Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Steel Panthers World At War v6.0

 
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 >> Steel Panthers World At War v6.0 Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Steel Panthers World At War v6.0 - 7/3/2001 12:48:00 PM   
David Heath


Posts: 3274
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Staten Island NY
Status: offline
Yes you read right, we have been really working hard since v4.5 to get a better infantry - squad operations into SPWaW. The squad light machine gun in Steel Panthers has always been of marginal use, because of the way rifles were handled. Rifles have been able to achieve kills at range, usually more frequently than the light machine gun. In World War II, the squad was generally designed around the light machine gun and the firepower from that single weapon usually equaled or exceeded the combined power of all the rifles in the squad. Version 5.0+ tried to correct that design flaw, by reducing the effective firepower of the rifles. As a by-product, other weapons were inadvertently affected. In what will now become SPWaW v6.0 the infantry combat system has been completely overhauled. The game fun factor is there again but gamers still require a greater care in the tactics used for infantry combat and is, at the same time, more realistic. In the upcoming release, players will find the following: 1) Rifles will be effective to a range of about 200 yards. Beyond 350 yards they will only be useful for suppression fire. 2) Squad light machine guns will be effective to a range of about 400 yards. Beyond 500 yards they will only be useful for suppression fire. 3) Medium and heavy crew served machine guns will be effective to a range of about 500 yards. At ranges of 300 to 500 hundred yards they can produce severe casualties against moving infantry. Beyond 750 yards they will be useful for suppression fire. This weapon is now a real killer. 4) Armored fighting vehicle machine guns will be effective to a range of 200 to 500 yards, depending on the type and placement of the machine gun. If the vehicle is armed with a small bore cannon of 37mm or less, it will be useful for the player to turn off the main gun and use the coaxial machine gun at ranges greater than 200 yards and less than 500 yards, as at ranges greater than 200 yards the crew must take an experience check before it can fire the coaxial machine gun and at ranges of greater than 500 yards the cannon may be more accurate than the coaxial machine gun. 5) Artillery is now slightly more effective than in version 5.1. 6) Small units, of 4 men or less, are still size zero for spotting purposes, but are now size one for purposes of being hit and damaged. This means they are difficult to spot, but once spotted, are no harder to kill than normal units. The exception to this is the sniper, who is still quite difficult to spot and kill. 7) Terrain cover has been reworked and is now of significantly greater importance. The player should always keep soft targets, such as guns and infantry in the best cover available. The difference to hit a target in good cover can be of an order of magnitude ten. Soft units in cover now take a good deal fewer casualties. 8) For soft targets, movement is a serious danger. Especially, if moving in the open and within effective range of the attacking weapon. The player will need to move slowly and stay in good cover. A crewed machine gun 300 yards away may kill 6 or more men in a single shot, when firing against a squad moving in the open. 9) Infantry are now harder to spot if 250 yards or more away and harder still, if 750 yards or more away. 10) Catastrophic destruction of buildings will now occur less frequently and require larger bore ordinance to bring them down. This allows greater use as cover. 11) Bridges are now much harder to destroy, especially stone bridges, for which you need artillery of 170mm or greater, a bomb or a satchel charge. 12) The ratio for troop purchase points has been changed from 1:1 to meeting engagements, 1.5:1 for advance missions and 2:1 for assaults to 1:1 for meeting engagements, 2:1 for advance missions and 3:1 for assaults. The increased effectiveness of cover and the disadvantage gained by moving units necessitates greater forces when attacking. 13) The to hit chance displayed in the data box, after a unit has fired, has been recalculated for rifles and sub-machine pistols, when those weapons are in slot one. The value no longer needs to be multiplied by the number of men in the squad. So, now if the chance displayed is 15%, that is the chance for all men in the squad combined, to hit. Please note that since the men in the target receive a saving throw against the fire, they may still sometimes go to ground and take no casualties. 14) Victory Point Change - This is a big change -- for some reason, killed men have always been counted as only 1 victory point, no matter what unit they are from or what their unit cost is. In order to make the set unit costs (and increased unit costs, like general rommel in your example) be counted, killed infantry units are now counted at their unit cost in victory points. Partially-killed units are worth the proper proportional amount. We now have it working and it seems to really answer just about everyones desires. So maybe we have a a little surprise for you real soon. Thanks for your Support.

_____________________________

Post #: 1
- 7/3/2001 1:07:00 PM   
Don

 

Posts: 810
Joined: 7/12/2000
From: Elk Grove, CA (near Sacramento)
Status: offline
I'm impressed - these changes sound great! What I'm really impressed by, though, is the way you continue to work on SPWAW while needing to get Combat Leader done. As usual, you somehow get it ALL done! :D

_____________________________

Don "Sapper" Llewellyn

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 2
- 7/3/2001 1:34:00 PM   
mr172

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 5/15/2000
From: Roma Italy
Status: offline
Chapeau David! If all could be done we run the longest yard and touch down the perfect game in SP's history. Massimo

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 3
- 7/3/2001 2:49:00 PM   
Spellbinder

 

Posts: 67
Joined: 9/6/2000
From: Germany
Status: offline
Hi David, et all at Matrix, WOW I'm deeply impressed! This will be the ultimate gaming experience! :p One question/suggestion though: ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 8) For soft targets, movement is a serious danger. Especially, if moving in the open and within effective range of the attacking weapon. The player will need to move slowly and stay in good cover. A crewed machine gun 300 yards away may kill 6 or more men in a single shot, when firing against a squad moving in the open. ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ How about including something like an "Assault Move"? The squad moves only one hex, anounces this and therefore receives some extra cover,TEM - just like the ASL thingee. The way moving Infantry is handeled right now, they suffere severe casualities, no matter how far/fast they move if they are hit in the first hex. So I suppose an AM Option would help a little bit. Don't you think? Anyway, Thank you very much for this great game - I love it! :rolleyes: Ciao Klaus, aka Spellbinder

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 4
- 7/3/2001 3:21:00 PM   
BomBeer

 

Posts: 85
Joined: 9/8/2000
Status: offline
V.6 sounds Fantastic :) Thanks for the Great work your putting into this Great Game.

_____________________________

IYAAYAS

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 5
- 7/3/2001 7:01:00 PM   
AlvinS

 

Posts: 665
Joined: 12/2/2000
From: O'Fallon, Missouri
Status: offline
Sounds Great. You guys are incredible! Question: Will the upgrade to 6.0 have an effect on the current Desert Fox Mega Campaign? I have heard that sometimes scenarios have to be modified and tested to work in a newer version and was wondering if the Mega Campaign is the same way.

_____________________________

"Sometimes I wonder whether the world is being run by smart people who are putting us on, or by imbeciles who really mean it." ---Mark Twain

Naval Warfare Simulations

AlvinS

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 6
- 7/3/2001 7:23:00 PM   
lnp4668

 

Posts: 517
Joined: 11/10/2000
From: Arlington, TX, USA
Status: offline
I used to swith all the heavy MGs to regular infantry squads due to its lack of hitting power. Guess I will have to changes my tactic now :)

_____________________________

"My friends, remember this, that there are no bad herbs, and no bad men; there are only bad cultivators." Les Miserables

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 7
- 7/3/2001 7:25:00 PM   
waynef

 

Posts: 128
Joined: 8/25/2000
From: plano, tx,usa
Status: offline
All I can say is...WOW and THANK YOU 6.0 sounds great.

_____________________________

"At My Signal...Unleash Hell" Thanks, Wayne

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 8
- 7/3/2001 7:48:00 PM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline
Moving only one hex IS an assault move. the way it is right now, moving more than 1 hex is "fully vulnerable" (minus your cover) = moving only one hex divides that by 3 and being stationary cut that in half again (or full/6) So if a series of fire would normally kill 6 moving in the open it would only kill 2 moving cauiously and 1 is "in the dirt". One of the big effects we've added is widening the "dynamic range" of combat results substatially. THe thing that prompted this was my exasperation with the 'one casualtied to death' syndrome where fire seemed to do one casualty about half the time, no matter what cover you were in or what you were doing. Mike Wood took up the cause and in a very short time, we made some excellent changes to bring infantry combat up to the same high level as armor combat! The significant change this has made prompted David to make the "major version number" switch. Fans of the ASL board game will find a lot fo the excitement of infantry combat in that game is now here, as you cringe with each chot when your troops are vulnerable, hoping you don't get our equivalent of a "KIA" die roll...or praying for it if your beleaguered Marines spot another platoon of Japanese screaming toward them ;) [ July 03, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 9
- 7/3/2001 8:59:00 PM   
Kluckenbill

 

Posts: 278
Joined: 6/7/2000
From: Lancaster, PA, USA
Status: offline
Sounds great. how soon can we expect 6.0?

_____________________________

Target, Cease Fire !

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 10
- 7/3/2001 9:53:00 PM   
MalleusDei

 

Posts: 56
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: Baton Rouge
Status: offline
Sounds great! Does it include expanded OOB's and spotter planes? :) Would you consider expanding the choices in generated battles for 6.0? Optional switches to override the selection of the type of battle (regardless of relative points), expanded battle lengths (why not a 300 turn infantry battle on a big city map?), more control over randomly generated maps, and more control over VP hexes would be useful things to have and would improve game enjoyment. In fact, the more control that you can give us on generated battles the better, so that we can tailor a battle to taste and time available and still have the wonderful elements of surprise and mystery that are missing from edited scenarios and from scenarios that we have played before.

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 11
- 7/3/2001 10:18:00 PM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline
The above lists the changes that will be in the new version. There is a group that is goign through the OOBs cleaning up inconsistencies and typos. No spotter planes. For the other stuff you will have to wait for the Combat Leader series... Not sure the release timeframe - likely "several weeks" but maybe sooner. It will be on the new Lost Victories Mega Campaign and will be a small patch for the next lot of Desert Fox (that has 5.3)

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 12
- 7/3/2001 10:48:00 PM   
11Bravo


Posts: 2082
Joined: 4/5/2001
Status: offline
Mein Gott! When do you guys sleep? That version 6 will make a great game even better! You guys are some of the hardest working, talented, and dedicated people I have come across in ANY field. Your company does the hard things (like customer service, and learning from mistakes) very, very well. You have a great team at Matrix! Keep up the great work. I really enjoy playing your fine game, and look forward to your new products.

_____________________________

Squatting in the bush and marking it on a map.

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 13
- 7/3/2001 10:48:00 PM   
General Mayhem

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Country of six thousand lakes and one truth
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: One of the big effects we've added is widening the "dynamic range" of combat results substatially. THe thing that prompted this was my exasperation with the 'one casualtied to death' syndrome where fire seemed to do one casualty about half the time, no matter what cover you were in or what you were doing. Mike Wood took up the cause and in a very short time, we made some excellent changes to bring infantry combat up to the same high level as armor combat! The significant change this has made prompted David to make the "major version number" switch. Fans of the ASL board game will find a lot fo the excitement of infantry combat in that game is now here, as you cringe with each chot when your troops are vulnerable, hoping you don't get our equivalent of a "KIA" die roll...or praying for it if your beleaguered Marines spot another platoon of Japanese screaming toward them ;) [ July 03, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]
Uh, I've played such games and personally I think it is a BAD idea. There is no way one can well control the ranges. Nor do they create situations that one could understand. It easily comes to point where when majority of players just start to run squads to some places and wait to lucky shot to from them to swipe enemy off. If you make chance too small, it doesn't make a diffrence and nobody notices it. If you make it too big, then system starts to look like double or nothing. In other words, it can create exiting randomnes, but it can also creates situations which are hard to justify, which frustrate a lot and give reward to one who just shoots a lot and doesn't think a lot. Don't get me wrong, it's exiting at first, but it does get's awfully tiresome in long run and more one plays, less charming the feature is. Especially if you play against computer. Atleast I've not felt need to get back to games with such features in game system, altough they were LOT of fun at first.

_____________________________

----------------------------- Sex, rags and and rock'n roll! ------------------------------

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 14
- 7/3/2001 11:43:00 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
@ Paul & David: How is it with Reverse Gear for Vehicles? And Amo choosing, so you could save the good Babes for the tough Guys? Is Cover like Walls etc. still handled that way that the Unit is in Cover no matter from witch side they get shot at?

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 15
- 7/4/2001 12:21:00 AM   
BruceAZ


Posts: 608
Joined: 10/9/2000
From: California
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by waynef: All I can say is...WOW and THANK YOU 6.0 sounds great.
Ditto...

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 16
- 7/4/2001 12:37:00 AM   
Larry W. Wilson

 

Posts: 13
Joined: 4/4/2001
From: Cleveland,Oklahoma,USA
Status: offline
I am so impressed with the Matrix team. Your dedication is not found in any other group in the gaming business. It is obvious that you genuinely care about SPWAW and us grognards who play. I hope you guys never lose you zeal and passion for both historical accuracy and just plain ol' fun. I would also like to say that I am grateful that the vast majority of the members of this forum appear to be a "cut above" what one finds in other forums. Even when there are disagreements---the discussion usually stays on a civil level. Thanks to all who have worked so hard to give us an award winning game.

_____________________________

Twenty-Nine, Let's Go

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 17
- 7/4/2001 12:57:00 AM   
darroch

 

Posts: 210
Joined: 3/13/2001
From: US
Status: offline
I've watched you guys struggle with the infantry question through 5.2 then 5.3 - never quite reaching a satisfying stage... Now you go and do this. WOW. Words fail. All I can say is thanks for your dogged pursuit of perfection... It continues to be a true delight every time I get to sit at the computer and play/escape... Part of the fun is wondering what you'll come up with next... I got to fight T95 GMCs against King and Jagd Tigers the other night - Woohoo! - no other game I know of offers this kind of fun... And I'm looking forward to adding to my MC collection and providing you with some legal tender to do more good work with and show real gratitude for your efforts. :) :D :D :D

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 18
- 7/4/2001 1:03:00 AM   
Wild Bill

 

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline
Most of us at Matrix catnap in front of this one-eyed monster machine, with an occasional visit from the family and a demand that a bath be taken at once :eek: Phone calls at 2 or 3AM between us are the rule, not the exception. Wild Bill

_____________________________


In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 19
- 7/4/2001 1:22:00 AM   
Coachace


Posts: 49
Joined: 3/13/2001
From: Fountain Valley, California
Status: offline
Matrix guys, I don't think the game will ever really be realistic. I mean, how do you get the GI troop morale boost that they really got when they went on leave and spent their $$ on some bordello? How will you ever simulate the effects poor hygene had on the foot soldiers' feet?? Just kidding!! SPWAW is becoming more and more like ASL. However, since it will take MUCH longer than a couple of weeks to tire of MC 5.3, I'll admit that I can just barely wait for the nect MC.

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 20
- 7/4/2001 1:25:00 AM   
A_B

 

Posts: 296
Joined: 4/11/2001
From: San Jose, CA
Status: offline
Question – can there be any improvements in night battles? For example, spotting out to four or six hexes seems reasonable at night, but hitting should be much harder. Could all shots suffer a 50% drop in hit chance during a night battle? Also, could command and control points suffer the same effectiveness penalty, to reflect the confusion of a night battle? It would be nice to have better night battles, to go along with the improved infantry. As for the rest of the improvemnts, it is great news. Infantry has always been the most poorly modeled element of the game. I am happy with 5.3 so far – melee makes up for the small teams not dying (my experience anyway). The changes for 6.0 sound even better. We will be able to make Infantry based campaigns – pacific, airborne, etc. – as gripping as the armor based campaigns.

_____________________________

Unconventional war requires unconventional thought

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 21
- 7/4/2001 1:27:00 AM   
Fabio Prado

 

Posts: 503
Joined: 5/23/2000
Status: offline
Version 6.0! It seems like yesterday when we started with version 1.0...Just look how much was done in such a short period. NO other wargame company has ever come close to this kind of commitment!!! MATRIX RULES!!! Fab

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 22
- 7/4/2001 1:29:00 AM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline
If you think getting "big kills" occasionally is bad, by turning up infantry toughness you effective lower the dynamic range back down, so you can adjust it to your preference. Anybobdy that relies on dumb luck with lose...but at times the best laid plan runs amok of an artillery round landing in the wrong place or your squad bunching up at an inopportune moment... Walls are still in the hex and if you are adjacent to cover, you can always duck behind it without getting shot, so youcan retire 50m to cover without exposing a vulnerability, but not more than that. As I said before, the list is the list, if its not on list its not in the new version... [ July 03, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 23
- 7/4/2001 1:35:00 AM   
Larry Holt

 

Posts: 1969
Joined: 3/31/2000
From: Atlanta, GA 30068
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by A_B: Question – can there be any improvements in night battles? For example, spotting out to four or six hexes seems reasonable at night, but hitting should be much harder. Could all shots suffer a 50% drop in hit chance during a night battle? Also, could command and control points suffer the same effectiveness penalty, to reflect the confusion of a night battle?... As for the rest of the improvemnts, it is great news. Infantry has always been the most poorly modeled element of the game. I am happy with 5.3 so far – melee makes up for the small teams not dying (my experience anyway)...
It is not clear why you think that hitting would be more attrited than spotting. Weapons with magnifying sights also collect and concentrate light so spotting with them is less attrited than plain visual sighting is. C&C is definately harder at night & I echo the comments about how improved the game is now that the infantry model has been changed.

_____________________________

Never take counsel of your fears.

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 24
- 7/4/2001 2:09:00 AM   
A_B

 

Posts: 296
Joined: 4/11/2001
From: San Jose, CA
Status: offline
quote:

It is not clear why you think that hitting would be more attrited than spotting. Weapons with magnifying sights also collect and concentrate light so spotting with them is less attrited than plain visual sighting is. C&C is definately harder at night & I echo the comments about how improved the game is now that the infantry model has been changed.
During the day, almost all spotting is by visual contact. At night, hearing can become almost as important. Tanks could be 'spotted' by their noise far before they could be effectivly engaged. Even Infantry can be sensed - noise, fleeting movement - before they can be taken under aimed fire. Once you do shoot, it will be more akin to area fire. There a ton of variable, ie; aiming at muzzle flash would make for a pretty nice site picture, and once the shooting starts, you can't hear sh*t. I was just hoping for a few simple (easy to code) solutions to add some flavor to night battles. I've started working on a US Airborne campaign, which features night drop insertions & skirmishes, followed in the next battle with more deliberate assaults or defenses. The night battles as currently modeled are just too arbitray. If you can see twenty hexes during the day, but not 21, it doesn't drasticaly effect play. However, seeing 4 hexes, but not 5 makes a bigger diffence. I'm not suggesting a big fix, such as variable spotting tables based on wheather and light data. If there is an easy way to code it though, it would add to the game. PS Heavy rain could also effect CC points too.

_____________________________

Unconventional war requires unconventional thought

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 25
- 7/4/2001 2:23:00 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
@Paul: I just want to know if these Points are possible at all. I guess these features are not easy to include in the Game so is it possible at all? 1. How is it with Reverse Gear for Vehicles? 2. And Amo choosing, so you could save the good Babes for the tough Guys? 3. Is Cover like Walls etc. still handled that way that the Unit is in Cover no matter from witch side they get shot at? For example: I had a Russian Infantry squad pinned at a wall and shot them from on side and then from the opposite direction but every shot was useless. This would be OK for Cover like Buildings, Foxholes etc. that covers the unit almost total but not for Walls, abandon Vehicles, Trench etc., cross fire should be deadly if your are behind such cover. Must have looked funny to see russans jumping from one side of the wall to the other and back again :D . 6.0 and the Improvements sound very good in my ear and I can't wait till I get it, keep up the good work. [ July 03, 2001: Message edited by: BigDuke66 ]

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 26
- 7/4/2001 2:47:00 AM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline
You have to wait for Combat Leader Big Duke...there is only so much we can do to good ole SP... It is general consensus form previous threads, that if you were going to back up more than about 50m a tank would turn around to do it. The argument that a tank crew would want to keep its front hull to the enemy is arguable if the slow speed in reverse lets teh enemy get 3 shots at you when turning might mean less. Plus the trouble going reverse if buttoned (you are driving blind) many tankers indicate that keeping the turret front toward teh enemy and beating feet is how most would go a large distance. In the game if you are in a hex on a hill top next to the back slope (out of LOS) and you get shot at, you can always back up that one hex and not only does teh enemy not get to shoot your rear, it NEVER gets to shoot you at all since the opfire is triggered by entering the NEXT hex. SO if you stay next to cover like woods (if vis<29) or building, or back slope of a hill, you can alwaays "back up" one hex with impunity. for walls to have a "side" they need to be made hexside terraine features, no such thing in SP so no can do with out an entirely new file structure. Choosing ammo - your tank crews do that that as best they can, in teh heat of battle they make mistakes. The game is "Two Borg collectives fighting with WW2 weapons" C2 wise...having the battalion or regimental commander telling the troops what type of round to fire everytime is too far into the realm of micromanagement even for ARMY XXI, let alone WWII...If you want to play loader and gunner, that is the realm of tank sim games... In Combat Leader at some point (ie likely not in the first module) there will be the ability to give orders to units, but in the heat of battle they will not always follow them exactly...These sorts of complete overhaul changes are why we are doing CL. They will never appear in SP:WaW.

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 27
- 7/4/2001 2:55:00 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25684
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
have i kissed you guy's feet lately? mmm mmm mm mmm mmm mm mmm. Ok not as enjoyable as kissing a horse but it's the thought that counts. You guys are the best damn wargame company ever to grace the planet. Cant wait to get my mitts on this version. Finally!!! the long question of MG fire vs rifles being solved. wow. one question. Since the evolution of the game towards greater realism and more realistic tactics seems to be creating longer times to achieve goals, will we be seing scenerios with larger turn spans? I realize that not all battles allow one the luxery of fighting a set piece attack but it seems to me that too many of the (otherwise well designed) scenerios give the player too few time to do little more than rush at the objectives. heh, given what "rushing" can now cost an attacker heavy with infantry, that does not sound like a good thing to do. :eek:

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 28
- 7/4/2001 2:57:00 AM   
Voriax

 

Posts: 1719
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline
Thank You Voriax

_____________________________

Oh God give Me strength to accept those things I cannot change with a firearm!

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 29
- 7/4/2001 3:00:00 AM   
sven


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

Originally posted by Voriax: Thank You Voriax
Indeed

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Steel Panthers World At War v6.0 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

1.219