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 >> Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 12/19/2001 6:27:00 AM   
Gallo Rojo


Posts: 731
Joined: 10/26/2000
From: Argentina
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Nikademus:
I believe there's one flaw in your test Gallo, apart from the obvious point others will make that a single small engagement does not a defining make as Paul has said over and over. When you change nations even within a single player's deployment, you are not just getting the alt nation's tank, you get their crews as well. Those wer'nt Germans in those T-34's but Russians, just like when you build a African scenerio and wish to have a mixed nationality force of Italians and Germans. IIRC, that is what the Nation button feature is for. In order to remove the crew experience factor from your tests, turn country training off, then rechoose your units and make sure they all have the same or near same exp and morale (and more importantly, LEADERSHIP ratings) Further suggestion, dont set the AI loose, play both sides and set em up like a Virtual Kublinka (aka, a miliary field testing site with tanks facing each other at set ranges and set angles. Raise hitting chances to maximum in the preferences to insure hits, this eliminates the "crew" and even the fire control factor and allows basic armor vs pen to be examined ,which is where the heart of the conflict resides since the issue at stake is the lowered gun rates of the 76mm and the lowered armor stats for the Russian OOB. (and the raised German stats) the crew and FC differences are static and hav'nt changed of course
Got it. I didn't know that. Thanks.
I will try what you said latter.
But even with poor trained Russians crews I found this result really disappointing.
T-34 should won Pz III. Don't you think?

_____________________________

The bayonet is a weapon with a worker on each end

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 31
- 12/19/2001 6:55:00 AM   
Mikimoto

 

Posts: 511
Joined: 11/6/2000
From: Barcelona, Catalunya
Status: offline 		I will reply some posts later, or tomorrow... testing all the time... my wife will kill me... Tested thirty (30) engagements between Germans and Soviets in 1941... Can somebody test this way two or three battles, please? If results don't match my opinion, save scores and send to me, please? And post it, sure. June 1941 German vs Soviet Meeting
2000 points per side
country training off
Assign 70 exp for both countries
Buy a PzCo of PzIIIj or PzIIIh, or better a mix of both, they have the shorter 50L42, that is 21 or 22 tanks for Germany.
Buy 2 Medium Co of T-34/41 (never model 40), that is 20 tanks for Soviets.
Opp confirmation fire off (let the engine manage that...)
You can set visibility to 20 hexes, for example. Deployment and control, both for the computer, and let the dogs loose... the A(rtificial) I(diot) is silly (fair) with both sides. Every and all 30 engagements end with horrendous soviet losses, almost 100% every time. Every time PzIII armed with the 50L42 lose between 1 and 10 tanks at maximum (average of seven). I repeat, if you make that testing, you will see same results. Now I'm going to test PzIII with 50L42 against KV's in june 41. Next will be PzIII with 50L60 against T34... next the same against KV's (that is the first test i did two days ago, that originated my angry post:mad ... Now I have six or seven slots with Saved Scores... If you want I can mail it to you...

_____________________________

Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 32
- 12/19/2001 6:59:00 AM   
AbsntMndedProf


Posts: 1780
Joined: 7/6/2001
From: Boston, Massachusetts
Status: offline 		Once upon a time in a happy land far away there was a software company. This company produced an excellent WW II computer game. It ran on any system. It had not glitches or bugs. The weapons in the game worked just like the ones in the real world. The AFVs, APCs, Artillery, both on and offboard performed just like the real things. AFVs never drove through buildings or over walls, becoming needlessly bogged down. Air support never shot up their own units. All nation's weapon systems worked to perfection in simulating the actual conditions in the WW II environment. Anti-tank guns were rated just like the ones used in the real war. Tank armor wasn't too strong, or too weak. Every sound and graphic was letter perfect. Even though this amazing game was perfect in every way, it only required 200 MB of HD space and 32 MB of RAM! Now there is a fairy tale for you! I know I've been guilty of being picky about SP:WaW in the past. However, it must be recognized that it is the best game by far for the money, (For free!), and exceeds even the games I've paid lots of $$$ for in the past. Thanks again Matrix for the great game, and I hope everyone there has a very happy holiday season! You've more than earned it, IMHO! Eric Maietta

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 33
- 12/19/2001 6:59:00 AM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		kind of funny to have one discussion spreading over three forum topics So, we either do have a lot of people who are just not very good at maths, or they rather would complain about things they do not understand, then trying to make some tests on their own... Some facts on v7.0 penetration system on the biggest issue around at the moment, the PzIII and the T-34 First, the contestants: PzIII variants 1) standard early war model 50mm/L42
2) with APCR ammo
3) with upgraded armor
T-34 model 41 with F-34 gun The facts:
A 50mm/L42 will not penetrate front Hull or Turret of T-34 with normal hit (no vulnerable location hit) T-34 will penetrate front Hull and Turret at ranges over 1000m (with very high probability, but random events (ricochet) do occur like with every other gun) PG40 (APCR) will be able to penetrate front Turret up to 500m (max range of PG40) T-34 will just not (and really of talking millimeters here) penetrate upgraded armor No PzIII of June '41 does have upgraded Turret AND Hull armor What do we learn ? A PzIII has to come as close as 500m (and this is short range for tank combat) to have a CHANCE to penetrate the front armor with a PG40 (APCR).
The requirement is a hit on the Turret (much more unlikely then Hull hit) and no ricochet or other random effect.
This is not what I would call a secure process. Instead German command suggest to engage T-34 from flank and not to waste PG40 ammo while trying to hit the Turret from front.
The T-34 outguns the PzIII from over 1000m and is even at distances below 500m on the better side.
Now the upgrade armor of the PzIII. Surprise, surprise ! Isn't it funny, that the spaced front Turret armor fit to e.g. the J version in July '42 is just capable of defeating the F-34 gun rounds. Not much more, not much less. As if someone knew, what the purpose of these plates should be... All these facts do support most found reports on PzIII and T-34 combat in '41 (even the ones on RMZ). ...so what the hack are your points, complainers

_____________________________

[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 Mikimoto)
Post #: 34
- 12/19/2001 7:03:00 AM   
AbsntMndedProf


Posts: 1780
Joined: 7/6/2001
From: Boston, Massachusetts
Status: offline 		Once upon a time in a happy land far away there was a software company. This company produced an excellent WW II computer game. It ran on any system. It had not glitches or bugs. The weapons in the game worked just like the ones in the real world. The AFVs, APCs, Artillery, both on and offboard performed just like the real things. AFVs never drove through buildings or over walls, becoming needlessly bogged down. Air support never shot up their own units. All nation's weapon systems worked to perfection in simulating the actual conditions in the WW II environment. Anti-tank guns were rated just like the ones used in the real war. Tank armor wasn't too strong, or too weak. Every sound and graphic was letter perfect. Even though this amazing game was perfect in every way, it only required 200 MB of HD space and 32 MB of RAM! Now there is a fairy tale for you! I know I've been guilty of being picky about SP:WaW in the past. However, it must be recognized that it is the best game by far for the money, (For free!), and exceeds even the games I've paid lots of $$$ for in the past. Thanks again Matrix for the great game, and I hope everyone there has a very happy holiday season! You've more than earned it, IMHO! Eric Maietta

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 35
- 12/19/2001 7:11:00 AM   
Galka

 

Posts: 129
Joined: 4/30/2000
From: Alberta, Canada
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Gallo Rojo:
T-34 should won Pz III. Don't you think?
I do. I seem to remember way back in SP1 they did too. Aside from the Matrix games designers, arguments in this forum seem to be more of ego and intellectualism than of fact; and Gallo sifting through the blarney to get those facts is one thing I don't envy those game designers.

_____________________________

"In light of my experience, I consider that your conclusion that the attacker needs a three to one superiority is under the mark, rather than over it. I would say that, for success, the attacker needs six to one or seven to one against a well-knit defence

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 36
- 12/19/2001 7:11:00 AM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		posted my last one, just before I read you intended tests, Miki... Please for your own sake, stop these tests. This way you'll prove nothing. Your test is a system PzIII vs system T-34 test, without the capability of the user (computer) to play out the strenghts of either side. So it sure does not say anything on the PENETRATION CALCULATION !!! So pull out your pocket calculator and at least try to understand what is behind Pauls system, no matter whether you'll get it in full or not - I didn't get it in full either, but I'm sure way ahead of you at the moment...

_____________________________

[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 Mikimoto)
Post #: 37
- 12/19/2001 7:14:00 AM   
Mikimoto

 

Posts: 511
Joined: 11/6/2000
From: Barcelona, Catalunya
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Panzer Leo:
kind of funny to have one discussion spreading over three forum topics So, we either do have a lot of people who are just not very good at maths, or they rather would complain about things they do not understand, then trying to make some tests on their own... Some facts on v7.0 penetration system on the biggest issue around at the moment, the PzIII and the T-34 First, the contestants: PzIII variants 1) standard early war model 50mm/L42
2) with APCR ammo
3) with upgraded armor
T-34 model 41 with F-34 gun The facts:
A 50mm/L42 will not penetrate front Hull or Turret of T-34 with normal hit (no vulnerable location hit) T-34 will penetrate front Hull and Turret at ranges over 1000m (with very high probability, but random events (ricochet) do occur like with every other gun) PG40 (APCR) will be able to penetrate front Turret up to 500m (max range of PG40) T-34 will just not (and really of talking millimeters here) penetrate upgraded armor No PzIII of June '41 does have upgraded Turret AND Hull armor What do we learn ? A PzIII has to come as close as 500m (and this is short range for tank combat) to have a CHANCE to penetrate the front armor with a PG40 (APCR).
The requirement is a hit on the Turret (much more unlikely then Hull hit) and no ricochet or other random effect.
This is not what I would call a secure process. Instead German command suggest to engage T-34 from flank and not to waste PG40 ammo while trying to hit the Turret from front.
The T-34 outguns the PzIII from over 1000m and is even at distances below 500m on the better side.
Now the upgrade armor of the PzIII. Surprise, surprise ! Isn't it funny, that the spaced front Turret armor fit to e.g. the J version in July '42 is just capable of defeating the F-34 gun rounds. Not much more, not much less. As if someone knew, what the purpose of these plates should be... All these facts do support most found reports on PzIII and T-34 combat in '41 (even the ones on RMZ). ...so what the hack are your points, complainers
Panzer... so sarcastic... PzIII models J and H are available in june 1941 for Germany in version 7.0. In the tests I made, they killed most T34 in two ways: 1) Frontal turret hit and 2) Side hull hit. If you want you can test it.
If you don't believe me, try testing it please! By the way, if facts you said were real facts, T34 superiority only lasted one month... funny. [ December 18, 2001: Message edited by: Mikimoto ]



_____________________________

Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 38
- 12/19/2001 7:30:00 AM   
Capt. Pixel

 

Posts: 1219
Joined: 10/15/2001
From: Tucson, AZ
Status: offline 		I think warrior got it right - IT'S A GAME! Many of you, it seems, would sh#t bullets if you ever had to play the setups that my PBEM friends and I play. We pick and choose whatever units suit us across any nationality, always looking for the best 'bang-for-the-buck'. My latest 6000 point OB is represented by SIX different nationalities (most of whom never fought a single battle, anywhere, anytime, together) Nobody gets upset that this unit or that unit aren't historically accurate. Who gives a cr@p? On a final note - a game is for enjoyment. If you're not enjoying it, find another game or polish your shoes, or something.

_____________________________

"Always mystify, mislead, and surprise the enemy, if possible. "
- Stonewall Jackson

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 39
- 12/19/2001 8:41:00 AM   
gorgias96

 

Posts: 122
Joined: 9/29/2000
From: Spain
Status: offline 		Well after reading this topics i did a very simple test: June of 1941. Small size scenary absolutelly plain. Visibility 10 and 12 turns. I took 10 Pz IIIjs and 12 T34s (advantage for russians as you see). Historic ratings OFF, 70 exp every army. Computer manage both sides. Well the result was really funny. Crushing defeat for the russians 12 tanks destroyed 180 points. Germans decisive victory 3602 points 0.000... tanks destroyed!!!! Hehehehe the germans must be really lucky..... Well i dont understand about armors, penetrations tables etc.. etc... but i´m not stupid and i have eyes. If this score is accurate historically really What did kind of MIRACLE save to russians to be absolutely defeat??? Is obvious that in the v7 patch there is something wrong.... If u can see this, perfect, if not, i wish VERY VERY luck playing with the russians..... If somebody want the files in wich i saved this test, i can send them at moment --------------- Por ultimo me doy el gustazo de escribir en cristiano ke ya estaba harto de tanta jerga jeje. A por ellos Miki ke son pocos y cobardes, ademas está claro ke llevas la razon por muy farrucos ke se pongan. Es OBVIO ke se les ha pasado la mano esta vez. El test ke hice es absolutamente veridico, no es broma, sucedio incluso de forma más contundente de lo ke cuento. De hecho los rusos no llegaron a dañar ni un solo Pz IIIj ke se dice pronto. Estuve analizando en ke se basó tan aplastante victoria alemana y está muy claro bajo mi punto de vista. En ambos bandos hubo mogollon de rebotes y tiros no penetrantes, la aplastante diferencia la marcó la calidad del cañon y el "rate of fire". Los rusos disparaban la mitad de tiros ke los alemanes y su 75 mm no vale una mierda, el 50 mm aleman le daba 80 vueltas. Esto, su mayor cadencia de disparo y "control de fuego" es lo ke explican semejante paliza. Yo no sé si esto se corresponde o no a la realidad, pero como dije en el tablon en español siempre he escuchado en documentales, libros etc.. etc..... ke los alemanes tuvieron mogollon de problemas con los T34 hasta ke sustituyeron los Pz III por los de gama superior con el cañon de 75 mm 43L. Estoy seguro de haber visto un documental en el ke aparecian informes del alto estado aleman en el ke los oficiales y responsables de las divisiones panzer del frente oriental decian muy claramente ke o mejoraban los Pz III, para poder canear a los T34 o no tenian nada ke hacer.
Yo no sé lo rigurosos ke puedan ser esos estudios de blindaje y demas hechos CON POSTERIORIDAD a la guerra, pero lo ke tengo claro es ke me fio más de los comentarios de cualkier oficial aleman o ruso ke vivió la guerra en persona ke de cualkier supuesto "estudioso" dedicado a reescribir la historia.....
Si no me pongo yo tb. a discutir en ingles es porke me puede reventar la cabeza si intento traducir uno de mis "interminables" discursos jejejeje Hasta ahora y A POR ELLOS!!!

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 40
- 12/19/2001 8:59:00 AM   
Mikimoto

 

Posts: 511
Joined: 11/6/2000
From: Barcelona, Catalunya
Status: offline 		Gracias, camarada. Gorgias... ¡Yo también te quiero! Es indignante cómo basándose en "nuevos" y clarividentes estudios se reescribe la historia... un poco, en aras de la jugabilidad, puedo entenderlo... pero esto de la versión 7.0 es demasiado hasta para mí, un auténtico despropósito... Si la historia fuera como la reescriben la guerra habría acabado en el 42, victoria Alemana. Lo peor de todo es que la mayoría de la gente se dedica a hacer el pelota a los de Matrix, y lanzarme comentarios sarcásticos en lugar de intentar desempolvar los libros de historia. No entiendo cómo pretenden que esto es histórico... tal vez el coeficiente intelectual está bajando... será la mala alimentación.
Y si no se enteran porque está en español, que se jodan y busquen un traductor ¡joder!, que nosotros traducimos todo el día y no tenemos problemas. Un abrazo.
Miki.

_____________________________

Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 41
- 12/19/2001 9:18:00 AM   
Svennemir

 

Posts: 542
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Well but I just conducted a test. Date: JUNE 1941. 50L42 gun with APCR mounted by PzIIIj against KV-1 m.40. Range 274metres (6 hexes). The test lasted until every KV was abandoned or destroyed. All shots hit the front HULL or TURRET.
(I sorted the few SIDE hits away) Shots fired: 34.
Penetrations: 32.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 42
- 12/19/2001 9:25:00 AM   
Mikimoto

 

Posts: 511
Joined: 11/6/2000
From: Barcelona, Catalunya
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Svennemir:
Well but I just conducted a test. Date: JUNE 1941. 50L42 gun with APCR mounted by PzIIIj against KV-1 m.40. Range 274metres (6 hexes). The test lasted until every KV was abandoned or destroyed. All shots hit the front HULL or TURRET.
(I sorted the few SIDE hits away) Shots fired: 34.
Penetrations: 32.
Thanks for testing Svennemir!
it is exactly as I have tested: same results. And if you test Shermans against Panthers... you will discover new surprises.

_____________________________

Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 43
- 12/19/2001 9:34:00 AM   
Svennemir

 

Posts: 542
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Well I couldn't quite believe it... so I tried again. Results *cough*) Shots fired: 33.
Penetrations: 31. This time there was a lovely ricochet among the non-penetrations.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 44
- 12/19/2001 9:37:00 AM   
Svennemir

 

Posts: 542
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		That unhappy smiley wasn't intentional! But I guess it does a good job there anyway...

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 45
- 12/19/2001 9:51:00 AM   
Svennemir

 

Posts: 542
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Denmark
Status: offline 		Ah yes, and here's a quote from Antony Beevor: "Stalingrad", pp. 90-91: (July 25, 1941) 'They had longer range,' explained a German panzer commander. 'We could not attack them across the open. So,like ships at sea, I pulled my tanks right back out of sight, made a wide detour, and attacked them from behind.' The Russian heavy tanks scattered, except for one which had lost a track; its traverse mechanism had jammed, so the turret could not turn. 'We lined up behind him, and started to shoot. We counted our hits on this tank, but none of them penetrated the armour. Then, I saw the hatch of the tank move. I guessed that they wanted to surrender, so over the radio I told my company to cease fire. The Russians then opened the hatch completely and climbed out.' The crew were totally confused, shaken and deafened, but not one of them was even wounded. 'It was depressing to realize how inferior our tank guns were.'

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 46
- 12/19/2001 10:33:00 AM   
Alby


Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline 		In the numerous tests Ive run, the PZIII series tanks, destroy t34 from front with ease UNTIL they run out of apcr ammo then its a different ballgame.\ OOPs had PZII instead of PZIII, corrected now to PZIII [ December 19, 2001: Message edited by: Alby ]



_____________________________



(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 47
- 12/19/2001 10:49:00 AM   
Figmo

 

Posts: 556
Joined: 5/28/2000
From: Pennsylvania, USA
Status: offline 		I'm not an expert on Armor but I've played every version of the SP series and have some scenarios that have been created in almost every version. I use those to test new changes to the game. IMO - the changes made in Version 7 to the Russian and German armor/guns is wrong. The increase in Penetration of German guns combined with the decrease of Armor thickness and gun penetration on Russian tanks and guns has over compensated where a minor adjustment was needed. I have no facts to back this up - only a feeling when playing the game from experience of playing Armor games for over 30 years and reading books for at least that time frame. I love some of the fixes in Version 7 but I'll have to go back to Version 6.1 until this is worked out. Luckily I copied it onto my wifes computer before doing the upgrade - but don't tell her!!

_____________________________

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, f

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 48
- 12/19/2001 10:59:00 AM   
Mikimoto

 

Posts: 511
Joined: 11/6/2000
From: Barcelona, Catalunya
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by ruxius:
I am sorry Mikimoto but I can't understand why you try to explain your point of view starting with a mood that is more oriented towards ridiculizing rather than discussing seriously the point..that way it seems you are not really interested in showing your point...
Matrix obviously tends to offer some replies...it's not easy changing things continuosly , and also corrections should be prooved in some way more than on e time...
Hello Ruxius. I respect you so much. But I think I am not who has to prove or defend my point. As I have tried to say these changes are going against all I have learned from WWII, specially in the East Front... It's game designers fault, not mine. They think and believe all are wrong: historians, other game designers and "some" spwaw fans... Perhaps Avalon Hill was wrong, THEGAMERS, SPI, 3W, GMT, SSI, AVALANCHE, Gary Grigsby, OSPREY, Ty Bomba, Richard Berg, Mark Hermann, etc.. And all the "battle reports" from german officers talking about his soviet experiences were wrong or are false "you know, mein Oberst, we dont need to attack from the flank, from the front all is OK. And no, no, don't bring me those 88's. We don't need them to deal with that ****ed KV...". Vamos, hombre, que se han pasado.

_____________________________

Desperta ferro!
Miquel Guasch Aparicio

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 49
- 12/19/2001 11:09:00 AM   
Figmo

 

Posts: 556
Joined: 5/28/2000
From: Pennsylvania, USA
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Warrior:
This is getting out of hand. All of you that want Red tanks to kill German tanks, just replace the T-34 main gun with a 150mm cannon or something like that and GET OVER IT.
Now Now Warrior - it's not a matter of getting over anything - it's a matter of stating ones opinion - right or wrong. Being an American that is a right I WON'T give up. And if it's a change that makes me and other gamers not want to play version 7 for whatever reason - I'm sure Matrix would want to hear it. And I'm not one to change the OOBs - I live with them as they are or move on to another game - or in this case back to a previous version.

_____________________________

"Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes ...Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, f

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 50
- 12/19/2001 12:02:00 PM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline 		Appreciate the cast of thousands you align against me, but where in all that is DATA that contradicts what is in the game and if you want it changed whatdo you think it should be changed to? You started this whole thing listing a set of penetration numbers you don;t agree with. You continue to rail that "the game goes against everything known about WWII" Please quote specific data that contradicts what is in the game, or explain how you feel accurate data is being incorrectly used. You keep making statements and site a litany of sources, but where's the meat?

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 51
- 12/19/2001 12:26:00 PM   
LeibstandartePzD

 

Posts: 130
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: NW Indiana, (Valpo) USA
Status: offline 		You know since this game is free and includes an editor that allows you to tweak anything you like you can always change what you disagree with. It really burns me up to read of people flaming Matrix especially over a FREE game with an EDITOR!

_____________________________

Respectfully,
Jason E. Otto
Former member of the 8th US Cavalry and a grandson of a Leibstandarte tanker.

"It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us freedom of the press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us freedom of speech

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 52
- 12/19/2001 12:55:00 PM   
kao16

 

Posts: 311
Joined: 4/10/2000
From: Christchurch, New Zealand
Status: offline 		I don't have SPWAW installed on this machine, so I'll try at home later but: IIRC the T34/76 has a smaller crew (commander as loader) this is part of the data in the OOB. Also there is unit ROF. What is the ROF and crew of a Panzer III, and the T34/76? I'm sure that in these tests the Soviet forces (T34) are under a ROF deficit compared to the Germans. Also, combat ranges of 10-12 hexes....(visibility 10-12) mean that the engagements take place VERY close, in which case the side that shoots first (op-fire?) has a good chance of killing the enemy. Test with longer visibility and Steppes (not bush/forest etc where LOS is very short) so that you can actually see whether the T34 can deal with the PIII

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 53
- 12/19/2001 1:05:00 PM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline 		T_34 has ROF 4 PzIIIh has ROF 6. It can make a big difference... I encourage reasonable arguments. That is how improvements get made. But I can't change anything based on "its all hosed up" opinions...

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 54
- 12/19/2001 2:28:00 PM   
Scorpion_sk

 

Posts: 51
Joined: 11/6/2001
From: Finland
Status: offline 		Capt. Pixel.....please....Agh, best to leave it at that....
That goes for Warrior too...I´m sorry, but that is the sort of attitude I despise...If I want "just a game" I´ll go play one.
I know I have lots of them. For SPWAW I want something different.
The enjoyment does not come from "blasting tanks and driving vehicles around" but rather from the *simulation*. No offence is meant we just have a difference of opinion here.
Regardless of the test conditions and AI tactics, those tests you´ve run, they confirm that something is wrong. Yes, modifying the conditions (visibility, terrain, AI tactics) might modify the results somewhat, but only to a small degree. We will certainly not see them turn upside down just because of those conditions. This is an important issue since many of us will be fighting you know where and you know when and guess what SHOULD be giving us the most headache. Yes, the game includes an editor, but not everyone of us has the ballistics data or extensive knowledge about the issue.
So, unless Matrix makes an exception and releases a correction (which I´m sure is more likely to happen if we discuss it in a cordial manner.) we need to come up with a plan how to modify the data ourselves if needed in a mostly uniform manner (that is, for those who want to do it).
In other words, we´ll discuss the issue here and decide on the new values for the things that need changing. Ok. My suggestions. No hard data here as I haven´t looked at the values myself. So the germans´ 50 mm gun is too efficient.
Lower the value *just a bit*, closer to v 6.1 values (but still maybe a notch higher than it used to be.)
What about other gerry guns? Or is just the 50mml42 gun standing out? Ok, the soviet tanks. They need to have their armour values increased closer to what they were in v 6.1. This should be the biggest change, right? I don´t know about the efficiency of soviet guns vs german armour so I won´t say anything about that yet. But I´m assuming their pen. values are just a bit too low too? If so , tune them up just a little.
The end result and objective of all of these *small* modifications should be to make the tanks more even, with the T-34 being just a bit better than the PzIII variants as a whole (taking things such as russian training, rof etc etc into account).
Just like their points value suggests. This way, everybody should at least stay content and Megacampaign balance would not be totally lost (although the AI needs every bit of help it can get).
As for Matrix, please continue doing the good job and stay motivated despite angry, impassioned gamers. I think we all agree that something needs a bit of changing, and in the end we all want the best for the game.

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 55
- 12/19/2001 4:28:00 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Greetings every one. Is there a big difference between versions? I still get slaughtered in the same old way. Last battle I had Soviets July 43 clear weather clear terrian (recipe for disaster)
I took 5 companies of Tankodest's with T-34m42 each with a FO on a BT-7m a btry of 122mm FA and 2 Strumoviks as support. One of those supper large maps with 5 victory areas 1 up north behind my start line 3 in the middle and one down south.
I decided to mass everything in the north and drive south. One turn one I occupied the northern area. with 1 co and 1 in support while the other 3 headed south. On turn 2 MK-IVh's appeared and 3 Tigers at turns end 16 of 22 Soviet tanks had been destroyed. On turn 3 I managed to kill several half tracks (carring SS inf) but I had to hit them several times. Every hit on a MK-IV bounched. I turned the 3 other companies around.
12 more Soviet tanks were destroyed on turn 3. With me killing a few more halftracks. On turn 4 the airforce arrived and killed another half track. By the end of turn 5 my 9 surviving tanks (out of 55) were running. The poor infantry dismounted and in the open were butchered.
Nothing new here from one version to the next. I have much better success against German armour if I just stick to purchasing Soviet infantry and hiding. The good thing about battles between German and Soviet tanks is they only take a few turns to fight. I still love playing the game and have just came to accept the fact that when a Soviet tank moves or fires it dies. I love playing against Tigers and Panther fat German forces that skimp the infantry support. If I had had time I would have used my arty to lay smoke and sent the infantry with their molotovs forward. But I was hit faster then I thought and then my FO's all needed 1.1 turns to call and by that time it was over. Antone looking for an online battle? (I can never get combat net to work)

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 56
- 12/19/2001 4:44:00 PM   
Halgary

 

Posts: 52
Joined: 6/4/2001
From: Oulu, Finland
Status: offline 		I do not know how well the IIIh fared against the T34/76 in reality, but after running a few (very unscientific) tests I came to conclusion that although IIIh can destroy T34 within 400m (8 hexes)about as often as T34 can destroy it, the IIIh's get slaughtered from distances over 750m (15 hexes). IIIh has no chance to penetrate the frontal armor of T34, while the 76mm penetrates aprox. 20% of the time. How often did tanks shoot at each other face to face at point-blank ranges anyway?

_____________________________


(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 57
- 12/19/2001 5:37:00 PM   
sebagonzalez

 

Posts: 156
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Uruguay
Status: offline 		There are obviously 2 schools of thinking here about armor in ww2. I must say that I TOTALLY AGREE with Mikimoto, Gorgias and Gallo Rojo (and others now), not because we r comrades of SPWAW since a time, but because all they say in extended way reflects my way of thinking about this subject. But on the other hand, I think that we have (Thks god for some of us), the possibility of just uninstall the game and install it and patch till V6.1 (the more accurate one to me). So, we also know that V7 was the last patch from Matrix, so from now on they will focus on Combat Leader, so things are very straight………or you like the new version or u keep with the 6.1 which satisfied a lot of us, then the 2 schools of thinking are satisfied. In my case I am right now playing again in 6.1. Although this new version will now make my online play harder, since I will have to search for people with V6.1, instead of V7. Since there will be nothing more new under the sun in matter of patches by Matrix to this game, the issue becomes clear to me…….Or u play V6.1 or V7. Since anything we say will not change a damn thing from now on, lets just make our choices. I am writing this post offline so I don’t remember the name of the guy that said it was just a game so play it or leave it (it´s warrior, I am looking now, and seems also to be a sarcastic assle for the last post he puted)……well…… actually what makes this kind of discussion is that the game is based in WW2, and from WW2 we have facts, and this facts must be reflected in a game that tries to reflect the conflict as accurate as possible, and this are not only my words, I think that with each topic that is posted about proposed changes and also critics we are all struggling to make the game better and to make it an accurate WW2 tactical warfare game. I think u were a veteran of this forum also, so I guess that some time ago when u posted things in the forum about what changes can make the game more accurate or what changes not, u would be very happy of hearing a guy telling you (is just a game, play it or leave it), when u know the spirit of this kind of topics is for struggling for improvement. Anyway, as I say above, we cant do nothing else from now on since V7 is the definitive version, so things are just simple as playing V7 or V6.1. I forgot also to say that the way i see it, tha game from 6.1 to 7 is sacrificing accuracy to balance, a balance that to me is made by good choices of equipment and well planned tactical decisions more than by making the game LESS ACCÚRATE. Seems to be making the game more accessible to beginners. Or u will tell me that u never beated the Soviets with the Italians in 1942? Or some of this battles that seems impossible but where u finally win. It´s incredible how u can use the prejudices of other players towards a combatant country for your benefit in battle. I am remembering now the Movie “The Patriot” when the Americans used the Militia to engage the british based on the prejudice of the british general for their benefit. This can also be translated to the game, I can assure u that. PS: I did some more tries, and had 10 T34 tanks vs 10 PzIII J, with the following result:
All Russian tanks dead with no german casualties, and this result keep happening more or less the same!!!. I tried thhe same in 6.1, and results are more accurate……4 T34 destroyed and all panzers destroyed or damaged.

_____________________________

Mierda....y ahora...que corno hago?

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 58
- 12/19/2001 6:00:00 PM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline 		Grrrr.....!!!! What's happening here is just what happened, when the godlike Tiger I was pushed of it's throne. Someone does remember the old days, when the Tiger I ruled the battlefield and nothing could stand against it ? It was, (and now something rare, I use AmmoSgts words ) something from the land of Myth and Fantasy. All kind of folks were yelling and screaming how the Tiger could be downgraded. They wrote all the excellent researched comments so many people do post now, complaining how the "best tank in the world" could be downgraded like that and blablabla...
The Tiger came back to earth, were it belongs. And now the T-34 goes the same way...nothing different, nothing unfair, just good research, good maths and a DESIRE TO DO THINGS RIGHT. Thank you very much for this last, valuable PzIII vs T-34 test...great !!! So you really belive, what your're saying ?
Do you want to make a battle against me ?
10 PzIII and 10 T-34 m41
Start distance at 2000m
Plain map from the editor, so no map advantage for either side
Equal experience and leadership values Take the Pz III and if you score more then one lucky punch, you win.
But I think, if you just think it over a minute, you'll see, that we don't even have to start the battle to know, what the result will be. ...unbelievable, this amount of "unqualified" comments...

_____________________________

[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 Mikimoto)
Post #: 59
- 12/19/2001 6:18:00 PM   
sebagonzalez

 

Posts: 156
Joined: 9/11/2001
From: Uruguay
Status: offline 		Maybe u r not getting the point that this tests were to prove the new armor ratings, and for that test works fine. Now, what u say is totally true.........in V6.1 against a human player, or when i played both sides...but in V7 is not that way.....why dont you try it some times, use the 50x40 map, visibility 25, weather 1 and 12 turns. Try it in V7 and shout up! I dont have more to say about this subject since i was clear enough in the first one.

_____________________________

Mierda....y ahora...que corno hago?

(in reply to Mikimoto)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   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