RE: Upgrades/Changes (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> John Tiller's Campaign Series



Message

wolf44 -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/4/2006 8:07:08 PM)

Some way to stop the cheats! Block replays, the code has been around so long and I fear cheating is easy for some who have the know how!



Peacenik -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/4/2006 8:34:21 PM)

Units need to have a limit placed on the number of times they can execute a retreat as a result of combat in a single turn. On several occasions I have seen targeted units record track records without injury because of successive combat retreats without injury over virtually impassable terrain. After one or two retreats subsequent retreat outcomes in the combat table should instead cause unit loss.



vadersson -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/6/2006 12:42:16 AM)

Hey gang,

Just wanted to add my two cents on the retreat issue. Here is something I have seen in some other games that might work for CS.

When I unit retreats it must pay normal movement costs and takes these cost (action points in this case) from thier allowance next turn. When they run out of next turns APs they are stuck and further retreat results tend to destroy them. (Or the surrender, or maybe just lose men and equipment, whatever works.) The other kicker is that on you next turn any AP expended in retreating are used and you can't use them. So if a unit retreated twice into terrian that cost 40 AP, next turn the unit would only have 60 AP left for you to use on your turn. Not sure how to implement that in the game, but something to think on.

ALso I suggestion I have is to redo the Assaults in the game to perhaps match to old AH Panzer Blitz/Leader games. Infanty and such can make close assaults while Tanks and armored vehicles make overruns. Overruns don't work in non-clear (or at least open) terrian. Just a thought since this game is so much like PB/PL already. ;)

Thanks,
Duncan



HobbesACW -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/7/2006 8:04:52 PM)

It might be a bit risky as it could unbalance existing scenarios but I think heavy artillery should have slightly more chance of at least disrupting armour. I have researched a few scenario's that just did not seem possible to make as armoured formations were stopped in their tracks by artillery concentrations. It can't happen in the current game.

Airstikes should have more effect as well.

Chris



TOCarroll -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/13/2006 4:07:07 PM)

Basically I agree with the others. I do have a qusetion. German troops run out of smoke as soon as they fire shell # 2 or 3. (realisrically), Russians, Americans, Brits get a little more. I know the Germans used more smoke than the scenarios allowed, but I have also heard stories that WW2 was not a BBQ, and the overuse of smokeshells by players created an unplayable smog situation. I don't know the answer, just interested in a realsitic assault capability if it doesn't create other playing problems.[:D]



HobbesACW -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/14/2006 6:28:35 PM)

From recent experience with a fast new PC :-

EF2 is now too fast. I got used to playing with fast human player on but it's now so fast you
can't watch the opponents replay easily. Without fast human on it seems painfully slow.

Can we have something in the middle?

Thanks, Chris



HoustonAerosFan -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/18/2006 3:22:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho


What do you consider absolutely vital to be added or changed within the Matrix release of the Campaign Series (M-CS)?




I'll throw in my usual pitch for better rocket launcher modeling. Currently, they fire like regular artillery, which is not realistic.



rictavian -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/18/2006 9:12:00 PM)

I've only played the Germans but :
1) Close Air Support must have historically accurate a/c. Henschel 129s in 6/41?
2) Improved awards system. Knights Cross w/oak leaves and swords all at once?
3) Flexible OOB to choose from while starting a campaign eg maybe I would like to start out a campaign with an assault gun battalion instead of tanks only.
4)An advanced speed for full campaigns. Instead of a battle every 3 days (which is fine) but and option say to have a battle once per week, that would still be some 240 engagements per campaign.
5) Actual time of day display would be nice. Visibility is reduced because it's 5pm and near dusk.
6) Historical units. 3rd SS Panzer Korps in 1941? 23rd panzer Bn.? etc.
7) Advancement in rank is too fast. 30 days from captain to colonel?

Still though I do love this game.



Dugger -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/19/2006 9:31:17 PM)

I would like to see the campaigns check out i felt that the big problem was with the reserves after a battle . Your next battle in the the campiagn was short on the reinforcement and you always were put up against a full strenght army.

I guess to put it simple the oppenent you fought in the campiagn got full reinforcements and yours didn't.

And yes i know the battles weren't all even but i know i fought some battle that were just a butching for them because i could field a strong enough unit to defeat or even scratch them.

Dugger



PaladinSix -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/20/2006 2:45:04 AM)

This is just a copy/paste from something I posted in an earlier discussion, but it would go a long way towards eliminating what is (for me) the single most frustrating aspect of the game:

Something that always bugged me about the original WF (and this may have been fixed in RS, which I haven't played) is the fact that enemy units are spotted only:

1) when they open fire
2) when you bump into them, or
3) at the end of your turn when the system checks line of sight and spotting.

If possible, I'd like to see a system in which a moving unit has a chance to spot an enemy during the friendly's move, rather than waiting until all units have moved and its the next turn. For instance, a unit is ordered to move down a road and halfway through the movement, they spot a infantry unit in the farmhouse ahead. It would allow for more tactical flexibility and require greater care in laying out defensive positions, not to mention be more realistic. Under the current system, its as if a moving unit is blind until they stop and wait for the end of the turn, or unless they literally bump into someone. This leads to situations in which an entire formation moves towards an objective and only then realizes that they are only two hexes away from dug-in defenders.

Ideally, the chance of spotting someone would be based on terrain and weather and the type of unit, both friendly and enemy. It would be great if recon units had higher spotting percentages than infantry, which would have higher percentages than armor, etc. That would provide a use for all those divisional cavalry units which now tend to do "reconaissance by death."

By the way, I realize that one could just put a recon unit in a position with good line of sight and wait for the turn to end, but they tend to draw fire from every enemy and rarely survive long. Plus, as discussed before in this thread, the larger scenarios don't usually leave a lot of turns to spare. Kind of annoying to burn an entire turn while the recon guys sit on some hilltop with binoculars and the rest of the division sits lined up on a road.

PaladinSix



XLVIIIPzKorp -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/24/2006 4:05:24 AM)

Hi Jason:

In no particular order
1. Reverse movement for vehicles during retreat.
2. Increased survivability for concealed AT guns, perhaps some type of calculation could be made after these units fire. Based on range, unit size, concealment value of terrain, etc these units may be able to retain concealment.
3. Increase artillery effects vs. AFV's. I'm not expecting to destroy tanks but I would like to see artillery have a more "disruptive" effect vs. armor.  Vehicles have to button up, units lose some cohesion, etc.
4. Pretty much every change made by "ASDN patch" for EFII.
5. Ability to recall air or artillery strikes once placed.
6. Engineer functions in longer scenarios, bridge construction, wreck clearing, etc.
7. Waffen SS units with their own unit bases. (I miss the white on black counters from my boardgame days)
8. Dynamic visibility in the course of a scenario.
9. PBEM linked campaign games with core OOB's for each successive game based on how well the players preserved or squandered their forces in the previous game.
10. Variable last turn for scenarios ending the "Charge with all I have, it's the last turn" syndrome.
11. Some change to the game engine permitting recon other than "recon by death".

And I'm sure I'm forgetting plenty more.

Thanks,
GC



awc -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/25/2006 7:13:20 PM)

Jason, I would like to be able to minimize the screen while playing the game so that i can hide my game screen if interupted.



Jason Petho -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/25/2006 7:47:32 PM)

Pressing the Windows key + M should minimize all programs.

Try that and see if it works!

Take care and good luck
Jason Petho



vadersson -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (10/26/2006 3:03:17 PM)

Hey gang,

I just thought of something I would like to see. Linux compatibility. I just built a new computer and after some soul searching I installed Linux rather than Windows. If the game could run under Linux that would be great for me.

I would also like to second the idea about being able to spot as you move. Not sure how best to implement it, but it seems more realistic to me.

Thanks,
Duncan



HobbesACW -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (11/3/2006 10:06:12 PM)

It would be great if the sound loop that people sometimes experience could also be fixed.
Chris



Nebfer -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (11/4/2006 5:48:21 AM)

well one thing I would like to have done is an updated OOB Files/editer
The current one has a few odditys with it, Like US army units having there HQ companys and yet german units do not...
addtion of a Late war German infantry platoon called a "sturm" platoon so that one can implment Sturm companys (I.e. companys that are equiped with the STG 44.)



Ostfront -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (11/4/2006 11:57:27 PM)

My Christmas wish list for Matrix in regards to the Campaign Series:

My primary love of the game comes from it's awesome Scenario-building
capabilites, but even they need improving. I like to play at the largest
level: entire Fronts or Theatres. Therefore, I would like an increase in
the maximum number of horizontal hexes available. Currently, I cannot
build a scenario with more than 512 horizontal hexes. This creates
problems when I try to re-create Operation Typhoon or the 1945 Soviet
invasion of Europe, or Operation Coronet. An increase to at least 1000
horizontal hexes will solve the problem.

Other scenario-building wishes: overall better quality graphics of course:
Many more types of buildings to break up the monotony of repeating the
same structure endlessly in cities. Ability to have German structures in
East Front-I am not aware of any onion-domed churches in Berlin.
Addition of more types of historical aircraft, including large bombers,
with their attacks having a more realistic result. Right now they have
little effect. Ability to have working railroads that can bring supplies and
reinforcements, and thus become prime targets. Ability to create 'cratered' hexes during scenario set-up as the result of previous
artillery or bomber action. Movable warships of all types, from river
monitors to battleships and carriers that can launch and land aircraft,
as well as submarines that can submerge and sneak up on their enemy.
The ability of the Germans in 1944 & 1945 to launch V1's and V2's at
their enemy. Make the opposing sides have to set up realistic supply
depots and systems before they can begin deep offensive thrusts.
Have a much greater range of terrain levels, so that realistic mountain
ranges can be built. 0 to 12 isn't a big enough range. Engineers should
be able to lay minefields, dig tank traps, build 'corderoy' roads and
bunkers from nearby trees, and most importantly, build pontoon bridges.
Working railroads could have railroad guns like 'Anzio Annie' ,'Gustav',
or 'Thor', plus armoured trains with AA guns. American tanks in 1944 could have hedgerow-cutting blades or anti-mine flails. German infantry in 1944 could have panzerfausts and panzerschrecks. More specialty
vehicles could be created for 1945 what-if confrontations, such as the
German Lowe heavy tank, the Stalin 3 heavy tank, the M26 Pershing
or the colossal German Ratte. Russian, French or Italian partisan activity
needs to be included. Dams that can be 'busted' to flood areas would
be a nice touch. Rocket-firing Typhoons and real flame-shooting flame
throwers would be a visual treat. Oddities to be corrected: The Russians
have landing craft that can carry tanks. Why not the Germans? Didn't
they have some from the Sealion preparations? I agree with the calls
for daylight/nightime visual cycles, and I also would like to see seasonal
changes. Barbarossa went from summer heat to frozen wasteland. The
game should know what time of year it is, and throw in rainstorms, snow
and occasional strong wind. Spring flooding of rivers would be realistic
( this held up Barbarossa for five weeks while the River Bug was flooding
it's banks ). Try to build a pontoon bridge or ferry troops across a
river when chunks of ice or flood debris come roaring downstream.
Typhoons can sink landing craft and destroyers at Okinawa.
Artillery should be able to blanket an area and prevent enemy use of
affected hexes during the following turn. Of course, if they use up too
much ammo.... Anti-aircraft guns should actually be able to shoot down
aircraft if they get too near. Katyushas and Nebelwerfers would be nicer
if their trails of fire were accurately depicted. Aircraft should be able to
shoot down each other. Artillery spotters using colored-smoke mortars
to mark targets can increase the accuracy of heavy artillery. Aircraft can
spot for artillery, expanding their 'line of sight'. The spotted target will
then have to move or be destroyed. Destroyers and patrol vessels can
detect submarines. Barbed wire obstructions can be crushed by tanks,
as well as cleared by engineers. A realistic limit should be placed on
how big a gun can be placed in a bunker. I think a 170mm cannon cannot
fit in a bunker; but maybe a 75mm howitzer can. Engineers should also
be able to dig a 'hull-down' position for tanks. Armoured bulldozers
should be available to crush/bury bunkers or knock down trees to create
instant roadblocks. They could even be used to create temporary runways
close to the front lines for aircraft. Real airbases of course will have to be
buildable in scenarios to rearm and repair aircraft. Finding and destroying
them would be a whole new priority in the Campaign Series. Super-tough
concrete structures like the Grain Silos in Stalingrad ( or high walls )
should not be able to stand up to a specialty vehicle like the SturmTiger
with it's huge mortar. Soldiers armed with just rifles or machine guns
should not be able to take out a heavily armoured vehicle unless it was
first damaged by a mine or cannon fire.
Ok, I'm out of ideas.......Thanks Matrix and Jason Petho![:D]



Dualnet -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (1/30/2007 12:13:40 PM)

Reverse movement for vehicles during retreat.

Some change to the game engine permitting recon other than "recon by death".

Increased survivability for concealed AT guns, perhaps some type of calculation could be made after these units fire. Based on range, unit size, concealment value of terrain, etc these units may be able to retain concealment.
Ability to recall air or artillery strikes once placed.
Engineer functions in longer scenarios, bridge construction, wreck clearing, etc.
Dynamic visibility in the course of a scenario.
PBEM linked/dynamic campaign games with core OOB's for each successive game based on how well the players preserved or squandered their forces in the previous game.
Variable victory criteria I read an articale recently which discribed a turn by turn victory criteria changing as time goes on.




vadersson -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (1/31/2007 2:50:22 PM)

I trust that the new version will work under Vista as well as Windows XP.  Having it work for Mac and Linux would both be good ideas too.

Thanks,
Duncan




Jason Petho -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (2/1/2007 12:03:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: vadersson

I trust that the new version will work under Vista as well as Windows XP.  Having it work for Mac and Linux would both be good ideas too.

Thanks,
Duncan




Hi Duncan

This is being looked into, but should not pose a problem

Take care and good luck
Jason Petho




The Rattler -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (2/1/2007 7:56:14 AM)

HI,
I think many at the Blitzkrieg wargaming club have more experience on this issue than I as i havent been a member long but i do believe the Armour facing when retreating needs to be addressed.

The ASDN patch for east front II seems to work well and that makes Armoured units face forward after retreat as well as its harder to spot a firing unit (concealed AT gun) for example.

I think AT guns should have a higher rate of fire and if dug in be a little harder to eliminate.

Op fire could do with more options as to what is targeted and be a little more accurate and consistent.

I would like to see spotting based on terrain factor/unit size/ and what type of unit is doing the spotting.

More choice as to what type of aircraft you call up for a strike and make them more consistent and even air battles overhead.

Naval units would bring a new dimension to the game.

Graphics enhancement would be nice for units and terrain.Even optional camouflage markings for your units. Better explosions and some sound enhancements.

PBEM security for peace of mind

Order of battle editor/unit editor, more terrain types for those that build custom scenarios giving them more options/tools for the future of this game.The allowance of bigger maps.Even some new units not included.

Varying speeds to watch replay/play , for those with too fast computers and the option to watch replay again.

Im mostly thinking against a human opponent but the campaigns do need looking at as others have said.

Thanks and good luck





Sequoia -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (2/2/2007 12:13:02 AM)

Does anyone know if any features from the later games will be brought forward into the earlier ones?



Jason Petho -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (2/2/2007 5:10:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Sequoia

Does anyone know if any features from the later games will be brought forward into the earlier ones?



Such as?

Take care and good luck
Jason Petho



Sequoia -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (2/2/2007 7:26:31 PM)

I only have Rising Sun, so I'm not an expert on everything the older games have, but I believe Rising Sun was the only game to have night actions. Might we see night actions in the earlier games? Stretching it a bit, might we see amphibious operations in West Front so we can play D-Day scenarios?



british exil -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (2/2/2007 9:50:36 PM)

Sequoia there was a mission in WF where you could play the D-Day invasion. It wasn't a massive map only Omaha beach I think. Or maybe just a beach. Whatever it was quite fun landing amphibious troops. Finding mines though wasn't quite so much fun though.
Would be nice if there was an overlord campaign/mission. I agree with you!

Night action would be great.

Lets hope the Matrix Boys have great things in store for us, soon!!



Temple -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (2/3/2007 1:35:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: british exil

Sequoia there was a mission in WF where you could play the D-Day invasion. It wasn't a massive map only Omaha beach I think. Or maybe just a beach. Whatever it was quite fun landing amphibious troops. Finding mines though wasn't quite so much fun though.
Would be nice if there was an overlord campaign/mission. I agree with you!

Night action would be great.

Lets hope the Matrix Boys have great things in store for us, soon!!



East Front II as released in the World At War compilation has night rules implemented, West Front had it added in the final patch but there were problems with the patch so the WaW version rolled it back to the previous rev.

West Front and East Front II have all the amphibious trimmings. WF does have a campaign that starts off with a D-Day beach landing. There is also a separate D-Day scenario, but again with only one beach. The scale of the game really precludes having more than one beach if gameplay is to be considered.



Joachim Peiper -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (2/20/2007 10:54:00 PM)

I think that The CS Games are really good Tactical Games! ... I think/hope that the new changes make them suitable to the Operational level ...

My vital changes:
- Revised supply rules;
- OOB/Visibility/Weather modifiable during the battle;
- Engineers ability to clear wreckage / rubble , build bridges, lay minefields ...;
- All Infantry units should be able to mount on bicycle;

Less vital changes:
- Ability to subdivide one units; example: I have a 3sp Arty battery and a 2sp truck platoon ... and a column of T34 is running over me! ...  I'd like to tow 2 Guns with trucks and leave 1 Gun to face the Russkies!! :-(
- Ability to place replacements during the match
- it would be useful a way for exclude one unit from the "Cycle to next unit" ...
For example I'd like to exclude the swarms of unload trucks/wagons/ecc standing in the zone behind in the front ...

My 2 cents

I'm sorry for my bad English! :-(

Marco aka Joachim Peiper



Dualnet -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (2/26/2007 2:46:48 PM)

The artillery from the entire front should not be able to fire on a particular hex on go 1 and then switch to fire on another hex on a completely different part of the battlefield for a completly different command on go 2.

I believe artillery should only fire in support of a unit in its chain of command, and should not be able to fire for a number of turns if mapped to a different command.



Ladmo -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (3/5/2007 10:35:41 PM)

I wouldn't mind a system wherein a single scenario and go from day to night, etc. with the appropriate visibility rules in play.



awc -> RE: Upgrades/Changes (3/9/2007 1:36:20 AM)

gentleman, i would like to be able to open the strenth button and be able to see my combat unit losses per turn, instead of just a mass of destroyed units with the option to view them either way, thanks.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.78125