Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

That 5.3 version

 
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 >> That 5.3 version Page: [1]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
That 5.3 version - 7/1/2001 5:23:00 AM   
Cona

 

Posts: 137
Joined: 9/9/2000
From: Penco, Chile
Status: offline
I didn't like it at the beginning. I was accustomed to shoot from far and to annihilate the enemy infantry. Of course, if one thinks a little, this is not very realistic. Mainly if the enemy infantry is entrenched. Or is covered. Or with the face hit to the floor. In these cases, it should be quite difficult to hit an enemy soldier that just tries to become a bundle the smallest thing possible. And if somebody is shooting me, it should be more difficult even. To shoot to an enemy squad at 500 meters of distance with 8 or 9 rifles and a light machine gun and to hurt or to kill one or more of them while somebody shoots me requires something else that good aim. For that reason it is that I like 5.3 version more while more i play. Make the test of shooting at an enemy unit entrenched from the distance and a complete company will be need to liquidate it. But shoot against a squad that this running into open field and 3 or 4 enemies eliminated without problems. Even with rifles. After everything, when a squad is in cover or moves slowly and with caution it is supposed that it is to avoid casualties. Not to have few. Even so, it is my opinion that if a squad had covered or it’s moving slowly receives shots from the flanks or the rearguard of an unit that has not seen, it should suffer casualties just as if it’s completely unprotected. And also that an unit that responds the enemy fire should be made more vulnerable, because its men should lift the head to point and to shoot. At least, of course, that shoot just to maintain the enemy far. Another topic is that of the machine guns. Until here, the heavy machine guns are some true murderers although not as much as were the rifles in the version 5.01. The problem for me is the medium and light machine guns. It is supposed that while more close is the enemy most effective is the armament and this should be noticed more when machine guns fire. I don't notice it. I could be wrong. I don't notice it. The machine guns should be the true murderers of the game. Them and the artillery. But they are not. Yet. And the artillery. The king of the battle field. Well, until recently, I was of the opinion that the quantity of ammunition should be increased for the artillery. Now I have the doubt. The truth is that I have found that because it is necessary to shoot many more times on the enemy squads, to cause a single casualty, the entrenched enemy unit will retire, due to the high suppression level that has been caused previously. Ideally, these units should continue entrenched until not just suffering a high suppression degree but also several casualties. And the last thing i want to comment, to be able to continue playing SPWAW, it is on the crews. It is incredibly difficult to neutralize an enemy crew unless them are overrun or liquidated hand to hand. But obviously, the threat that they represent is of accord with their size. Maybe be necessary and convenient to change the weapons that them take when abandoning the tank for something more specific. Saludos a Todos, Cona. Traduced with Globalink Power Translator Pro 6.4

_____________________________

"War is much too serious to be entrusted to the military." - Tallyrand
Post #: 1
- 7/1/2001 5:31:00 AM   
sven


Posts: 10293
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: brickyard
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Cona: I didn't like it at the beginning. I was accustomed to shoot from far and to annihilate the enemy infantry. Of course, if one thinks a little, this is not very realistic. Mainly if the enemy infantry is entrenched. Or is covered. Or with the face hit to the floor. In these cases, it should be quite difficult to hit an enemy soldier that just tries to become a bundle the smallest thing possible. And if somebody is shooting me, it should be more difficult even. To shoot to an enemy squad at 500 meters of distance with 8 or 9 rifles and a light machine gun and to hurt or to kill one or more of them while somebody shoots me requires something else that good aim. For that reason it is that I like 5.3 version more while more i play. Make the test of shooting at an enemy unit entrenched from the distance and a complete company will be need to liquidate it. But shoot against a squad that this running into open field and 3 or 4 enemies eliminated without problems. Even with rifles. After everything, when a squad is in cover or moves slowly and with caution it is supposed that it is to avoid casualties. Not to have few. Even so, it is my opinion that if a squad had covered or it’s moving slowly receives shots from the flanks or the rearguard of an unit that has not seen, it should suffer casualties just as if it’s completely unprotected. And also that an unit that responds the enemy fire should be made more vulnerable, because its men should lift the head to point and to shoot. At least, of course, that shoot just to maintain the enemy far. Another topic is that of the machine guns. Until here, the heavy machine guns are some true murderers although not as much as were the rifles in the version 5.01. The problem for me is the medium and light machine guns. It is supposed that while more close is the enemy most effective is the armament and this should be noticed more when machine guns fire. I don't notice it. I could be wrong. I don't notice it. The machine guns should be the true murderers of the game. Them and the artillery. But they are not. Yet. And the artillery. The king of the battle field. Well, until recently, I was of the opinion that the quantity of ammunition should be increased for the artillery. Now I have the doubt. The truth is that I have found that because it is necessary to shoot many more times on the enemy squads, to cause a single casualty, the entrenched enemy unit will retire, due to the high suppression level that has been caused previously. Ideally, these units should continue entrenched until not just suffering a high suppression degree but also several casualties. And the last thing i want to comment, to be able to continue playing SPWAW, it is on the crews. It is incredibly difficult to neutralize an enemy crew unless them are overrun or liquidated hand to hand. But obviously, the threat that they represent is of accord with their size. Maybe be necessary and convenient to change the weapons that them take when abandoning the tank for something more specific. Saludos a Todos, Cona. Traduced with Globalink Power Translator Pro 6.4
Cona I am glad to hear that the new version is growing on you. I am sorry I missed you the last time I was in the chatroom with you.(I fell asleep at the computer) I hope we can talk about tactics again in the near future my friend. I am thinking of trying to explain hammer and anvil to you soon. The new version necessitates it to some degree. War is tactics and strategy with technology as an aid. best regards and wishes, sven

_____________________________


(in reply to Cona)
Post #: 2
Page:   [1]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> That 5.3 version Page: [1]
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

0.734