RE: Wish List (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Advanced Tactics Series



Message

serg3d1 -> RE: Wish List (12/26/2007 10:07:43 AM)

The thread "Thinking about buying the game" gave me idea -
1. Allow map scrolling and data inspection during AI turn.
2.Allow to give delayed order during AI turn, at least for production.



T_K -> RE: Wish List (12/26/2007 7:57:18 PM)

Victor, do you think you could make an Excel import/export feature for the SFTypes, it would make editing large numbers of units simultaneously much easier.



Delyn Locksmiths -> RE: Wish List (12/28/2007 7:33:28 PM)

I haven't read the whole thread, so this may have been mentioned. But one thing I miss from PT is, when playing PBEM at the save game stage it tells you who to email it onto. Not needed in 2 player games, but useful on multi player games I reckon. Is there anyway we could put peoples email addy's there when setting up a pbem game?



miral -> RE: Wish List (12/28/2007 8:07:12 PM)

Many many good ideas. In the large sense the best thing would be to reduce the amount of clicking needed for many actions. For instance, it would be nice if we could upgrade all the units of a type with one or two clicks rather than having to go unit to unit to do so. Or can you? If so I can't find it in manual.

Would also love to have the name of cities appear on the tactical map; it would make it easier to keep up with things.



rickier65 -> RE: Wish List (12/28/2007 8:36:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: miral


Would also love to have the name of cities appear on the tactical map; it would make it easier to keep up with things.



I"m not positive, but I thought this would be a scenario designer option in the 1.1 patch. But perhaps I misunderstood. One reason I'm waiting to make a couple of changes to SalernoVICorp is to do this.

Rick



T_K -> RE: Wish List (12/30/2007 1:23:14 AM)

Ok after some extensive adding and adjusting of new units - actual WWII German and Soviet units - I'd like to note the following issues:

1. The current system doesn't allow proper dual-use artillery. Two examples: the soviet 122mm A-19 corps gun; it could be used in direct fire mode against heavy German tanks or concrete fortifications or it could also (mainly, actually) serve as a long-range artillery employed mostly for counter-battery fire. So if I want to set up a unit that can do both, I have only one set of kill % on target, which is, standard, 6% for indirect fire and 25% for direct fire. I don't know what I could do except settle on some mean kill % of, for instance, 15%, which would make a gun that's like twice as powerful in indirect mode compared to other artillery but also an ineffective direct-fire gun.

A workaround would be to create two identical SFTypes with different fire properties and make each upgradeable to the other at no cost but that's pretty cumbersome at best.

Another example, I would like to be able to use the 8,8cm FlaK as an anti-tank gun if need be. As an AA gun it has very high initiative of 50/50, which is just not balanced for the anti-tank role.

2. It would be nice if it was possible to upgrade one unit not just to the next in the ladder, but to have several options instead. Like in PG, you can convert any armour to any other armour.

3. Like I mentioned already, some form of mass editing of SFType properties would make balance work vastly easier. An export/import to Excel would do that.

4. When I want to change some string it'd be nice if the string was loaded in the editbox and I didn't have to type it all again.

4.1 Also if I change my mind or just accidentally clicked on the button if I hit cancel the original string gets deleted. That's frustrating.

I'm sure I'll think of other stuff as I go along.

---

5. In "combat sim" sound should be automatically disabled.

6. When you make a random game and, for example, have two regimes, and set one to "people x" and the other to "people y", then when you click on "set research to level 1" the game should NOT give people y level 1 research that is only available to people x, and vice-versa. Right now it doesn't make a difference and I have to manually change all research which is just too much unnecessary work.



tweber -> RE: Wish List (12/30/2007 1:34:37 AM)

I think you can already do your first point with the current game.  I would look at the 'Flak 88' unit that I introduce in the World at War scenario.



T_K -> RE: Wish List (12/30/2007 11:55:03 PM)

Your 88 isn't fundamentally different from the default unit and the problem is more acute when trying to simulate gun-howitzers like some soviet systems.



T_K -> RE: Wish List (12/31/2007 4:36:09 AM)

Would it be possible to implement capturing of equipment? I've seen often in battles units with white flags but that doesn't seem to actually mean anything. Captured equipment pressed in service with the captor was pretty common in WWII even sometimes on large scale (soviet 76,2mm F-22 comes to mind immediately). Please think about it.



tweber -> RE: Wish List (12/31/2007 7:44:34 AM)

There are checks that return casualty levels and there are execs that provide reinforcements.  So, there is no reason why you could not write an event that gives a player a certain percent of the units eliminated. 



seille -> RE: Wish List (12/31/2007 11:11:59 AM)

Looking at the russia 1941 scenario it would probably screw the scenario balance when Germany
could capture (and use) bigger parts of the russian equipment captured int he first turns.
The "captured war material" event is imho more than enough here.

For new scenarioīs this might be a good idea, but some existing ones could get problems with balance.

@T_K
Donīt underestimate the work youīll have balancing your new units, especially with all the multirole
weapons you have in mind. We needed monthīs to get a balance into the existing SFTīs.
I would suggest you DONīT create weapons that can act as artillery, infantry gun and AT gun.
This weapon type would be way too powerful, or ?
BTW, german artillery was used the same way (direct fire) against russian tanks, but thatīs nothing i would model in AT.
How many guns were destroyed by attacking tanks ?



jwarrenw13 -> RE: Wish List (12/31/2007 6:15:25 PM)

As some others have mentioned, I would like a wider range of choices other than AI AI+ and AI++.  There is a pretty big jump from AI to AI+, and it would be nice in random scenarios and I'm sure some of the regular scenarios to be able to fine tune the AI production.



SMK-at-work -> RE: Wish List (1/1/2008 12:08:39 PM)

Something I keep forgetting to post - the ability to make some  low tech units for less cost - - eg if you're up to level 3 infantry then you should be able to build some level 2 and even level 1 infantry - the equivalent of militia/volksturm, etc - simulating pulling old weapons out of reserve & equipping the home guard.

Sure a scenario designer can design low tech troops, but it's not quite the same.

Probably wouldn't do it for all troops....and should have some sort of limitations on it too so you don't suddenly churn out 10x the number of Pz 2's that you ever fielded in the game - highly technological units (tanks, aircraft, ships) should be severely limited in hte number of low tech reserves available, more manpower oriented ones (eg inf) less so.



seille -> RE: Wish List (1/1/2008 12:17:30 PM)

@SMK
There is a automatic in the production that switches actual production to the latest tech if available.
And this is a good thing since the player donīt have to adjust manually all his production once he upgraded
tanks/infantry/planes.
Cheap infantry like militias should be set by the scenario designer and no standard option.



T_K -> RE: Wish List (1/1/2008 9:42:20 PM)

I found out that if a tracket/wheeled unit has 0 carry cap, then its weight is added to the display of carry cap / carried weight, although behind the screen things work out properly. For example, I set the armoured car carry cap to 0, and its weight is 5. I make a formation of 2 cars and 10 infantry and I see a total weight of 20 instead of just 10. But if I add another 10 infantry and the displayed weight goes to 30, adding one truck (carry cap 20) does make the unit motorized properly. So I think it's just a display bug.



freeboy -> RE: Wish List (1/2/2008 12:25:01 AM)

I would like to see automatically the production in the bottum of the screan when looking at a hex that produces.. alos the ability to "jump" to the pruduction see all screan no matter where the mouse is pointed



miral -> RE: Wish List (1/4/2008 9:12:38 PM)

There are so many posts havent read all so this may have been requested. Who doesnt have lots of wishes? It would be nice if the names of the cities and towns appeared on the map. This would make keep track of particular a whole lot easier. Those with better memories than me may have no problem remembering which city is where but I do. I tend to play small to medium sized games and so play a number of different games and it is hard to remember city sites from game to game.



all5n -> RE: Wish List (1/4/2008 9:50:50 PM)

I would like to see an improved interface for loading units into cargo ships that doesnt involve so much clicking. Like a window that lists eligable units with check boxes, etc.



rickier65 -> RE: Wish List (1/4/2008 11:58:52 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: miral

There are so many posts havent read all so this may have been requested. Who doesnt have lots of wishes? It would be nice if the names of the cities and towns appeared on the map. This would make keep track of particular a whole lot easier. Those with better memories than me may have no problem remembering which city is where but I do. I tend to play small to medium sized games and so play a number of different games and it is hard to remember city sites from game to game.



this can be done with v1.1 now. There's even a button in the editor that will automatically do it. (Though that may be more than you want to see). In any event, the feature is there for scenario designers to use now. I"ll be updating Salerno VI with a few changes and this will be one of them.

Rick



freeboy -> RE: Wish List (1/5/2008 12:33:34 AM)

I want an air search to show all hexes the plane travels, not jus tthe last hex and the six arround it.



yoggi75 -> RE: Wish List (1/5/2008 2:00:32 AM)

This is probably to much to ask for as it is quite a big change in how navies work in game. Anyhow I would like to have navies work more like fighters in terms of interception. This would alow for more movement points for ships wo making it to easy to land forces deep behind enemy lines at no risk of cargoships beeing sunk.

Sort of having ships to conduct "patrol" missions and trying to sink enemy vessels.




Vic -> RE: Wish List (1/5/2008 1:39:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: yoggi75

This is probably to much to ask for as it is quite a big change in how navies work in game. Anyhow I would like to have navies work more like fighters in terms of interception. This would alow for more movement points for ships wo making it to easy to land forces deep behind enemy lines at no risk of cargoships beeing sunk.

Sort of having ships to conduct "patrol" missions and trying to sink enemy vessels.




yes i noted these easy invasions myself too. Its on the list for the v1.2 of the Engine!



yoggi75 -> RE: Wish List (1/5/2008 1:48:47 PM)

That's just super. Really looking forward to that.

Btw thanks for this astonishing little gem of a game. I also played PT earlier and is truly amazed how addicting PT and AT are.

//Yoggi



mtvaill -> RE: Wish List (1/6/2008 9:34:31 PM)

less than or equal to (<=), and greater than or equal to (>=) operators in event code would be nice.



zook08 -> RE: Wish List (2/20/2008 2:06:07 AM)

1) Small things I noted about the unit display: all the info fields have a short explanation pop up in the info bar. I didn't pay much attention to the texts because I already knew what the fields meant from reading the manual. What I didn't know was that some of them can be clicked to enter a number, like Supply Reserve. It would probably a great help to newbies if these clickable fields were marked, by a red outline, different background or whatever, to show that there is something special about these fields.

2) A few pages ago paratroop drops were discussed. I think a lot of gamey para use could be prevented by taking ZOCs into account. What about this: If a para unit drops not onto an enemy unit but into enemy ZOC (which represents fields of fire, patrols, etc.), it suffers extra readiness losses, or even automatic casualties. Or maybe the paras are automatically "pushed out" of the landing hex by a strong enemy ZOC. However, the most simple way to deal with this might be to have paras dropping on enemy ZOC fight the adjacent enemy unit automatically, just with a smaller penalty than if they had dropped directly on it. This would make amphibious invasions a la D-Day more difficult, too.



Herode_2 -> RE: Wish List (2/20/2008 10:11:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: miral
There are so many posts havent read all so this may have been requested. Who doesnt have lots of wishes? It would be nice if the names of the cities and towns appeared on the map. This would make keep track of particular a whole lot easier.


+1 !
And a toggle for this display



zook08 -> RE: Wish List (2/23/2008 8:31:49 PM)

Minor niggles:

When you save a master file, the default ending and file filter are set to *.pt2, not *.ptmaster. I accidentally overwrote my scenario file because of this (master and scen had the same name, only different endings). It might be enough to disable file filters in the file dialog so I'd see both "blah.pt2" and "blah.ptmaster".

The program doesn't store the last directory and file type set. Each time you pick a bitmap (e.g. when setting up the Regime flags and icons), you have to go down several directory levels and switch the file type to *.png again. That's a lot of unnecessary mouse clicks for a simple action.



BULLDOGINTHEUK -> RE: Wish List (2/26/2008 3:33:41 PM)

At present you are unable to change the start turn drum roll. It would be nice to be able to change this as drums may not be appropriate for say a space game or a navy game where you may want a tune, lazers or ships horn.

Just my 3 cents.



Tac2i -> RE: Wish List (2/27/2008 8:08:15 PM)

Great game!!! Here are my ideas as a game owner of three weeks:

1) improve the random scenario generator to produce maps that are "fair" in allocation of production centers without the use of the mirror map feature. This would create more interesting war fighting maps I believe. This would be in addition to the mirror map setting, not a replacement for it.

2) improve the random scenario generator so that it places cities/town in such a way that the player moving second has a fair chance to grab enough production capacity to give his opponent a good battle. Random 1vs1 games appear, at least to me, to give the first player an advantage in the rush to grab production centers. There is nothing worse than losing because you couldn't get to enough production capacity in the first few turns of a random scenario game simply because you moved second.

3) an alternative to 2 above would be a way to produce random 1vs1 maps with each player having two starting locations, each with its own HQ. Such a map, if mirrored, or if idea 1 could be implemented, would greatly increase the chances of a more battle worthy map and thereby create greater enjoyment by both players.

aka TacticsII



rickier65 -> RE: Wish List (2/28/2008 10:30:26 PM)



I don't know if Vic is still reading this list ( I imagine he is since he seems to be supporting this game very well), but just so it doesnt get lost, another feature that would be useful (any might even pay off in increased sales).

I've been following forums on some other boards, and have noticed one common critism is lack of historical feel for game. This perception is, I think, mainly because of the difficulty of establishing historical OOBS, and MAINTAINING them during gameplay.

I've noticed that in the standard masterfile, there are slots for up to 100 Historical Unit Groups, though I dont know what they are used for (haven't seen any reference to them in editor documentation except a reference about one exec use should be limited to use with "historical" units.)

If these unit groups could somehow be used to allow scenario to set up a TO&E for units assigned to this group, where this TO&E would set the MAX type and amount of SFTypes that could be assigned to those units. for example:

Scenario designer could have a historical unit group 1 - Infantry Regt the TOE could be SFType 1 - max 4, SFType 2 - max 2, SFType 8, max 2, etc. where SFType1 might be rifle Bn. SFtype 2 might be Hvy Weapons, SFType 8 might be Arm. Co. or antitank co. whatever the scenario designer created for those SFTypes. This could still provide players ability to build reinforced Regts (up to TO& allowed)

It would allow scenario designers to create operational level games with that "historical" feel that some might miss right now. AND increase the buzz (and maybe sales) for this game on other forums, without limiting the ability to do the grand strategic scenarios that AT really shines at right now.

This might well be beyond the scope of what could be incorporated into AT, and if not, I understand, but hope you might consider something like this for future games you create.

I'd like this feature myself, but I'm also pretty happy with AT right now. It's one of the most enjoyable I've had in a number of years, with the best scenario editor I've ever used.

Thanks,
Rick



Page: <<   < prev  6 7 [8] 9 10   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.09375