Great_Ajax
Posts: 4774
Joined: 10/28/2002 From: Alabama, USA Status: offline
|
Seriously? Intentionally truncated to obfuscate? I don't disagree with the OP's suggestion and have already started adding "Mot." in the unit names in the expansion scenarios. This is an item that is on my list to complete as I have a massive OB 2.0 planned that addresses the motorization issue with individual OBs that make distinctions between the two. However, there are almost no TO&E (OB) differences from a motorized and a non-motorized unit except for the motorization flag. There is no conspiracy to confuse people here. The reality is that the data in this game is on a continual path for improvement. Most of the original OBs that are in the system are from WitE 1.0 and back then, the motorization flag didn't even matter to support units. The massive OB update is on my "to do" list. I have the spreadsheets completed but I am bogged down in working on new scenarios and won't be able to focus on the OBs until I get all of the scenario drafts submitted. I doubt we will see new icons with motorized artillery, pioneers, etc. but Joel could always surprise us. quote:
ORIGINAL: Sauron_II This could have easily been accomplished by adopting historical naming conventions. For example: 275th Pioneer Battalion(mot) vs 274th Pioneer Battalion ---- This makes it clear to the player which SUs are motorized and not throughout the UI, to include the CR. There was a valid reason why these historical naming conventions existed. For them to be arbitrarily truncated in WiTE2 is lunacy. As it is, you have numerous error and inaccuracies of the motorization of SUs across the German Order of Battle, with nothing but a manual, arduous way to verify. I am inclined to believe that these names were intentionally truncated by Matrix to obfuscate TOE errors and inaccuracies.
_____________________________
"You want mercy!? I'm chaotic neutral!" WiTE Scenario Designer WitW Scenario/Data Team Lead WitE 2.0 Scenario Designer
|