Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SPWaW Thread Hall of Fame >> Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 5/20/2002 5:06:20 AM   
El Vito

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 3/25/2001
From: Ohio
Status: offline 		I totally agree with your point about the Shermans, some 49,000 were produced of all the types. But I also think they are somewhat overrated in this game, weren't they considered death traps by many? in regular SPWAW they can slug it out with most of the good German tanks. I haven't really faced them that much in Head-2-Head so I don't have an accurate opinion on that. I realize that these would be fundamental changes and hard to employ. the Shermans and the T-34/76's would probably all have to be a little more inaccurate. Just my thoughts.

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 61
- 5/20/2002 7:48:55 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		I think Shermans, at least the pre 76MM ones or Jumbos should be priced about the same as the T34/76 models.
They should be Cheaper than The PZIV, IMHO, But how much cheaper?
And what about cromwells? How do they compare?
But when you get up to the sherman 76s and T34/85
HMM now thats a tougher question!!

_____________________________



(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 62
- 5/21/2002 12:18:24 AM   
Svennemir

 

Posts: 542
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		But if the pricing of a unit is changed manually then the whole systematic pricing system is discarded.

Please remember that we have the SpreadSheet From Hell to make things easier.

There could be made a small change in the formula to correctly price the "mass produced units" in correspondence to the others: let RARITY affect unit cost!

Units with rarity 0 could have a small - say 5% price reduction. That makes 95%. "Rarity 1" units could have their price retained, then rarity 2 and 3 could have their prices increased accordingly in 5% increments.

It is of course important that the penalizing ratio is not set high since rare units are also *supposed* to be used on the battlefield, they must not be totally ruled out by the other units.

What do you think about this?

In my opinion the solution is much better than manually changing the prices of units. Manual changes should be avoided at ALL costs. If units are not "equally good" then adjustments to formulae should be made, not adjustments to the prices of those units.

The SFH has done a great job balancing, and though there are some "unfair" costs around, it would be a shame to discard this balance.

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 63
- 5/21/2002 12:44:10 AM   
Svennemir

 

Posts: 542
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		An easy way to compare the AT capabilities of tanks is to create a scenario with 10-20 AI-controlled tanks of one type vs. same number of AI-controlled tanks of the other type on a clear map.

It takes almost no time and the computer can fight it out itself. Actually interesting to see results afterwards.

It's far from a perfect comparison but in general it tells you which tank can take out the other at greater range. (results tend to be "extreme" since the winning group will also outnumber the other group as soon as it starts taking losses).

Also remember to turn on unlimited ammo if testing IS-2 tanks. The interesting part is the actual combat efficiency of vehicles, not how much they'll lose when running out of ammo.

I think the following ROUGH comparisons apply

Panther
IS-2
Tiger
Sherman 76
T-34/85
Panzer IV (long 75mm)
Sherman 75
T-34/76
Panzer III

In real life I would doubt the efficiency of Shermans over T-34s, especially early versions.

Of course in those tests the Front armour will primarily be "in use", but that also counts in real life battles.

Rather interesting things also show if you check the log afterwards, such as IS-2s being almost invincible at the front hull while Panthers can shoot through their turret at even long range.

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 64
- 5/21/2002 9:08:33 PM   
El Vito

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 3/25/2001
From: Ohio
Status: offline 		Using the rarity to affect the point cost sounds reasonable enough. At least its a move in the right direction without upturning the apple cart.

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 65
- 5/22/2002 2:20:55 AM   
AmmoSgt

 

Posts: 1002
Joined: 10/21/2000
From: Redstone Arsenal Al
Status: offline 		Using points to reflect production numbers would tend to make players face odds , and possibly buy more in line with Historical Battle's ..if thats what you want. Purchases of Primarily Infantry with some Armor support would be less impacted by any price changes than Armor Heavy buys ..This brings up the whole Findamental Pricing scheme .. if you consider the "production" of Infantry Squads vs the "production' of Tanks .. this would force a serious discounting of Infantry v Armor units and for some nations might run the price of Arty up and for some down ... It would definately effect the relative cost of trucks v Halftracks ... I would strongly suggest just doing two opposing OOB's for a test , and seeing how that effects things ... My Guess is that , especially given the ammount of info a player has in this game, it would essentially make a whole new variant of SP that would take some considerable getting used to. Remember this has to be done within a very narrow point range ... I know 1-255 point cost seems large , but when yiou start trying to squeeze the large variety of units in this game into it, it starts getting incredibly narrow fast.
I am not against the idea per se , but I can see problems , and I don't think you can just do Armor alone , it would be a massive amount of work , and I am sure a massive debate .. I don't think the 5% incremental suggestion is a bad one , based on rarity, but I think a 10% increment would better reflect the issue .
Another method I would suggest is Base Price as per the current formula discounted .5% ( half of 1%) for each 100 units made up to 1000 and above 1000 .5 % discount for each 1000 units made up to a maximum of 50% discount( or whatever limit folks can agree upon) .. this discount would apply across the board to all types of units . Infantry , in other words , would by default , at least for the major powers , would be discounted the maximum , rare and unique Vechicles , elite commando units would be discounted much less . I would further suggest that imported weapons (ie US Halftracks/ British Valentine Tanks supplied to the Russians for example )be priced per numbers imported in lieu of actual production numbers. Likewise captured vehicles (ie Matilda's captured by Germans in North Africa being much more expensive for the Germans than for the British) .. all this is just a suggestion.

_____________________________

"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 66
- 5/22/2002 7:27:59 PM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Svennemir
[B]But if the pricing of a unit is changed manually then the whole systematic pricing system is discarded.

Please remember that we have the SpreadSheet From Hell to make things easier.

In my opinion the solution is much better than manually changing the prices of units. Manual changes should be avoided at ALL costs. If units are not "equally good" then adjustments to formulae should be made, not adjustments to the prices of those units.


[/B][/QUOTE]

On this point I disagree...my "believe" in the SFH is quite limited at best.
I do see the benefit of restructuring and getting a common baseline, but that's it.
I think to calculate costs by a formula is the most challenging task in SP since the game was born...and the currently used formula did surely a good job and one can see, that a lot of factors went into it...and yet it produced some strange results, that are just not bareable (the AAA costs is the most drastic example).
So I always tended to use the SFH as a hint or base, but prefer manual tweaking over formula...

H2H is full of manually redone cost structures and that for some good reasons.
Here's one example:
Russian Rifle vs German Rifle squad (early, just with Rifle, LMG and Grenades).
German superiority in LMG and FC is better, Russians do have 2 men more in the squad.
The rest is equal for both...

So on paper it looks like the two are about the same battle effectiveness...the Russians compensate a little setback in equipement and FC by two more men.

In H2H the costs for a German Schützen Grp are 27 points, for the Russian equivalent 18...and that's pretty close to battle performence.

The reason for the high German costs are in this case, that one major factor for the effectiveness of an infantry squad is not included in the OOB data...the leadership values.
The German rally and inf command ratings make a German squad way more lethal than it's Russian counterpart.
That is why I set the costs this way (also giving the Russians a little bonus for sheer numbers of infantry available).

What this also does tell you is, do not play H2H with historic ratings turned off and think everything is handled equally, or you might be quite surprised... ;)

You brought some good points up here, Ammo and I agree. There're a lot of possible errors in this approach.
Probably a systematic reevaluation of unit costs by production numbers might be the best way...but it's also a way to stressing and time consuming...
If you take a close look at some pricings, you will notice that a lot the rarity and production numbers already went into the costs the one or other way...

Here's how I try to handle the costs in general:

Basically costs for all nations are the same for the same vehicle, gun...
From this baseline I give bonuses or penalties for some nations, like the penalty for German infantry or a bonus for US Artillery.
This can be considered some sort of national characteristics...

The idea of giving the Russians a bonus on T-34 costs is something already implemented in H2H, but I agree it could be a bit more...I checked out costs, that will not disturb the overall cost structure and this came out:

T-34 m41 cost 69
M4A1 (75) cost 72
T-34/85 cost 93 (with APCR)
M4A1 (76) cost 93 (without APCR)
Pzkpfw IVh cost 112

this is the limit the current system can handle, without breaking existing cost structures.

National cost characteristic in H2H up to now are:

Germany:

penalty on infantry
bonus on horse vehicles

Russia:

bonus on infantry
bonus on Artillery (limited effect)
bonus on T-34 tanks

US:

bonus on Artillery (significant effect)
bonus on motor transportation
bonus on Sherman tanks

any other nation can have a little advantage here or there, but they are not generalized, like the above...it's some sort of fun of it's own, to find out what a nation is good at ;)

Please note, that no changes were made without keeping gaming balance in mind and I can almost assure, that no real disadvantages for a nation evolve through these changes...what will cause a disadvantage for you is, when you do not choose typical equipement for you nation and your opponent does...then your unusual stuff should be chosen quite wisely to make up for some more points...this is something directly connected to player experience and in my opinion adds really fun to force selection...

So to sum it all up:

H2H takes a slightly different approach on costs. The regular v7.1 makes the costs and performence equal for the setting "historic ratings OFF".
In H2H "historic ratings ON" is considered to be the baseline and costs are modeled according to this plus a tendency to "guide" players into typical force structures by "awarding" such choices with less costs.

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 67
- 5/23/2002 1:47:35 AM   
Svennemir

 

Posts: 542
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]
Germany:

penalty on infantry
bonus on horse vehicles

Russia:

bonus on infantry
bonus on Artillery (limited effect)
bonus on T-34 tanks

US:

bonus on Artillery (significant effect)
bonus on motor transportation
bonus on Sherman tanks
[/QUOTE]

This kind of bonus easy to apply and use, since it accounts for overall groups of units. I won't consider this a "manual" change like it would be to change prices for units "one at a time".

This chart makes prices correspond roughly to real-life rarity of units TYPES. I still think that using the RARITY to affect prices of single units with small increments is the best way to go.

Remember, for instance, that T-34 tanks were not very frequently seen in the early war. The earliest T-34 tanks could have rarities reflecting this, thereby having their prices changed. Also not all Sherman vehicles were equally common. If there's a overall bonus to Sherman and T-34 tanks, the rarities of specific models could be used to counter these gaps in pricing.

RARITY is a world of opportunity waiting to be exploited! :mad:

It will then be unnecessary to e.g. penalize captured tanks since those were "automatically" quite rare.

Basing prices on production numbers as suggested by AmmoSgt is a good way in theory, but it's a hell to implement - how many "Odessa tanks" were produced? Who wants to find out? What about all the Sonderkraftfahrzeuge? :eek:

About the pricing of those AAA units - I don't know exactly what has been done, but I would apply a factor to the prices of all AAA units. Since both the multiple tube units and the heavy one-shot guns like the US 90mm and the Soviet 85mm are cost-wise superior to infantry guns / AT-guns, the same factor could be applied to all AAA units. Is this what has been done? (I made some posts discussing this a long time ago....)

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 68
- 5/23/2002 7:15:11 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		T-34 m41 cost 69
M4A1 (75) cost 72
T-34/85 cost 93 (with APCR)
M4A1 (76) cost 93 (without APCR)
Pzkpfw IVh cost 112

this is the limit the current system can handle, without breaking existing cost structures.

This Looks good to me Panzer!
Im glad Panthers, tigers, IS series were NOT included in this, as alot of people like to compare, tigers to shermans ect ect... but those are different animals..
keep up the good work

_____________________________



(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 69
APCR ammo? - 5/31/2002 7:03:25 AM   
tracer


Posts: 1865
Joined: 11/22/2000
From: New Smyrna Beach, FL USA
Status: offline 		A PBEM opponent requested a battle using H2H, so I downloaded and installed the mod. I have a question: where's the APCR ammo? I bought AT units that always have APCR in their loadout, but there's not a round in my entire force. Did I miss a memo? :(

_____________________________

Jim NSB

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 70
Re: APCR ammo? - 5/31/2002 1:56:23 PM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by tracer
[B]A PBEM opponent requested a battle using H2H, so I downloaded and installed the mod. I have a question: where's the APCR ammo? I bought AT units that always have APCR in their loadout, but there's not a round in my entire force. Did I miss a memo? :( [/B][/QUOTE]

The APCR loads in H2H are completely redone. Basically APCR is much more uncommon now.
It depends on the the nation and vehicles you purchase, but in general there're two versions of the same vehicle...one with APCR, one without (well, ofcourse only for the few that had it at all).
The APCR loads by nation:

Germany

Will have quite high APCR loads in early war years for small calibers (20mm/37mm and 50mm) up to about '42.
Larger calibers don't have APCR at all, except very few like I think the Pz IVf2 with 2 rounds in full load and the one or other tank destroyer (but it's close to nothing and much less than in v7.1).

Russia

Starting about '43 in one special T-34/76 m43 version with a couple of rounds and I think 4 shots in a T-34/85 in '44.
Some tank destroyers or AT-guns might also have a few rounds, but it's not very common.

USA

The earliest for tanks to appear with APCR is in August '44. Usually every 76mm gun vehicle has one version with and one without APCR load. Loads are smaller then used to be, ranging from 4 to 8 rounds max.

UK

They are the only ones who really fielded APCR on a regular base from August '44 on (for larger calibers).
Loads on their guns are significantly higher than other nations and you can rely on having at least a few shots even with reduced ammo on.

Other nations

Usually only for 20mm cannons or in vehicles from the UK (17pounder), but no regular appearance...


What it comes down to is: APCR is much rarer in H2H and you have to pay quite a bit, if you want it...
When in doubt, if a vehicle or gun has APCR ammo or not, it is always the more expensive one of the otherwise two identical units in the purchase :D

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 71
Re: Re: APCR ammo? - 6/2/2002 8:42:16 AM   
tracer


Posts: 1865
Joined: 11/22/2000
From: New Smyrna Beach, FL USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Panzer Leo
[B]

When in doubt, if a vehicle or gun has APCR ammo or not, it is always the more expensive one of the otherwise two identical units in the purchase :D [/B][/QUOTE]

Got it; thanks. Can an ammo dump/truck supply APCR ammo if the vehicle did not have any to begin with (if it was a 'cheaper' version)?

_____________________________

Jim NSB

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 72
Re: Re: Re: APCR ammo? - 6/2/2002 3:17:50 PM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by tracer
[B]

Got it; thanks. Can an ammo dump/truck supply APCR ammo if the vehicle did not have any to begin with (if it was a 'cheaper' version)? [/B][/QUOTE]

No, if it is not supposed to have APCR (the preset ammo load in the OOB), it can't get it in a battle, even with reloading.
You can just give a vehicle that is supposed to have APCR the max APCR load with ammo trucks or so when you fired some rounds or "reduced ammo" is "on" (if I recall right...).

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 73
Re: Re: Re: Re: APCR ammo? - 6/3/2002 10:33:53 AM   
tracer


Posts: 1865
Joined: 11/22/2000
From: New Smyrna Beach, FL USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Panzer Leo
[B]

No, if it is not supposed to have APCR (the preset ammo load in the OOB), it can't get it in a battle, even with reloading.
[/B][/QUOTE]

Phhhht! So much for that idea: guess I better pray for some good side-shots :)

_____________________________

Jim NSB

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 74
some things I notice - 6/8/2002 10:02:14 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		Just finished my first online game using H2H
some observations
the 20mm flakveirling is way to strong, it was taking out hellcats at some distance
the turret on the king tiger appears backwards?
May just be my old eyesight.
the blue elefants have to go!! heheh
but all in all I think it played very well!!
Fine job!

_____________________________



(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 75
Re: some things I notice - 6/11/2002 1:38:09 PM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Alby
[B]Just finished my first online game using H2H
some observations
the 20mm flakveirling is way to strong, it was taking out hellcats at some distance
the turret on the king tiger appears backwards?
May just be my old eyesight.
the blue elefants have to go!! heheh
but all in all I think it played very well!!
Fine job! [/B][/QUOTE]

Thanks, Alby !

Hmmm...20mm to strong ? Did you take a look at the paper thin armour of these Hellcats ?
An AT-Rifle has no trouble putting them out of business - so why not a 20mm with APCR ?

have fun !

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 76
Re: Re: some things I notice - 6/17/2002 8:26:52 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Panzer Leo
[B]

Thanks, Alby !

Hmmm...20mm to strong ? Did you take a look at the paper thin armour of these Hellcats ?
An AT-Rifle has no trouble putting them out of business - so why not a 20mm with APCR ?

have fun ! [/B][/QUOTE]

yes, you are right, I musta been thinking of wolverines I guess
H2H is very very good!!

_____________________________



(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 77
- 6/30/2002 3:45:58 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		Sorry if this has already been mentioned somewheres, but the Icons for T34M43 and M40 appear to be wrong
The m40 looks like brown cromwell and the m43 looks like a brown "fox" from modern British, sp3

_____________________________



(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 78
- 6/30/2002 3:57:19 AM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Alby
[B]Sorry if this has already been mentioned somewheres, but the Icons for T34M43 and M40 appear to be wrong
The m40 looks like brown cromwell and the m43 looks like a brown "fox" from modern British, sp3 [/B][/QUOTE]

Are you sure, you still got the shp files from H2H installed ?
Both icons have been replaced in H2H and what you describe is what you see, when you use H2H OOBs with normal 7.1 shps...

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 79
- 6/30/2002 7:18:23 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		I might have switched them awhile back
Do you Know the shp file number those particular vehicles are in?
I.E. icon0000 Icon0001 ect ect....

_____________________________



(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 80
- 7/2/2002 3:04:55 PM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Alby
[B]I might have switched them awhile back
Do you Know the shp file number those particular vehicles are in?
I.E. icon0000 Icon0001 ect ect.... [/B][/QUOTE]

It should be:

icon0059
icon0060

...I hope ;)

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 81
Flammenwerfer - 7/15/2002 11:33:11 AM   
tracer


Posts: 1865
Joined: 11/22/2000
From: New Smyrna Beach, FL USA
Status: offline 		I noticed that when the 2-man flammenwerfer team runs out of ammo for its primary weapon, the carbine in the secondary slot no longer fires. Apologies if this has been brought up already.

And I'm not sure if this is an oversight or intentional: the Soviet P-Mol was wisely (IMO) changed in v7.1, making its ammo AP only and unusable against infantry. I notice in H2H that its reverted back to being a nifty 3-hex flamethrower with 10 shots. :eek: I understand you can throw a bottle of petrol at anything, but in the spirit of 'balance' I think that weapon should be limited to vehicles.

_____________________________

Jim NSB

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 82
Re: Flammenwerfer - 7/17/2002 2:59:12 AM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by tracer
[B]I noticed that when the 2-man flammenwerfer team runs out of ammo for its primary weapon, the carbine in the secondary slot no longer fires. Apologies if this has been brought up already.

And I'm not sure if this is an oversight or intentional: the Soviet P-Mol was wisely (IMO) changed in v7.1, making its ammo AP only and unusable against infantry. I notice in H2H that its reverted back to being a nifty 3-hex flamethrower with 10 shots. :eek: I understand you can throw a bottle of petrol at anything, but in the spirit of 'balance' I think that weapon should be limited to vehicles. [/B][/QUOTE]


Hi Tracer !

I'm not sure about the Flammenwerfer...mine do work, when the shots are down to 0, the 98k still fires...

Might it be, that when you tested it, the unit already suffered a loss...if there's only one man left, the second weapons will not fire any more...that's the case for all two-men teams...

The P-Mol is a good hint...I will look into it...thanks !

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 83
Re: Re: Flammenwerfer - 7/17/2002 10:49:42 AM   
tracer


Posts: 1865
Joined: 11/22/2000
From: New Smyrna Beach, FL USA
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Panzer Leo
[B]


Hi Tracer !

I'm not sure about the Flammenwerfer...mine do work, when the shots are down to 0, the 98k still fires...

Might it be, that when you tested it, the unit already suffered a loss...if there's only one man left, the second weapons will not fire any more...that's the case for all two-men teams...

The P-Mol is a good hint...I will look into it...thanks ! [/B][/QUOTE]

DOH! That's probably what it was...also too much PBEM, not enough sleep! Thanks

_____________________________

Jim NSB

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 84
- 8/15/2002 2:38:00 AM   
Kevin E. Duguay

 

Posts: 1044
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Goldsboro, North Carolina
Status: offline 		Leo,
Did you find a place for us to down load H2H yet!!:)

_____________________________

KED

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 85
- 8/15/2002 2:56:38 AM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kevin E. Duguay
[B]Leo,
Did you find a place for us to down load H2H yet!!:) [/B][/QUOTE]

It will be hosted by the [URL=http://www.theblitz.org/index.php]Blitzkrieg Wargaming Club[/URL]

The final release version is complete and tested...I'm trying to get it over to the Blitz right now and then they will put it up...don't know how long they will need...but shouldn't be a big deal...:)

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 86
- 8/15/2002 6:45:54 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		"The final release version is complete and tested...I'm trying to get it over to the Blitz right now and then they will put it up...don't know how long they will need...but shouldn't be a big deal."..

YEEEEEEEEEEEEEHAWWWWWWWWWWW!!:) :) :)

Noticed something, The Ruskies have a Super Heavy Mortar Plt(on board) available Jan 49, But the "super heavy"(160MM) mortars arnt!! until dec 49.
too late now tho!!

_____________________________



(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 87
- 8/15/2002 7:12:36 AM   
Kevin E. Duguay

 

Posts: 1044
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Goldsboro, North Carolina
Status: offline 		Many things are to late, and some of it is my fault.:(

_____________________________

KED

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 88
- 8/15/2002 7:52:44 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		huh?:confused:

_____________________________



(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 89
- 8/15/2002 10:43:07 AM   
Kevin E. Duguay

 

Posts: 1044
Joined: 4/24/2002
From: Goldsboro, North Carolina
Status: offline 		Never mind. It may be only a minor thing.

Or may be not?

_____________________________

KED

(in reply to Panzer Leo)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SPWaW Thread Hall of Fame >> Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.703