Future patches

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

Future patches

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 >> Future patches

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Future patches - 8/18/2005 1:42:54 PM

soldier

Posts: 199
Joined: 5/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

Considering for future patches: Increasing maximums for weapons, units and formation to 1000 slots, increasing maximum number of weapons per unit from 4 to 6 (or 8), allowing addition and removal of formations during long WWII and random campaigns.

Bye...

Michael Wood

It would be good if some long time bugs could be looked at in the new patches

- When your planes fly bombing missions the location of your entire force is revealed to your enemy on the mini map (a problem when using aircraft in pbem or online games)
- Units that expend their turns shot count can go on firing smoke until that ammo is exhausted. An SP mortar in particular can fire up 20 + rounds of smoke ammo in one turn ! (please fix this).
- If troops are loaded and unloaded multiple times their speed reaches an extraordinary pace ( up to 100 mph ?). A cost in movement points for loading might solve this (Unloading troops near a fire fight should maybe trigger opfire).
- Manual states on page 185 that "smoke is an obscurant (to LOS) not impenetrable armour". In the game however smoke acts like a force field and drifts around for ages. Area fire through smoke would be a more realistic simulation of its true role in warfare.

Adding new features is much appreciated by the gamers here (myself included) but fail to address some other problems the game has had for many years. If the code is being worked on maybe these bugs could be finally laid to rest.

Post #: 1

RE: Future patches - 8/18/2005 6:05:08 PM

Mike Wood

Posts: 2095
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Oakland, California
Status: offline

Hello...

- Units that expend their turns shot count can go on firing smoke until that ammo is exhausted. An SP mortar in particular can fire up 20 + rounds of smoke ammo in one turn ! (please fix this). Not a bug (a piece of code that does not do what the programmer intended). A feature added by Tom Proudfoot.

- If troops are loaded and unloaded multiple times their speed reaches an extraordinary pace ( up to 100 mph ?). A cost in movement points for loading might solve this (Unloading troops near a fire fight should maybe trigger opfire). Not a bug. Just the way it works. The opportunity fire option might be a good new rule.

- Manual states on page 185 that "smoke is an obscurant (to LOS) not impenetrable armour". In the game however smoke acts like a force field and drifts around for ages. Area fire through smoke would be a more realistic simulation of its true role in warfare. Manual is wrong. Should read "direct fire may not traverse a hex with smoke in it"

May look at these items.

Thanks for Your input...

Michael Wood

quote:

ORIGINAL: soldier

quote:

Considering for future patches: Increasing maximums for weapons, units and formation to 1000 slots, increasing maximum number of weapons per unit from 4 to 6 (or 8), allowing addition and removal of formations during long WWII and random campaigns.

Bye...

Michael Wood

It would be good if some long time bugs could be looked at in the new patches

- When your planes fly bombing missions the location of your entire force is revealed to your enemy on the mini map (a problem when using aircraft in pbem or online games)
- Units that expend their turns shot count can go on firing smoke until that ammo is exhausted. An SP mortar in particular can fire up 20 + rounds of smoke ammo in one turn ! (please fix this).
- If troops are loaded and unloaded multiple times their speed reaches an extraordinary pace ( up to 100 mph ?). A cost in movement points for loading might solve this (Unloading troops near a fire fight should maybe trigger opfire).
- Manual states on page 185 that "smoke is an obscurant (to LOS) not impenetrable armour". In the game however smoke acts like a force field and drifts around for ages. Area fire through smoke would be a more realistic simulation of its true role in warfare.

Adding new features is much appreciated by the gamers here (myself included) but fail to address some other problems the game has had for many years. If the code is being worked on maybe these bugs could be finally laid to rest.

< Message edited by Mike Wood -- 8/18/2005 6:16:44 PM >

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 2

RE: Future patches - 8/18/2005 6:21:54 PM

omegaall

Posts: 317
Joined: 7/28/2003
Status: offline

Mike,
Thanks for this consideration:
Considering for future patches: Increasing maximums for weapons, units and formation to 1000 slots, increasing maximum number of weapons per unit from 4 to 6 (or 8), allowing addition and removal of formations during long WWII and random campaigns.

I will try to be quiet for a while on the topic.

(in reply to Mike Wood)

Post #: 3

RE: Future patches - 8/18/2005 8:36:03 PM

Puukkoo

Posts: 472
Joined: 7/19/2005
From: Sein�joki, Finland
Status: offline

Steel Panthers 1 had one good feature I'd like to see in here, though this one is more a cosmetic matter.

Artillery barrages were dramatic in SP1. There was only one text saying 150mm FH firing:::::::::::: while the shot was whisling in the air. Then there was BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM

Then second battery fired. Again whisling and BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM BOOM

Steel Panthers 3 made me a FAST ARTILLERY ON -user. With every single shot two texts were displayed: 81mm mortar firing bombardment, with the range of 15 hexes, FLAP, 81mm mortar firing bombardment, with the range of 15 hexes, FLAP.

It's been improved in SPWAW, but the original feeling is not the same.

_____________________________

Don't be shocked, I AM funny.

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 4

RE: Future patches - 8/18/2005 8:38:35 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Now that you've reminded me of it, that was true. The FLAP noise just isn't the same...

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to Puukkoo)

Post #: 5

RE: Future patches - 8/18/2005 8:46:58 PM

Puukkoo

Posts: 472
Joined: 7/19/2005
From: Sein�joki, Finland
Status: offline

Joker....

_____________________________

Don't be shocked, I AM funny.

(in reply to Terminus)

Post #: 6

RE: Future patches - 8/18/2005 8:55:14 PM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

These future considerations for increasing OOB slots and allowing more flexibility in long campaigns are things I've been wishing for. I would realistically expect these to be long-term goals. In the short-term, I'll be happy with the changes in 8.5.

The simple fix for smokescreens is to allow fire through them, but with a vastly lowered hit chance. Why would anyone want to do that, anyway? I know that recon by fire into a hex is allowed, but it seems a waste of ammo. To each his own, I suppose.

If we want to get into a wishlist, I have one item to add:

Allow the capability to seal caves, essentially burying the defenders alive -- it's a brutal tactic, but it WAS done. All things considered, I guess it's no worse than incinerating them. A new icon may be necessary for this -- a gravestone overtop the cave, maybe?

_____________________________

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 7

RE: Future patches - 8/18/2005 8:56:08 PM

Terminus

Posts: 41459
Joined: 4/23/2005
From: Denmark
Status: offline

Heh, while they're at it, maybe they could make it impossible to destroy caves with rifle fire!

_____________________________

We are all dreams of the Giant Space Butterfly.

(in reply to KG Erwin)

Post #: 8

RE: Future patches - 8/19/2005 1:49:41 AM

Alby

Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: soldier

quote:

Considering for future patches: Increasing maximums for weapons, units and formation to 1000 slots, increasing maximum number of weapons per unit from 4 to 6 (or 8), allowing addition and removal of formations during long WWII and random campaigns.

Bye...

Michael Wood

It would be good if some long time bugs could be looked at in the new patches

- When your planes fly bombing missions the location of your entire force is revealed to your enemy on the mini map (a problem when using aircraft in pbem or online games)
- Units that expend their turns shot count can go on firing smoke until that ammo is exhausted. An SP mortar in particular can fire up 20 + rounds of smoke ammo in one turn ! (please fix this).
- If troops are loaded and unloaded multiple times their speed reaches an extraordinary pace ( up to 100 mph ?). A cost in movement points for loading might solve this (Unloading troops near a fire fight should maybe trigger opfire).
- Manual states on page 185 that "smoke is an obscurant (to LOS) not impenetrable armour". In the game however smoke acts like a force field and drifts around for ages. Area fire through smoke would be a more realistic simulation of its true role in warfare.

Adding new features is much appreciated by the gamers here (myself included) but fail to address some other problems the game has had for many years. If the code is being worked on maybe these bugs could be finally laid to rest.

How about when an enemy plane flys over and reveals HIS OWN units...

I would love to see the scoring revised, you come out with way too many draws the way it is now I think.

< Message edited by Alby -- 8/19/2005 2:06:07 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 9

RE: Future patches - 8/19/2005 2:59:29 AM

BruceAZ

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

quote:

Considering for future patches: Increasing maximums for weapons, units and formation to 1000 slots, increasing maximum number of weapons per unit from 4 to 6 (or 8), allowing addition and removal of formations during long WWII and random campaigns.

Bye...

Michael Wood

Hi Mike:

All that have been mentioned here are good suggestions. I generally accept the games imperfections as "this is the way it is" and deal with it. The only thing I would add is allow Engineers to play a more significant role like building or repairing bridges.

However, there has been one major problem people have spoken of since I joined this web site some years ago - SPWAW GAME CRASHES. And the response was always the same - code problem.

All I can say is it happens with frequency after the game has been on for a while (say 30 minutes or more) but there are tell-tale signs that may help you locate the problem in the code:

1. It always happens with tank units when one fires and hits another. Very common when a German tank hit another such as the T-34.
2. Just before #1 happens, the small replay screen on the lower right hand corner goes black.
3. Then the games crashes to the Desktop.

All of this happens in a matter of seconds.

Thanks for considering this. We all appreciate your efforts of taking a look at this.

Recon
Semper Fi

P.S. BTW, thanks for of the cool units you helped design such as the ships. They work great! We all appreciate your efforts to improve.

_____________________________

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 10

RE: Future patches - 8/19/2005 5:34:04 AM

soldier

Posts: 199
Joined: 5/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

The simple fix for smokescreens is to allow fire through them, but with a vastly lowered hit chance. Why would anyone want to do that, anyway? I know that recon by fire into a hex is allowed, but it seems a waste of ammo. To each his own, I suppose.

I agree that firing into smoke would be greatly innacurate and not neccessarily a wise tactic but it was definatley used.
I have photos of what appears to be a SIG or some other version SP gun (small photo taken from behind) set up on a city street firing blindly into a wall of smoke from nearby burning buildings. The russians also fired their huge SP guns (through smoke) into buildings in Berlin where resistance was fanatical. Another photo during the Rhine crossing shows troops in an assault boat desperatley keeping low because of enemy fire with the quote " we all tried to crawl under each other cause the lead was flying around like hail" and this during the biggest smokescreen of the war.
My uncle recently started playing and has learned quickly to drive up to enemy lines, drop smoke and remain innvunerable. I have also seen it in many pbems where smoke is dropped as soon as enemy fire starts. Its a security blanket that too many players exploit in a gamey fashion and remain safe, on a battlefield ! If you want force fields go and play starfleet commander
On top of that its a completely unrealistic feature that defies natural law in a game that prides itself on realistic simulation. Area fire would have some limited uses against the above offences but not against troops who have dropped smoke and run. Its just an option really, especially at very close ranges.
I dont know why anyone would want to Banzai charge a MG nest or tank either but that happened a lot too

< Message edited by soldier -- 8/19/2005 12:07:03 PM >

(in reply to BruceAZ)

Post #: 11

RE: Future patches - 8/19/2005 6:32:42 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: soldier

quote:

The simple fix for smokescreens is to allow fire through them, but with a vastly lowered hit chance. Why would anyone want to do that, anyway? I know that recon by fire into a hex is allowed, but it seems a waste of ammo. To each his own, I suppose.

I agree that firing into smoke would be greatly innacurate and not neccessarily a wise tactic but it was definatley used.
I have photos of what appears to be a SIG or some other version SP gun (small photo taken from behind) set up on a city street firing blindly into a wall smoke form nearby burning buildings. The russians also fired their huge SP guns (through smoke) into buildings in Berlin where resistance was fanatical. Another photo during the Rhine crossing shows troops in an assault boat desperatley keeping low because of enemy fire with the quote " we all tried to crawl under each other cause the lead was flying around like hail" and this during the biggest smokescreen of the war.
My uncle recently started playing and has learned quickly to drive up to enemy lines, drop smoke and remain innvunerable. I have also seen it in many pbems where smoke is dropped as soon as enemy fire starts. Its a security blanket that too many players exploit in a gamey fashion and remain safe, on a battlefield ! If you want force fields go and play starfleet commander
On top of that its a completely unrealistic feature that defies natural law in a game that prides itself on realistic simulation. Area fire would have some limited uses against the above offences but not against troops who have dropped smoke and run. Its just an option really, especially at very close ranges.
I dont know why anyone would want to Banzai charge a MG nest or tank either but that happened a lot too

Good points, soldier. I don't play PBEM so this type of "gaminess" isn't an issue for me. I rarely, if ever, use smokescreens. I rely on firepower and mule-headed stubbornness. (I DO think like a Marine sometimes

)

_____________________________

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 12

RE: Future patches - 8/22/2005 7:13:21 PM

RockinHarry

Posts: 2963
Joined: 1/18/2001
From: Germany
Status: offline

Other comparably easy fixes:

#1 Setting afire of woods probability tweaked down to realistic levels! Generally there�s way to much fires/smoke produced in the game!

#2 Make adding smoke rounds to infantry optional (or remove entirely). Where currently do those SPWAW infantry units take all that smoke grenades!??

#3 For those who like to play with Arty. fired smoke rounds more realistically, add the existing "wind direction" data byte to the user interface/windows. The data byte is present in the scenario files, so there just needs to be a routine that translates and writes the value to (part of) the user screen. A "hotkey" might serve the purpose easily (see @ or * toggles).

#4 Decrease and limit supression to AFV�s taken from small arms fire to "buttoned", but apply the "buttoned" status quicker! Would be quite realistic if the buttoned status also would be applied to AFV�s with limited crew number! Maybe if they shoot a particular amount of a game turn (IE commander buttons up to take over gunner role), the "buttoned" status would last for the remainder of the game turn!?

#5 Make entrenched infantry type units less easy to rout from entrenched positions. Normally a considerably amount of certain weapon type fire (example: HMG) at long range should not get infantry to leave their trenches/foxholes, only to get mowed down afterwards! Only accurate direct or indirect HE fire should achieve this effect, but still not as much as it does now (due to the exaggerated SPWAW supression model)!

#6 The mentioned IR spotting abilities of aircraft is a true game killer! Spotting of AFV or fort type units should not be "Automatic" anymore and any concealment modifier of terrain types should be taken into consideration instead, the more if a possible to be targeted unit is immobile (not moving) during the game turn.

Probably more to code as it sounds, but other stuff might only require a change of few variables.

_____________________________

RockinHarry in the web:

https://www.facebook.com/harry.zann

(in reply to KG Erwin)

Post #: 13

RE: Future patches - 8/22/2005 8:04:24 PM

Puukkoo

Posts: 472
Joined: 7/19/2005
From: Sein�joki, Finland
Status: offline

Just one more...

Strafing.

Some nations have airplanes that have only machineguns as weapons. The problem is that these types usually target tanks and leave the infantry alone. Machineguns do not damage tanks but keep firing at them anyway. Much more realistic for the fighter type would be a long strafing run at the infantry positions and leaving immune tanks alone.

_____________________________

Don't be shocked, I AM funny.

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 14

RE: Future patches - 8/22/2005 9:58:11 PM

Alby

Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline

Wish list from someone over at the DEPOT

"Some other things I'd love to see, if Mike feels like doing them...

Ability to edit country data that is now hardcoded. (ie: flags, name, national characteristics, ranks, names used for personnel, etc.)

Additional OOB's for more countries (ie: South Africa, etc.)

Ability to "reverse" a unit for retreating, keeping frontal armor facing the threat while you back up behind cover.

Change how campaign upgrades work, to allow upgrading to units availible during the next scenario in a campaign. Currently you can only upgrade to units that were availible as of the date of the battle you just completed, not the one you're going into.

Increase the game timespan. 1901-1959 would be nice.

Larger maps, more formation slots for large scenarios

"Willy Meter" on/off toggle

More random arty patterns, instead of the current four hex vertical pattern

Non-combatant units that cost you points if hit (ie: civillians, medical units, hospitals, etc.)

Extended ammo types, particularly in the AP areas

Expanded selection of crews more specific to the vehicle types (truck drivers and tank crews are not the same, so why use a generic "crew"?)

Slot selectable "auto-save" routine. Whatever slot # you first save a game in becomes the default save slot for that game's auto-save.

Multi-country/player play. (ie: being able to play a 3 or 4 player PBEM with 3-4 countries, or play with/against mixed forces with proper national characteristics such as German & Italian forces, or American & Brits)

Off-board arty ammo resupply option

Target "type" setting for aircraft (ie: be able to specify "infantry" and not have aircraft attack an immobilized truck 30 hexes beyond the 40 squads of infantry you're trying to bomb or strafe)

Target "type" priority setting for op-fires (ie: ignore the two man recon squad ten hexes away and shoot at the T34 three hexes away that's bouncing rounds off your cupola!) Or, fix the routine that's supposed to allow you to "click through" a selection of op-fire targets. This would also be a big help in stopping units from firing at things they have no busines shooting at, or any hope of hurting, like a recon team blasting away at a Tiger fifteen hexes away.

Eliminate casualty reports about units you cannot see. This would stop what I call "recon by arty", where you drop rounds in a likely area and see if you get any casualty reports then plaster the area, even though there's no way you could possibly know what you're hitting. "

< Message edited by Alby -- 8/22/2005 10:01:39 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Puukkoo)

Post #: 15

RE: Future patches - 8/22/2005 10:30:14 PM

Puukkoo

Posts: 472
Joined: 7/19/2005
From: Sein�joki, Finland
Status: offline

Just some highlights.

quote:

Increase the game timespan. 1901-1959 would be nice.

The WW1 might require completely another OOB's . There are many conflicts from that period and even earlier that would make interesting gaming. But not American Civil War, hope not.

quote:

Non-combatant units that cost you points if hit (ie: civillians, medical units, hospitals, etc.)

Could this work with 'negative score'. Possibly not...

quote:

Target "type" priority setting for op-fires (ie: ignore the two man recon squad ten hexes away and shoot at the T34 three hexes away that's bouncing rounds off your cupola!) Or, fix the routine that's supposed to allow you to "click through" a selection of op-fire targets. This would also be a big help in stopping units from firing at things they have no busines shooting at, or any hope of hurting, like a recon team blasting away at a Tiger fifteen hexes away.

Perhaps the most important matter of attention.

_____________________________

Don't be shocked, I AM funny.

(in reply to Alby)

Post #: 16

RE: Future patches - 8/22/2005 10:58:35 PM

Alby

Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline

quote:

"Eliminate casualty reports about units you cannot see. This would stop what I call "recon by arty", where you drop rounds in a likely area and see if you get any casualty reports then plaster the area, even though there's no way you could possibly know what you're hitting. "

This one is my pet peeve!

< Message edited by Alby -- 8/22/2005 11:01:32 PM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Alby)

Post #: 17

RE: Future patches - 8/22/2005 11:38:36 PM

RUPD3658

Posts: 6922
Joined: 8/28/2002
From: East Brunswick, NJ
Status: offline

Spotter aircraft maybe? I miss these from SP2WW2.

_____________________________

"The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has limits"- Darwin Awards 2003

"No plan survives contact with the enemy." - Field Marshall Helmuth von Moltke

(in reply to Alby)

Post #: 18

RE: Future patches - 8/23/2005 2:00:58 PM

soldier

Posts: 199
Joined: 5/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

#1 Setting afire of woods probability tweaked down to realistic levels! Generally there�s way to much fires/smoke produced in the game!

#2 Make adding smoke rounds to infantry optional (or remove entirely). Where currently do those SPWAW infantry units take all that smoke grenades!??

#3 For those who like to play with Arty. fired smoke rounds more realistically, add the existing "wind direction" data byte to the user interface/windows. The data byte is present in the scenario files, so there just needs to be a routine that translates and writes the value to (part of) the user screen. A "hotkey" might serve the purpose easily (see @ or * toggles).

#4 Decrease and limit supression to AFV�s taken from small arms fire to "buttoned", but apply the "buttoned" status quicker! Would be quite realistic if the buttoned status also would be applied to AFV�s with limited crew number! Maybe if they shoot a particular amount of a game turn (IE commander buttons up to take over gunner role), the "buttoned" status would last for the remainder of the game turn!?

#5 Make entrenched infantry type units less easy to rout from entrenched positions. Normally a considerably amount of certain weapon type fire (example: HMG) at long range should not get infantry to leave their trenches/foxholes, only to get mowed down afterwards! Only accurate direct or indirect HE fire should achieve this effect, but still not as much as it does now (due to the exaggerated SPWAW supression model)!

#6 The mentioned IR spotting abilities of aircraft is a true game killer! Spotting of AFV or fort type units should not be "Automatic" anymore and any concealment modifier of terrain types should be taken into consideration instead, the more if a possible to be targeted unit is immobile (not moving) during the game turn.

Probably more to code as it sounds, but other stuff might only require a change of few variables.

_____________________________

__________________
"Rockin"Harry
Raiders SP Arsenal Team

These are some excellent suggestions and great "game play" enhancements. I agree with these ideas

(in reply to RUPD3658)

Post #: 19

RE: Future patches - 8/24/2005 3:43:31 AM

Svennemir

Posts: 542
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Denmark
Status: offline

My suggestions, some of which are already written above:

Considerably lower persistence and possibly availability of smoke, or increase the ability to see through it.

Increase victory point values substantially, or let the player specify the average at start of game.

Lower aircraft accuracy against immobile and dug-in units.

Fix the bug which makes aircraft reveal the entire map! This is probably the most destructive issue in the game, which in my opninion makes aircraft completely unacceptable for use in any battle against humans.

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 20

RE: Future patches - 8/25/2005 10:08:42 AM

easycoetzee

Posts: 3
Joined: 11/17/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: soldier

quote:

The simple fix for smokescreens is to allow fire through them, but with a vastly lowered hit chance. Why would anyone want to do that, anyway? I know that recon by fire into a hex is allowed, but it seems a waste of ammo. To each his own, I suppose.

I agree that firing into smoke would be greatly innacurate and not neccessarily a wise tactic

When I was an infantryman in the US Army, one of my NCOs, during an exercise, told me a bit of wisdom. "Green troops never fire into smoke."
Smoke is supposed to be used to screen your movements - hence, if somebody throws smoke, thye are doing something sneaky. Green troops, per my Sergeant, just sit there. But experienced troops, knowing something is up, open fire while guys that threw the smoke are making use of it to move and not be seen.

Being able to fire into a hex filled with smoke is nearly worthless. It's best advantage is that if you know or suspect an enemy unit is in there, they get suppressed and may OpFire back at you, confiming their presence, and now you can cally artillery on them. If you want ot enter a hex with smoke and trees/vegetation, have a covering unit "Z" key into the hex several times and then move in - you won't take fire as you come adjacent. Ditto when entering hexes while mounted - if you suppress hexes with units you cannot see, they are still suppressed and won't shoot *you*.

Being able to fire into the hexes *beyond* that smoke, however, would be priceless. Who *hasn't* laid a smoke screen with mortars to hide his engineers moving forward to clear an obstacle? If you've had it done to you, you've wanted to fire through that smoke, I'm certain, instead of blindly firing artillery at targets you cannot see.

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 21

RE: Future patches - 8/26/2005 2:59:44 AM

Svennemir

Posts: 542
Joined: 11/2/2001
From: Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

It's best advantage is that if you know or suspect an enemy unit is in there, they get suppressed and may OpFire back at you, confiming their presence, and now you can cally artillery on them.

Of course in most of these cases there will be no line of sight, and returning opfire will therefore be impossible (opfire is always targetted). I think this is a good thing. Also the concept would add a lot of excitement to infantry-vs-infantry fighting when the visibility is very low (smoke or night-time).

Obviously, high-caliber guns would have the main benefit. It might be necessary to slightly reduce splash damage across the board in order to make the game balanced.

(in reply to easycoetzee)

Post #: 22

RE: Future patches - 8/26/2005 8:34:17 PM

Maciste

Posts: 81
Joined: 3/5/2004
Status: offline

And what about to introduce alternate history? I mean, if you're playing with germans on a long campaign and if all battles against Allies in continent in 1940 are decisive victory, why don't go to some ficticious Seel�we scenarios? Or, if playing with Japan, let you choose to attack USSR or US in 1941... Just my imagination, for I think this desire too much complex to do it with ease. And I respect too much the dedication of programmers to let them think that I'd be somewhat annoyed by SP:WaW. Thank you for all you've done, people!

(in reply to Svennemir)

Post #: 23

RE: Future patches - 8/27/2005 6:29:47 AM

Dragoon 45

Posts: 435
Joined: 8/10/2004
Status: offline

I have read some excellent suggestions in the preceding posts and I thought I would add my thoughts on the subjects. I would personally like to see an expansion of available slots in the OOB databases to include open slots where you could add experimental weapons, i.e. US 155mm Mortar, German squeeze bore 7.5cm PAK, the longer 90mm guns installed on some of the prototypes of the M-26 series tanks, etc. I like to experiment with these types of weapons to see if they could have been effective on the battlefield. As it stands now I have to delete a normal weapon to add the experimental one. Also additional unit slots in the OOB would be very nice for things like Airborne Engineers, Task Organized Companies, RSO tractors mounting 7.5cm PAK's, and other vehicle types that were used as either field modified or built by a country but are not protrayed in the game.

_____________________________

Artillery always has the Right of Way

(in reply to Maciste)

Post #: 24

RE: Future patches - 9/6/2005 2:07:12 AM

Alby

Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline

I wouold love to see splash damage reduced some....seems units in the next hex take more casualties then units actually in the hex when arty hits.

_____________________________

(in reply to soldier)

Post #: 25

RE: Future patches - 9/6/2005 2:29:59 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Alby

I wouold love to see splash damage reduced some....seems units in the next hex take more casualties then units actually in the hex when arty hits.

I'll disagree on this one, Alby. The damage radius of 75mm artillery & 81mm mortars can be within 100 yards, if you include the effect of shrapnel. You catch infantry out in the open with an arty barrage, and it is murder. I've seen this stat repeated over & over again-- artillery was the primary killer on the battlefields of WWII, and I'd think that SPWaW should reflect this.

Given this, I WOULD like to see a reduction in the support artillery assets given to the AI forces. There's no realistic reason why an assaulting battalion, as part of an operation extending beyond the map's parameters, should be given the equivalent of a division's worth of arty assets.

Michael, are you listening? THIS is something that needs to be addressed. Human players can negotiate the amount of support assets -- the game's AI, though, uses every support point it gets, whether the human does or not. This is close to being a game killer for long-campaign players.

Let me break it down further -- most infantry battalions had maybe 4 to 6 medium/heavy mortars assigned to it. For off-board artillery support, they could usually call upon an artillery battalion's worth of assets, or perhaps two -- maybe 24 guns. That's it, plus perhaps a couple of ground-support planes, or in the case of an amphibious operation, perhaps a cruiser or a battleship, and a couple of destroyers. That is a hell of a lot of firepower, and these are conservative generalizations.

< Message edited by KG Erwin -- 9/6/2005 2:45:23 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Alby)

Post #: 26

RE: Future patches - 9/6/2005 2:33:10 AM

Goblin

Posts: 5547
Joined: 3/29/2002
From: Erie,Pa. USA
Status: offline

I agree with Alby, for the most part. I often hit the hexes next to a stubborn unit because shooting at the directly does little. Hitting the hex next to them geberates more casualties more often than not. I would not like to see the splash damage reduced per se, but redone so that a round hitting the same hex as an enemy unit does more damage to that hex than to surrounding hexes.

Goblin

_____________________________

http://www.spwaw.com/phpBB2/index.php

(in reply to KG Erwin)

Post #: 27

RE: Future patches - 9/6/2005 2:34:40 AM

Alby

Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline

well put, you put it better than I did

_____________________________

(in reply to Goblin)

Post #: 28

RE: Future patches - 9/6/2005 3:07:02 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Goblin

I agree with Alby, for the most part. I often hit the hexes next to a stubborn unit because shooting at the directly does little. Hitting the hex next to them geberates more casualties more often than not. I would not like to see the splash damage reduced per se, but redone so that a round hitting the same hex as an enemy unit does more damage to that hex than to surrounding hexes.

Goblin

In this case, splash damage needs to be adjusted in relation to the hex of direct hit. The effects of aerial bombing are even more pronounced, having been the victim of it on rare occasions. Air power is a great asset, and it can make a huge difference. Domination of the air made possible the German blitzes of 1939-41, and the rapid Allied gains of 1944-45. Just consider the success of the German offensive in the Ardennes in the Battle of the Bulge. Once the air cleared, the Germans were stopped cold, and they were relentlessly pounded by Allied planes.

I've drummed upon this before, but the value of air power is really underestimated in this game. It can be your worst enemy, but it can also be your best friend.

_____________________________

(in reply to Goblin)

Post #: 29

RE: Future patches - 9/6/2005 4:29:45 PM

FlashfyreSP

Posts: 1193
Joined: 7/6/2002
From: Combat Information Center
Status: offline

The problem with 'splash damage' is that it occurs more frequently in adjacent hexes than in the target hex. Countless times I've watched an arty barrage land amongst known enemy infantry formations and have seen the casualty indication (the unit icon loses a man) in hexes next to the one the artillery round landed in. In fact, it is sometimes advantageous to plot an arty barrage, not on the enemy unit/formation, but a hex or two away, as it will cause more damage.

Splash damage should not occur in adjacent hexes unless an equal or greater amount of damage has been done to the unit in the same hex as the round. Suppression damage is fine; but actual casualty-causing results shouldn't.

_____________________________