10 so far, reduced their health, and increased their cost to the same as bunkers. Regarding doing less damage to battleships - the only option there is to give them explosive damage, but that would make them unresonably strong against destroyers, since those are vulnerable to explosive fire. I think keeping the same damage type but changing other stats is the way to go.

Regarding Waffen SS, i am considering making them spawn in squads, or even remove them altogether. Since they were basically recruited more based on their Nazi allegiance rather than their combat prowess, i'm not sure if it's fair to make them so elite.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
I see no evidence in the object editor that this should be the case.


You should try it in game, hover some Fighters over enemy units and they will get the +1 armour.

By the way, you should make the Panzer IV upgrade be applied to existing units cause it's just 2 sheets of metals that get added and not a complete remodel.

The Battleships should be able to kill a few coastal batteries if they 1v1.
 
Last edited:
Level 1
Joined
Dec 1, 2016
Messages
58
It was only German paratroopers which had this insane range (i think the reasoning was that they used scoped FG42s), the others had pretty normal ranges. But yes, thank you for notifying me of this, i also noticed that in some cases i had been nerfing the wrong attack - some paratroopers use "attack 2" instead of "attack 1" in the object editor. I will adjust this, and also reduce German paratrooper range.



I see no evidence in the object editor that this should be the case.





Thanks! I won't add any more players to this map since there is no way to balance it up well without splitting certain factions into two (which i don't want to do). There is no proper axis team to be added.



Sure, good think you've reached a conclusion to the bunker issue. I can agree with that.



I did reduce their damage by about 10 so far, reduced their health, and increased their cost to the same as bunkers. Regarding doing less damage to battleships - the only option there is to give them explosive damage, but that would make them unresonably strong against destroyers, since those are vulnerable to explosive fire. I think keeping the same damage type but changing other stats is the way to go.

Regarding Waffen SS, i am considering making them spawn in squads, or even remove them altogether. Since they were basically recruited more based on their Nazi allegiance rather than their combat prowess, i'm not sure if it's fair to make them so elite.
Yeah not enough Axis memebers thats the problem. How about adding France, with African Corps to counter them? That way Italy would be able to help germany in europe vs france, while african corps will fight uk in africa.
Or maybe african corps +common wealth. commonwealth would control india and egypt and would fight the african corps in africa. tho that doesnt give italy a rival to fight with.
 
Level 1
Joined
Nov 17, 2018
Messages
1
Hello guys i used to play this map with my friends in Garena almost 6 or 7 years ago and i have just found out my favorite map is still being developed . Where can i play with you guys or like game client ? sorry for asked off-topic question.
 
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
Hello guys i used to play this map with my friends in Garena almost 6 or 7 years ago and i have just found out my favorite map is still being developed . Where can i play with you guys or like game client ? sorry for asked off-topic question.

You can join here Discord - Free voice and text chat for gamers , this is a world in flames group that host games every day.
 
Last edited:
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
I did reduce their damage by about 10 so far, reduced their health, and increased their cost to the same as bunkers. Regarding doing less damage to battleships - the only option there is to give them explosive damage, but that would make them unresonably strong against destroyers, since those are vulnerable to explosive fire. I think keeping the same damage type but changing other stats is the way to go.

Regarding Waffen SS, i am considering making them spawn in squads, or even remove them altogether. Since they were basically recruited more based on their Nazi allegiance rather than their combat prowess, i'm not sure if it's fair to make them so elite.

I think the armour should also be reduced by a lot also, currently it is 5 as even Infantry take quite a long time in destroying it. With upgrades it's 7, it could be reduced to either 3 or 1 so it will be 5 or 3 armour after upgrades, keep in mind that because there are no damage upgrades except through maybe doctrines the fortifications will simply be harder to destroy after you get the upgrade.


The Waffen SS had some elite divisions and very devoted they should be kept the same, maybe give them your STG44 model to them.
About models, do you ever think about revamping the Allied Infantry models? Those are the most used units and their models are no longer on par with the rest of the game, especially the USA/UK infantry. And that Soviet infantry smile, gives me shivers.

Btw make the Luzon Port objective for Japan start in 1941.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, a revamped allied soldier model is certainly needed, preferably a German one too as they look like bobbleheads. The Soviet one is wonky but will have to work for now.

As for the batteries, I think one issue is surely the upgrade, it would be worth it even if it just gave +1 armor. But yeah, I can reduce their base armor a little. I think that maybe tweaking infantry damage against structures is also possible, capturing certain structures takes to long for them at the moment.
 
v1.7 - British tanks update

There's a new version up, and it's pretty big! Features include new British tanks, objectives being listed in the quest menu, standings being moved to a separate multiboard, and much more!

British tank doctrine during WW2 was entirely different from that of the rest of the world. Instead of classifying their tanks by weight class, they believed that tanks should fill two different roles - either they would be slow but heavily armored, to advance alongside infantry against an enemy defensive position - or they would fill the role of cavalry, and be used for reconnaissance and fast, flanking attacks. With this in mind, they developed a line of "Infantry Tanks" for the former purpose, and "Cruiser" or "Cavalry" tanks for the latter.

For the purpose of this map, Cruiser tanks will roughly fill the role of Light tanks (as fast, anti-infantry units), while Infantry tanks will be a mixture between medium and heavy tanks, being designated as heavy armor but equipped with a somewhat under-performing HE-firing gun.

The A22 Churchill Infantry Tank

Churchill.jpg

The Churchill was the most heavily armored tank to be fielded by the Allies during WW2. Unfortunately, due to the British habit of restricting the width of their tanks to that of a regular train cart, the Churchill had an awkward oblong construction which could not fit a large enough turret ring to harbor a gun of the size it needed. Its speed was also a poultry 25 km/h, as it was designed to fight alongside infantry.

The A15 Crusader Cruiser Tank

Crusader.jpg

The Crusader was designed for the purpose of quickly swarming and overwhelming the enemy with its high speed and ability to fire somewhat accurately while moving. It was produced in massive numbers, even after it had become somewhat obsolete in the face of newer, German models. Historically, it fired exclusively an armor piercing round, which made it very vulnerable against anti-tank positions. Although considering the advantages and disadvantages of giving it an armor-piercing attack in the map, i ended up instead giving it an explosive attack, albeit with lower splash damage which makes it less effective against massed infantry.

Overall, the defining characteristic of the new British tanks is high survivability but low damage. I also started modeling a Handley Page Halifax bomber, but unfortunately, it didn't make it into this version.

Full changelog:
  • New unit: The Crusader cruiser tank.
  • New unit: The Churchill infantry tank.
  • All British Stuart tanks have been replaced with Crusaders.
  • Some infantry at Alexandria has been replaced with 2 Crusader tanks.
  • Objectives now generate quests in the quest menu.
  • Standings are now shown in a separate multiboard which can be toggled to in the Foreign Business menu.
  • Added a counter for cities held in the resource multiboard.
  • Reduced Coastal Battery damage by 10, health by 50, armor by 2, and increased cost. It is still recommended however to use land units or planes against coastal defenses.
  • Added a bunker for Japan at Hainan.
  • Removed a bunker for China in the southern passage to the airfield.
  • Increased the health of all SPG artillery units by around 10 and their damage by 1.
  • Numerous small balance tweaks which i have probably forgotten to list.
 

Attachments

  • World in Flames v1.7 (opt).w3x
    9.5 MB · Views: 121
Level 2
Joined
May 21, 2017
Messages
32
1.The city is repairing too fast. Need to be fixed.
2.Why can't a strategic bomber be attacked after it drops a bomb?
This has made it almost impossible for strategic bombers to be shot down.
 
Last edited:
Level 11
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
717
1.The city is repairing too fast. Need to be fixed.
2.Why can't a strategic bomber be attacked after it drops a bomb?
This has made it almost impossible for strategic bombers to be shot down.

That keeps Battleship spam from capturing your coastal cities.


There are still bugs that have not been addressed yet.

  • The Fighter aura provides armour to Enemy Units.
  • Sea Mines still do not work, perhaps they should be removed if they can't be worked out.
  • The Battleship second attack has been removed? It doesn't work anymore.
  • The timer for the Domination Victory should be longer, similar to the Sudden Death one (5 minutes). Currently as there are no warnings you can be caught by surprise when you lose a City and domination triggers leaving you only 1 minute to scramble to capture it back.
  • UK should maybe get a option to revert back to USA tanks (Lend Lease) as I think there should be a choice between having stronger Infantry splash and more beefy light tanks, also seeing a bunch of Churchills in the same place is a bit silly. Though they are both wonderful models.
  • I like the new Cities Held information and the quests, perhaps there is room to count the amount of Factories you own too.
  • Watch Towers and Half Tracks could get a damage boost to make them a bit more appealing, on this note more Watchtowers could be placed in the more remote areas where there are no points of interest this mostly referring to islands.
 
1.The city is repairing too fast. Need to be fixed.
2.Why can't a strategic bomber be attacked after it drops a bomb?
This has made it almost impossible for strategic bombers to be shot down.

Cities are repairing fast because earlier, engineers would spend ages repairing cities and not do much else. Just kill the engineers, the city won't fight back.

As for strat bombers - yes, this is an issue, and it is caused by a warcraft bug where paused units are not targeted by the phoenix fire ability. I am working on possibly making a better system for planes and airfields altogether which circumvents this and lets them use their regular attack. This would also potentially allow fighters to target infantry in strafing runs, which would be pretty rad.

There are still bugs that have not been addressed yet.

  • The Fighter aura provides armour to Enemy Units.
  • Sea Mines still do not work, perhaps they should be removed if they can't be worked out.
  • The Battleship second attack has been removed? It doesn't work anymore.
  • The timer for the Domination Victory should be longer, similar to the Sudden Death one (5 minutes). Currently as there are no warnings you can be caught by surprise when you lose a City and domination triggers leaving you only 1 minute to scramble to capture it back.
  • UK should maybe get a option to revert back to USA tanks (Lend Lease) as I think there should be a choice between having stronger Infantry splash and more beefy light tanks, also seeing a bunch of Churchills in the same place is a bit silly. Though they are both wonderful models.
  • I like the new Cities Held information and the quests, perhaps there is room to count the amount of Factories you own too.
  • Watch Towers and Half Tracks could get a damage boost to make them a bit more appealing, on this note more Watchtowers could be placed in the more remote areas where there are no points of interest this mostly referring to islands.

I have tried absolutely everything to fix the air superiority bug, but it seems to be an issue with warcraft. It has its targets allowed set to "ground, allied". I might try with a different base aura and see if it works better. It's weird though, since devotion aura (which it is based on) shouldn't (and doesn't) affect enemies either.

As for sea mines - yes, i haven't had time to fix this, but i will test it some more soon. I wish it had been possible to just base them off the regular land mines, but unfortunately, like many things, the "targets allowed" field of the goblin mine has no effect and is actually hardcoded.

Battleships still have a second attack (if you refer to the land attack) and i tested it before i uploaded the map. If you are referring to the machine gun attack - it was never supposed to target ground and is a basic anti-air attack, which has been fixed.

All your other suggestions sound good, i will look into all these things (though i think showing factories is perhaps redundant - research points earned would be more useful).
 
Top