The way I understand it.... (Full Version)

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



Message

rich12545 -> The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 5:05:29 PM)

There will be patch 1.04 in about two weeks. Then there won't be another patch until 2010 at the earliest? Did I get that right?



Jason Petho -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 5:12:20 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rich12545

There will be patch 1.04 in about two weeks. Then there won't be another patch until 2010 at the earliest? Did I get that right?


Depends on real life, time and the other offerings we are working on.

Campaign Series Modern Wars: Volume I and Modern Wars: Volume II are taking priority after the 1.04 UPDATE release.

Jason Petho



rich12545 -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 6:03:36 PM)

Ok, thanks.

What will be the difference between vol 1 and vol 2?



Jason Petho -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 6:08:59 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rich12545

Ok, thanks.

What will be the difference between vol 1 and vol 2?


This is not set in stone but...

Modern Wars: Volume I will include Divided Ground and Vietnam.

Modern Wars: Volume II will include Korea and NATO vs Warsaw Pact.

Jason Petho



rich12545 -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 6:34:03 PM)

Sounds enticing.



Jason Petho -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 6:38:16 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rich12545

Sounds enticing.


And a lot of work, hence the delay in the 1.05 UPDATE.

Jason Petho



MartNick -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 6:39:09 PM)

Are these titles seperate to JTCS and a seperate purchase?

Thanks



Jason Petho -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 6:41:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MartNick

Are these titles seperate to JTCS and a seperate purchase?

Thanks


They will be separate and will be purchased separately.

Jason Petho



MartNick -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 7:18:16 PM)

Thanks Jason. I take it these will be about sometime 2009? Which is fine with me, there is plenty to be going on with in JTCS.

I see the pissing competion is going well. Should be an Olympic sport [:D]



Jason Petho -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 7:21:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MartNick
Thanks Jason. I take it these will be about sometime 2009? Which is fine with me, there is plenty to be going on with in JTCS.


2009 for Volume I and 2010 for Volume II.

quote:

ORIGINAL: MartNick
I see the pissing competion is going well. Should be an Olympic sport [:D]


Cheap thrills are still thrills.

Jason Petho



marcbarker -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 7:23:29 PM)

I thought this was a family oriented forum?



paulsalayko -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 7:35:35 PM)

it is a family forum, if you take into consideration there are no women and no one probably under the age of 35. Other then that fact, this is the first thing you have said that i agree with.



marcbarker -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 7:38:35 PM)

My son gets on here to learn the games he see me play, my wife and I play accross our net. other matrix games not this one because it is too much of pain



paulsalayko -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 7:55:12 PM)

Barker, let me start by saying that i can certainly appreciate your frustration. This game has turned into a pet project to many of us over the years. Like someone who rebuilds a car from the ground up we constantly tweak and poke it to make it better , we have come to love it even with its flaws, even though it is simply a game with little cartoon tanks moving around a computer screen. Having said that i cant help but feel you are holding jason personally repsonsable for everything in the game that you dont like. I think Jason is just a guy, like the rest of us that is simply doing the best he can in the little to no free time he has to make a game thats pretty damn good allready, better. This was just what i see, and could definatly be wrong, but lets everybody take a breath...



andym -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 8:31:14 PM)

I cant wait for these 2 additionsit will open up so many theater of war,im looking forward to the NATO v WP stuff when it arrives.I have tried to find a good european Cold war game,Flashpoint germany came close but for some reason i didnt realy get to grips with the game system,it was a lovely looking game but shame i couldnt take to it.



marcbarker -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 9:10:53 PM)

Andy, In the old talonsoft game there was a set of designers that did just that up to korea 1953 europe and included the chinese. This little mod was called Hot War, Craig Foster, Glenn Saunders and others created that. This was in 2001. It was cool because the Whermact fight besides the Brits and US against the Eastern Block. Great Fun. Matter of fact if you have the old talonsoft game you can get the update.



marcbarker -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/15/2008 9:12:04 PM)

Jason is the Moderator the Face if you will to this so yes he took the responsibility so I hold him accountable



rich12545 -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/16/2008 1:33:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho


quote:

ORIGINAL: rich12545

Sounds enticing.


And a lot of work, hence the delay in the 1.05 UPDATE.

Jason Petho


No problem. I just wanted to make sure I understood the schedule. If vol 1 stays divided ground and nam you can count on a sale here for sure.



Borst50 -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/16/2008 5:56:42 AM)

Cooollll....cant wait to try my hand at commanding an Air Cav battalion in the rice patties. I can see me buying this one.



Geomitrak -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/16/2008 12:24:23 PM)

Jason, I know nothing is set in stone, as you say, but pleaaaaaaaaaaaaaase tell me the Vietnam one will include the French and Viet Minh. You just can't leave that out.

[&o][&o]



Deputy -> RE: The way I understand it.... (8/29/2008 9:58:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: andym

I cant wait for these 2 additionsit will open up so many theater of war,im looking forward to the NATO v WP stuff when it arrives.I have tried to find a good european Cold war game,Flashpoint germany came close but for some reason i didnt realy get to grips with the game system,it was a lovely looking game but shame i couldnt take to it.


You might want to look into Steel Panthers II:Main Battle Tank. It's an update to the Gary Grigsby game. Very nicely done and it's a FREE download.

http://www.shrapnelgames.com/Camo_Workshop/MBT/MBT_page.html




Achsah -> RE: The way I understand it.... (9/1/2008 9:03:39 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: barker

Andy, In the old talonsoft game there was a set of designers that did just that up to korea 1953 europe and included the chinese. This little mod was called Hot War, Craig Foster, Glenn Saunders and others created that. This was in 2001. It was cool because the Whermact fight besides the Brits and US against the Eastern Block. Great Fun. Matter of fact if you have the old talonsoft game you can get the update.

I think your original gripe had some merit. I am an old player from ef 1.06 days. I am one that also thinks the old game is still good. But i also know that efforts to improve the game come with the right spirit from jason and and others and also have watched him slave over it for eons for no other reason then passionate love for the title. I don't really intend this as a scolding so much as to bring you on board with the current effort if possible. *cheers* and many victories to you



Deputy -> RE: The way I understand it.... (9/1/2008 2:25:24 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pasha


quote:

ORIGINAL: barker

Andy, In the old talonsoft game there was a set of designers that did just that up to korea 1953 europe and included the chinese. This little mod was called Hot War, Craig Foster, Glenn Saunders and others created that. This was in 2001. It was cool because the Whermact fight besides the Brits and US against the Eastern Block. Great Fun. Matter of fact if you have the old talonsoft game you can get the update.

I think your original gripe had some merit. I am an old player from ef 1.06 days. I am one that also thinks the old game is still good. But i also know that efforts to improve the game come with the right spirit from jason and and others and also have watched him slave over it for eons for no other reason then passionate love for the title. I don't really intend this as a scolding so much as to bring you on board with the current effort if possible. *cheers* and many victories to you


I am also an "old player" of EF/WF/RS. I don't think anyone is holding a grudge against Jason for the efforts he is making. I was a bit shocked by the comment of one person on another thread that said that the main direction of the Campaign Series is "online play" and that user vs AI gameplay has been set as a low priority. If this is true, and I won't believe it until I hear it from Matrix or Jason, then I can stop visiting these forums and doing any patch updates. All my games in the Campaign Series are OFFLINE games vs the computer. I think that was the original design and spirit of the game. The "improvements" to the game I have seen so far are questionable at best. I enjoy seeing new units being introduced But the recent boosting of artillery capabilities has sent me and many others scrambling to dig up old patches to revert back to previous versions of the game. And some patches have been so disastrous that they have required immediate patch releases to correct the problems they created (1.03 to 1.04). If you remember the old Talonsoft, the patches were few and far between, but when they came out they did correct problems that existed. They weren't just OOB tweaks, but were actually needed gameplay resolutions. I hope that if and when Matrix/Jason corrects the last gameplay bug in the game (the back-and-forth-and-back-and forth movement of some vehicles), they release it as a seperate patch independant of all the other previous patches and useable under any version of the game. Once I get that fix, I won't be needing any more patches. [:)]

I wonder who the "genius" is that figured out that invisible anti-tank guns would be a cool and realistic addition to the game? I can tell you right now...any anti-tank weapon that is powerful enough to take out a tank, is not going to remain hidden once it fires. Is this another PBEM mod that was incorporated in the game? [8|]



Borst50 -> RE: The way I understand it.... (9/1/2008 3:34:36 PM)

I remember reading that thread myself....and it had been admitted to me that DCG's have been a lower priority for past updates, but they are not being ignored. The fact that the OOB's are constantly being updated, and there are palns in the works for new DCG's tells me that we weill see DCG's playing a more important part in the game as a whole. All in all...it works for me quite well....as all I play are DCG's.



Deputy -> RE: The way I understand it.... (9/1/2008 7:37:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Borst50

I remember reading that thread myself....and it had been admitted to me that DCG's have been a lower priority for past updates, but they are not being ignored. The fact that the OOB's are constantly being updated, and there are palns in the works for new DCG's tells me that we weill see DCG's playing a more important part in the game as a whole. All in all...it works for me quite well....as all I play are DCG's.


Borst: I sure hope you are right!!! I think there is a large group of us that still play the DCG and have a lot of fun doing it. I don't mind if DCG's are a low priority. As long as any changes that are made don't negatively affect what is already there. I've been [playing with version 1.01 the past few days and other than a weird bug where, instead of the Iron Cross Second Class, it says I am awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor for a victorious battle as a Waffen SS Major (makes me wonder how the Allies would react to that!!!) it's a lot of fun. I wonder is there was a later patch that corrected that?
Anyway, it's good to see that there are more of us that are dedicated DCG players. I think we might even be a "silent majority" [:D]

Dep



borsook79 -> RE: The way I understand it.... (9/1/2008 11:13:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Deputy
any anti-tank weapon that is powerful enough to take out a tank, is not going to remain hidden once it fires. Is this another PBEM mod that was incorporated in the game? [8|]

I wouldn't be so sure. In case of a well planned ambush such a gun could fire a few times even before getting pinned.

Speaking of single player priority - why do we have a single save for LCGs? Is it something bad that one would like to play two LCGs simultaneously?



Borst50 -> RE: The way I understand it.... (9/2/2008 1:19:29 AM)

yes, I remember reading a thread about the CMOH glitch....and i do believe it was fixed in 1.03....but the downside to that is, you have to have the update to have the fix....unless you ask Jason, or whomever did the fix to send you a file....like Mraa did with the WF medals fix for 1.02b.



Deputy -> RE: The way I understand it.... (9/2/2008 1:25:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Borsook


quote:

ORIGINAL: Deputy
any anti-tank weapon that is powerful enough to take out a tank, is not going to remain hidden once it fires. Is this another PBEM mod that was incorporated in the game? [8|]

I wouldn't be so sure. In case of a well planned ambush such a gun could fire a few times even before getting pinned.

Speaking of single player priority - why do we have a single save for LCGs? Is it something bad that one would like to play two LCGs simultaneously?


I can't think of any rapid fire anti-tank guns in WW2. And that Soviet anti-tank rifle is all but useless against any normal tank. Maybe effective against some lightly armored cars or trucks. It was actually obsolete by the start of the war.

Good question on the single save option. [&:]



borsook79 -> RE: The way I understand it.... (9/2/2008 10:14:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Deputy


quote:

ORIGINAL: Borsook


quote:

ORIGINAL: Deputy
any anti-tank weapon that is powerful enough to take out a tank, is not going to remain hidden once it fires. Is this another PBEM mod that was incorporated in the game? [8|]

I wouldn't be so sure. In case of a well planned ambush such a gun could fire a few times even before getting pinned.

Speaking of single player priority - why do we have a single save for LCGs? Is it something bad that one would like to play two LCGs simultaneously?


I can't think of any rapid fire anti-tank guns in WW2. And that Soviet anti-tank rifle is all but useless against any normal tank. Maybe effective against some lightly armored cars or trucks. It was actually obsolete by the start of the war.

Good question on the single save option. [&:]

It's not the case of rapid fire, rather a well placed and hidden gun, and the enemy not expecting an assault. With the first hit all you see is a destroyed vehicle, since you start looking for the gun afterwards there is no easy way to tell where it is located.



sfinlay -> RE: The way I understand it.... (9/2/2008 11:59:01 AM)

Just a thought, but it might be worth remembering that each turn represents 6 minutes of real time and rather than individual Tanks/anti-tank guns , each graphic might be simulating alot more of each, firing over a 6 minute period.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.703125