Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports

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

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Mods and Scenarios >> WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/20/2009 11:03:28 PM   
explorer2

 

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline 		Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports

Post here your experiences about how balanced or unbalanced any parts of WaW Revised are or are not.

Also post here any suggestions for improvement. Since I am trying to keep WaW Revised moderately "historically plausible" if you have improvement suggestions, if you could give any historical data (if appropriate), or where I can find the data, it would be most appreciated.

"Wish list" ideas also welcomed for discussion.
Post #: 1
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/22/2009 6:23:26 AM   
pat0467

 

Posts: 27
Joined: 6/9/2008
From: Belgium
Status: offline 		Hi Explorer thx for your mod !

Many night without sleeping with your mod lol

Some idea...



1). Propaganda:
An event/action card for add morale to regime  (with a maximum)
Loosing africa (no units in africa - morale) remove morale for Germany-Italian
Same in Russia...
Some target for bombing will add/remove morale too, London, Berlin, Darwin, Roma, Mockba, etc...

Propanganda = more use for morale...



2). No kamikaze before 44 plz...
The japanese dont have these units before the end of war :(

If each regime need special units you can  use Tankette --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankette
A tracked armored car with a lower cost than armored car, the Japanese massively use it !

Kamikaze are not so common in history, but "banzai charge" or "Gyokusai" ---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banzai_charge  are more common, so a special infantry sftype can be imaginated...



3). Island in the pacific:
It is nearly impossible to produce engineer and send it everywhere on the pacific island :(
But the Japan use many, many island like fortress/carrier...
So a"Seabee" unit can be imagined, a ship with enginering capacity, or simply giving a Cargoship with an escort and engineer at Palau island or Saipan island, or giving fortification on some island when Japan player use Pacific Blitz card...
 


4). AI and Staff:
When i play german  i have to fight allied HQ units with 200-300 staff :(
Can we raise staff points ?



5). Special research as option:
I know your passion for historical accuracy and i really like your work and where you take your information -->  http://niehorster.orbat.com/000_admin/000oob.htm
Really wonderful work !

I cant really imagine you can like this idea but...

Special units are funny in option we can imagine some new idea...
- NKVD for Russia
- Radar for allied (unit with high recon)
- Submarine carrier --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_aircraft_carrier (French and Japan use it !)
- Tanker and Submarine Tanker
- Jet fighter/bomber for Germany AND Japan...
- V-1, V-2, V-3 for Germany...
- Frogmen for Italy

Not a "Gear Krieg" version with giant robot lol , just use some funny and real idea...



5). More political choice for Axis player:
I like "Third Reich" from Avalon Hill because you can make political/strategical choice with Axis, attack Danemark and Norway before or after France, invade Turkey, Sweden or Spain etc...
I come from Belgium, before 40' belgium is really like Sweden or Switzerland a really neutral country, but Hitler invade Belgium...
So why in WaW the German player can attack Spain or Turkey but not Sweden, Switzerland, Portugal ?




And again, many thx for your wonderful Mod Explorer :)

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 2
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/23/2009 5:21:09 AM   
explorer2

 

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: pat0467
1). Propaganda:


I like this idea. Not high on my list but I will definitely add it to the list.

quote:

2). No kamikaze before 44 plz...
The japanese dont have these units before the end of war :(

Good idea also. I'll see what I can do here. Med high on list.

quote:

If each regime need special units you can  use Tankette --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tankette
A tracked armored car with a lower cost than armored car, the Japanese massively use it !

Kamikaze are not so common in history, but "banzai charge" or "Gyokusai" ---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banzai_charge  are more common, so a special infantry sftype can be imaginated...



Banzai charge seems more useful. Not sure however if giving JA both Kamikaze & Banzai charge is fair and balanced. Much thought needs to go into this.

quote:

3). Island in the pacific:
It is nearly impossible to produce engineer and send it everywhere on the pacific island :(
But the Japan use many, many island like fortress/carrier...
So a"Seabee" unit can be imagined, a ship with enginering capacity, or simply giving a Cargoship with an escort and engineer at Palau island or Saipan island, or giving fortification on some island when Japan player use Pacific Blitz card...


 
Not so sure about this one. You CAN build engineers and send them to the islands just like the game exists currently. YOu can use your landing craft long range or destroyers carry capacity to get them there relatively quickly. Iwo already has fort built in, and Okinawa has the equivalent by being a city.
I'm under the impression that the "digging in" on Guadalcanal, Tarawa, and Saipan was not the equivalent of a "fort" like they were on Iwo and Okinawa. Am I mistaken? And let's not forget that if JA wants to protect an island from BB bombardment, you just have to gain air and sea superiority to be able to totally wipe out an invader.

Can you give me more info to convince me this is necessary?




quote:

4). AI and Staff:
When i play german  i have to fight allied HQ units with 200-300 staff :(
Can we raise staff points ?


Not sure what you mean. Can you clarify?


quote:

5). Special research as option:
I know your passion for historical accuracy and i really like your work and where you take your information -->  http://niehorster.orbat.com/000_admin/000oob.htm
Really wonderful work !

I cant really imagine you can like this idea but...

Special units are funny in option we can imagine some new idea...
- NKVD for Russia
- Radar for allied (unit with high recon)
- Submarine carrier --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Submarine_aircraft_carrier (French and Japan use it !)
- Tanker and Submarine Tanker
- Jet fighter/bomber for Germany AND Japan...
- V-1, V-2, V-3 for Germany...
- Frogmen for Italy


Some really good ideas here, but not sure that I'm going to have energy to do it. For each unit created you h ave to be very careful how it interacts and balances with other units, and that takes lots and lots of testing or the balance can throw off lots of stuff.
Increased recon due to radar already placed in new naval units I hope you've already noticed that.
I think you'll find that Fighters IV currently act like Jet fighters, though not fighter/bombers.
V-1 and V2 is Med high on my list to add.
I love your idea of IT frogmen, but with a couple of notable exceptions, did they really have much impact on the war?

Not a "Gear Krieg" version with giant robot lol , just use some funny and real idea...



quote:

5). More political choice for Axis player:
I like "Third Reich" from Avalon Hill because you can make political/strategical choice with Axis, attack Danemark and Norway before or after France, invade Turkey, Sweden or Spain etc...
I come from Belgium, before 40' belgium is really like Sweden or Switzerland a really neutral country, but Hitler invade Belgium...
So why in WaW the German player can attack Spain or Turkey but not Sweden, Switzerland, Portugal ?


Well, Denmark, Norway , Turkey and Spain are already (starting in version d, working correctly in j?) in as totally independent regimes can be attacked at any time. My sympathy for Belgium, but your geography was quite useful to Hitler with no downside to trapsing through you. Hitler cowtowed Sweden anyway without having to occupy it - they allowed him to use their ore and at least once to transport troops through their territory. He also used Portugal, and Switzerland had no value but high cost of conquest. So..... I don't think there's a lot of value in putting those countries into play. I'm not opposed to it in principal, just very low on my list.



quote:

And again, many thx for your wonderful Mod Explorer :)


Well thank you so much pat for all your great thoughtfulness going into this post. I definitely want to use some of your ideas. And though I greatly appreciate the thanks, the mod was created by Tom Weber, I'm just trying to make some improvements.

(in reply to pat0467)
Post #: 3
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/23/2009 5:27:55 PM   
pat0467

 

Posts: 27
Joined: 6/9/2008
From: Belgium
Status: offline 		Thx Explorer :)

Some precision...



1). HQ unit with IA:
When i play the German against the IA i have to fight HQ unit with 200-300 staff...
Not a problem in PBM but against the IA it's awful :(




2). Island in the pacific:
 
 
From Wikipedia:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Pacific_Mandate
quote:


During the 1930s, the Japanese Navy began construction of airfields, fortifications, ports, and other military projects in the islands controlled under the South Seas Mandate. This work was done in secret, as it was a direct violation of the Washington Naval Treaty.
The Japanese Navy viewed the islands as "unsinkable aircraft carriers" with a critical role to play in the defense of the Japanese home islands against American invasion, and later, as important staging grounds for Japanese air and naval offensives in the Pacific War..

Although the islands' naval importance is unquestionable, the Japanese Army was able to utilize many of the natural topographic characteristics of the islands to support air and land detachments as well.

 

 
I work, very very slowly on another project: "War in the Pacific", just made map (80%), sftype (75%), regime-flag&ID-people (90%) so i can say many thing to do lol
I have nearly finished the map, a 200x200 copy from the WiP map...
I have inclueded many many (more than 150) small islands, i have read many thing on the pacific theatre so, in my opinion these islands need to be upgraded in WaW...
At these size my i can put the Japanese pupet states too (Meijang, Manchuko, Siam-Thailand) in attachement the strategical map :) :)

For this project i use these:

- For IJA:
http://www3.plala.or.jp/takihome/
 
- For naming unit/general (it's really great more than 19000 general biography country by country)
http://www.generals.dk/generals.php

- For Map and timeline:
http://www.teacheroz.com/WWIImaps.htm


I hope you can find some useful idea :)


Thx again (to you and Tom weber of course !).

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by pat0467 -- 4/23/2009 5:33:31 PM >

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 4
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/23/2009 8:19:40 PM   
Jeffrey H.


Posts: 3154
Joined: 4/13/2007
From: San Diego, Ca.
Status: offline 		Cool links !

The WitP Mod sounds interesting !

_____________________________

History began July 4th, 1776. Anything before that was a mistake.

Ron Swanson

(in reply to pat0467)
Post #: 5
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/24/2009 3:13:29 AM   
explorer2

 

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline 		@pat0467-
Thanks for letting us know about your upcoming scenario. I"m REALLY looking forward to it.
Thanks for the links as well.
IN adddition to the internet, I make extensive use of The Pacific War Encyclopedia & THe Pacific War Atlas in addition to general WWII books. They're very helpful also.


(in reply to Jeffrey H.)
Post #: 6
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/25/2009 4:24:29 PM   
82ndtrooper


Posts: 1083
Joined: 12/19/2008
From: tennessee
Status: offline 		hey bro

the version K folder is empty atm on the scenario Bank website

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 7
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/25/2009 4:56:34 PM   
explorer2

 

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: 82ndtrooper

hey bro

the version K folder is empty atm on the scenario Bank website


Hi 82nd!
Good to hear from you.
I just downloaded from sandbox to test it, 8:56 a.m. PST and it worked fine.
Maybe a temp glitch on their server?
If you need me to send it to you directly, let me know.
How you liking life on the road?

(in reply to 82ndtrooper)
Post #: 8
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/25/2009 5:18:01 PM   
82ndtrooper


Posts: 1083
Joined: 12/19/2008
From: tennessee
Status: offline 		my training will be over tuesday and ill have a week off the week after or so. life is great so far just havent had much time to get online which will change once training is over.

sure send that version to me because i can get the floder but it says its empty when i try and unzip it.

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 9
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/25/2009 5:31:26 PM   
explorer2

 

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline 		82nd-
Version K just sent via your email.

Looking forward to your having a little more free time.

(in reply to 82ndtrooper)
Post #: 10
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 4/25/2009 6:51:39 PM   
82ndtrooper


Posts: 1083
Joined: 12/19/2008
From: tennessee
Status: offline 		thanks bro , I am looking forward to testing all these new changes out they look very nice.

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 11
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/5/2009 2:55:11 AM   
ghoward

 

Posts: 147
Joined: 11/9/2007
Status: offline 		Hi
I have been playing with rev K (I assume I is still in developement) and I really like what you have done. There is an inheriant problem giving ships reasonable range for this scale without making them invincible as no interception scheme is included in the game. It occured to me that it might be possable to use Tom's concept of "big sea" (and perhaps middle sea as well) to 1:create shipping lanes so convoy routing and sub concentrations are more perdictable, 2 choke straits (like the english channel) so that defending forces have more reaction oppertunity, and 3 offer some coastline protection aginst "out of the blue" invasions originating from unreasonable distances. I thought that it might make the naval game more interesting, especially if recon (and perhaps carrier) air does not suffer the same percentage of additionl ap cost as do ships. I just wondered if you had played around with the idea.
I am enjoying the AAR you guys are doing, by the way

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 12
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/5/2009 3:25:32 AM   
explorer2

 

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: barerabbit
It occured to me that it might be possable to use Tom's concept of "big sea" (and perhaps middle sea as well) to 1:create shipping lanes so convoy routing and sub concentrations are more perdictable


Yes, that could be done, but I'm concerned what the results might be. You're right that there were moderately fixed shipping lanes. The way AT works, the supply routes do vary somewhat, but not a lot, and you can see what they are at that turn. Also, it's a little bit of an abstract system since no ships are actually passing by, so you can't "really" have a destroyer escort. The mix of keeping subs not easily found, but find-able has been probably my biggest challenge in working on the naval portion of this game.

quote:

2 choke straits (like the english channel) so that defending forces have more reaction oppertunity, and

I did indeed do this in an earlier version, but it had too many not so good other consequences. What I've done starting in K to accomplish kind of the same is change cargo ships to just do supply and add landing craft which have Very limited range (5 and 16 but 16 is very expensive but necessary for Pacific). In the 2 tests I've seen with this, it seems to work pretty well. I still like the idea of higher AP around coasts, but it affects everything - supply, air, transfer, etc... and that just gets pretty complicated balancing them all.

quote:

3 offer some coastline protection aginst "out of the blue" invasions originating from unreasonable distances. I thought that it might make the naval game more interesting, especially if recon (and perhaps carrier) air does not suffer the same percentage of additionl ap cost as do ships. I just wondered if you had played around with the idea.

See #2 regarding landing craft.

Thanks for the suggestions, glad you're enjoying the game and the AAR. ARe you playing human or AI?
L is coming real soon. Keep a look out and let me know what you think. Getting naval portion to work reasonably well and keep the balance has definitely been my biggest challenge.


(in reply to ghoward)
Post #: 13
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/5/2009 11:53:52 AM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: explorer2
...
quote:

2 choke straits (like the english channel) so that defending forces have more reaction oppertunity, and


I did indeed do this in an earlier version, but it had too many not so good other consequences. What I've done starting in K to accomplish kind of the same is change cargo ships to just do supply and add landing craft which have Very limited range (5 and 16 but 16 is very expensive but necessary for Pacific). In the 2 tests I've seen with this, it seems to work pretty well. I still like the idea of higher AP around coasts, but it affects everything - supply, air, transfer, etc... and that just gets pretty complicated balancing them all.
...


I'm not sure a coastal waters terrain type would have to affect everything. Since you'd need to make a new type anyway just set the ship AP higher and everything else the same as regular seas... or am I missing something?

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 14
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/5/2009 4:48:57 PM   
ghoward

 

Posts: 147
Joined: 11/9/2007
Status: offline 		I think you are right, Bravehart, you could have a coastal hex type that slowed transports (for instance), but not aircraft. I suspect supply transport cost through a hex is also adjustable, but I dont really remember about this. If not, then Explorer is right, this will really bolix up the system. I had also not understood the changes to cargoships and the introduction of landingcraft (is it ok if I think "Troop Transports"? Just thinking about a 250nm trip in a
Higgins Boat makes me quesy) and how they limit invasion range. Reading (with a great deal of pleasure and intrest) the AAR you two are generating, it seems that there may be risk involved with leaving a valuable fleet at sea at turns end, where they can be ganged up on during the other guys turn. If so, then this should limit the effective range of patrols with high value assets. So I think that Explorer's initial reaction, that multiple sea types will, in general cause more problems that they solve, is the correct one in most areas of the map. I have dreamed up another idea, however, that may make the use of these high value assets require even more thought. What if an event, at the start of each player turn, reduced the readiness of that players capitol (or maybe all of them) ships IN SEA HEXES ONLY by oh, maybe 3% (.03). No real effect on combat ability, but supply consumption immeadiatly jumps for at least two turns thereafter (one to get home, one to recover). This could result in a significant difference between the cost of ships in port versus ships at sea and allow you fine tune some of these supply costs so they have less of an impact on national supply policy, unless you are going to send the big guys on a long errands.

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 15
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/5/2009 5:09:43 PM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: barerabbit

I think you are right, Bravehart, ...


... Why do people have so much trouble with my handle.....

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to ghoward)
Post #: 16
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/5/2009 7:20:24 PM   
ghoward

 

Posts: 147
Joined: 11/9/2007
Status: offline 		cus they dont READ it, they think they know. sorry

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 17
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/5/2009 7:40:36 PM   
Jeffrey H.


Posts: 3154
Joined: 4/13/2007
From: San Diego, Ca.
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Barthheart

quote:

ORIGINAL: barerabbit

I think you are right, Bravehart, ...


... Why do people have so much trouble with my handle.....



I think "Barfheart" rolls off the tongue better. Ha ! Joke !

Honestly, most people know all about Braveheart and have seen the movie and also expect that someone in this forum will want to use that name for their membership ID and mentally they fill in your name on a glance without really looking hard at it.

How's that for thinking too much about something ?



_____________________________

History began July 4th, 1776. Anything before that was a mistake.

Ron Swanson

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 18
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/5/2009 7:59:27 PM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline 		No problem all... just think it' funny that I get so many different versions of my handle.

I have the same problem with my real first name which makes it even funnier....

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to Jeffrey H.)
Post #: 19
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/6/2009 1:19:11 AM   
ghoward

 

Posts: 147
Joined: 11/9/2007
Status: offline 		I guess the AAR is over so I dont have to be so careful with what I say. I havent finished reading it yet, but I thought barthheart's navy was vanishing too quickly. Anyhow,I have some questions

1. what is the difference between city(0) and military base
2. what is that thing between bergan and swedish ore? major road? why?
3 where is the french fleet? How did Explorer get a couple of french destroyers? Italy starts with 6 CAI's, where did all thier battleships come from in the AAR?
4 air scout notes say recon is 120, but the unit attribute panel reads 998 for recon value
5. It looks like the air scout range is sufficent to fly search patterns over the entire north atlantic from Gander, Cork, and Rekkjavik. Seems to make the atlantic pretty small.

I will finish up the AAR tonight and after the next version (I guess there still some issues with German supply from russia) start an AI game.

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 20
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/6/2009 3:22:03 AM   
explorer2

 

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: barerabbit
1. what is the difference between city(0) and military base


Military base can be built, city 0 cannot.

quote:

2. what is that thing between bergan and swedish ore? major road? why?


Major road, yes. I consulted maps of the area from WWII and there was a clear (I don't remember exactly) either major road or RR here that was in constant use. I was surprised to find there was no road from Oslo to Stavanger however.

quote:

3 where is the french fleet? How did Explorer get a couple of french destroyers? Italy starts with 6 CAI's, where did all thier battleships come from in the AAR?


Historical French fleet doesn't enter unless GE or West attack Vichy. Those French DD are some I built in Marseilles while France was part of the West. That has confused many people.


quote:

4 air scout notes say recon is 120, but the unit attribute panel reads 998 for recon value


My mistake, thanks for the catch. I'll correct it. Correct value will be 800.

quote:

5. It looks like the air scout range is sufficent to fly search patterns over the entire north atlantic from Gander, Cork, and Rekkjavik. Seems to make the atlantic pretty small.


NOt exactly. And they were so limited that I used them occassionally. It was the massive amount of DD's that helped find him. Air scout is based on the Catalina, with same range, and should NOT be able to get central Atlantic. I have several maps of the air ranges of sub hunters. I'll recheck to see if I've missed something. One problem is Atlantic and Pacific map scales are not the same.
Air scouts in version D (the one we played) didn't work accurately at all. Part of the problem is in AT air do not get to do recon on the path they take, just the final destination. I'm hoping


quote:

I will finish up the AAR tonight and after the next version (I guess there still some issues with German supply from russia) start an AI game.

I"m trying hard to finish up version L's testing. I know I keep saying I'm almost there. I've got everything in that I want to, I'm in testing now. Done one long run, found mistakes, have now corrected (I hope) the mistakes and need to do another round of tests. HOping to post L May 6 by noon Pacific Time (GMT -8). I've given AI a little more help in L than before and victory conditions are new for JA & GE. Full list coming right after I finish testing.

Thanks barerabbit for your comments and interest.


Oh yeah, and about the coastal sea landscape type, etc... : Not ready to insert that in L. I'll enter the discussion more after I get L up.



< Message edited by explorer2 -- 5/6/2009 3:23:12 AM >

(in reply to ghoward)
Post #: 21
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/6/2009 7:09:39 PM   
british exil


Posts: 1686
Joined: 5/4/2006
From: Lower Saxony Germany
Status: offline

quote:

I will finish up the AAR tonight and after the next version (I guess there still some issues with German supply from russia) start an AI game.

quote:

I"m trying hard to finish up version L's testing. I know I keep saying I'm almost there. I've got everything in that I want to, I'm in testing now. Done one long run, found mistakes, have now corrected (I hope) the mistakes and need to do another round of tests. HOping to post L May 6 by noon Pacific Time (GMT -8). I've given AI a little more help in L than before and victory conditions are new for JA & GE. Full list coming right after I finish testing.



Stop writing in this forum and get play testing.
You know that there are hundreds of players waiting for you to post the finished game.


_____________________________

"It is not enough to expect a man to pay for the best, you must also give him what he pays for." Alfred Dunhill

WitE,UV,AT,ATG,FoF,FPCRS

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 22
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/6/2009 8:06:26 PM   
explorer2

 

Posts: 465
Joined: 11/30/2007
Status: offline 		Noon May 6 PST has now passed and you'll notice no scenario posted yet.
My apologies. I ran into a major snag when examining Air Scouts.
More later. Currently believe it will be about 8:00 pm PDT, today May 6

OK british exil, I'll take your advise and stopping resonding here until L is ready.

(in reply to british exil)
Post #: 23
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/6/2009 9:35:06 PM   
ghoward

 

Posts: 147
Joined: 11/9/2007
Status: offline 		Take your time. You are doing a great job.

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 24
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/7/2009 5:28:39 AM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline 		I made a couple of new unit symbols for coastal artillery. You/anyone are welcome to use them if you want.



Attachment (1)

_____________________________

My Advanced Tactics Mod page
http://atgscenarios.wordpress.com

30+ scenarios, maps and mods for AT and AT:G

(in reply to explorer2)
Post #: 25
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/7/2009 5:32:30 AM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline 		Here is a picture of one of them (nato version) in action. Im sure it can be improved, but its ok.




Attachment (1)

_____________________________

My Advanced Tactics Mod page
http://atgscenarios.wordpress.com

30+ scenarios, maps and mods for AT and AT:G

(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 26
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/7/2009 12:25:53 PM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline 		That looks good.

What prgram did you use to make it? If your program has the ability do a "drop shadow" effect on the white bits of about 1 or 2 pixels, slightly transparent, down and right. This will give the symbol a "3D" look like other used around here. Make the symbol stand out better.

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 27
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/7/2009 3:24:17 PM   
Grymme

 

Posts: 1821
Joined: 12/16/2007
Status: offline 		I copied one of the boardgame mod squares and then i used paint to build the rectangle and the dot inside. The boardgame mod "square" does have the shadow effect but the rectangle and dot didnt, so i "amateurishly" put some shadow on myself pixel by pixel. (if you look at it with 800% magnifying you will see the shadows). I know its not that great looking. But i just wasnt so crazy about the original sprite for coastal artillery.

I am not sure if paint has the drop down shadow, but probably not. Dont know how to use it in any case. But maybe you know which program and how to use?  You are very welcome to improve on it.

_____________________________

My Advanced Tactics Mod page
http://atgscenarios.wordpress.com

30+ scenarios, maps and mods for AT and AT:G

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 28
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/7/2009 3:46:28 PM   
Barthheart


Posts: 3194
Joined: 7/20/2004
From: Nepean, Ontario
Status: offline 		Ahh... hard to see the shadow from the screen shot... or maybe my bad eyes.... Your hand made drop shadow does just fine.

MS Paint doesn't have drop shadow. I use Paint Shop Pro... ver X right now. No actual training on it just lots of trial and error.... lots and lots...

There's a free progeram call GIMP that has most of the features of PSP. Give that a try.

_____________________________

Life is not a journey to the grave with the intention of arriving safely in a pretty & well preserved body,
but rather to skid in broadside, totally worn out & proclaiming "WOW, what a ride!"

(in reply to Grymme)
Post #: 29
RE: WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports - 5/7/2009 4:42:55 PM   
ghoward

 

Posts: 147
Joined: 11/9/2007
Status: offline 		Is there a full Nato symbol set out there that works with WaW Revised? Barthheart, you were using something non standard during the AAR with Explorer2, but it didnt look like Nato, and I just saw bits and pieces. I would suppose there would be some renaming involved and prehaps some editing (I liked the level numbers on ship and ac symbols, for instance). Has anyone done it yet? If not, I will give it a try and make it available if there is intrest

(in reply to Barthheart)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series >> Mods and Scenarios >> WaW Revised Beta Suggestions & Balance Reports Page: [1] 2   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

0.766