H2H - What do you think ?

H2H - What do you think ? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> SPWaW Thread Hall of Fame

Message

Panzer Leo -> H2H - What do you think ? (4/19/2002 1:07:08 AM)
Well, let's see then...it's 1 1/2 weeks since Fabio posted SPWAW H2H on his site and at least one or two downloads were done by now :D As I said before, there might be the wish or need to correct errors in H2H (hmmm,...I hope there're none, but usually they sneak in...)or simply put in some things, that are not included now. To find out if this should be the case, I start this thread, to give you the possibility to point things out and maybe have some influence on the content of H2H: Are there any AAR with H2H already ? Did someone find some major errors or things, that should be changed ? Did you miss something, that should be included ? Did anyone have problems ? (with installing or playing H2H) This is your place and time to throw in your thoughts on H2H (even if you think it's bulls### :rolleyes: ) So tell me, are the Finns overrated ? ...the US from Hollywood or German Ueberweapons everywhere ?:D ...if yes, what can we do about it to change it ? ;) Any comments appreciated :D

Svennemir -> (4/19/2002 8:15:57 AM)
Thanks for this opportunity. I haven't yet found a human to play H2H with but have played a few battles against AI and I have yet to see "human-only" units. Maybe those units are classes that the AI doesn't actually buy? Anyway, while there might not be any new errors to H2H, some of the errors from 7.1 are still there. The German halftracks had one MG removed - but what about the US ones? Some of those even have three MGs in the game, and that seems a LOT in comparison with the German ones. Does anyone know whether this should be changed? I'm just wondering here, I'm not an expert. But well, other suggestions: The cost formula was changed in 7.1. This made trucks and unarmoured units VERY cheap. In my opinion scout vehicles shouldn't be bought at the cost of 3 points as in 7.1 since their mere ability to see is worth more than that. But units like trucks have seemingly always been too expensive in comparison to halftracks. Don't you all agree? In H2H, where th 7.1 unit costs don't seem to have been included, a truck like German Opel costs 18 while a halftrack 26 - but the halftrack is armed, armoured and much faster in terrain. A small adjustment here would certainly be in order IMHO. One possible way to make trucks more cheap would be to class their platoons "second line" - I guess the truckers were not the hardiest fighters on the from were they? The German 50mm mortars have one tube per unit. The american 50mm mortars have two/three tubes per unit. I heard they should rather have one tube per unit because of firing doctrine. German cpt. T-34s have different armour penetration than Soviet ones. Finnish cpt. KV-1E has different Fire Control/rangefinder than Soviet. In a thread in the OOB mod subforum I have mentioned this, but in my "Taschenbuch der Panzer 1943-54" the T-34/85 front hull armour is listed as 45+15 mm for a totalt of 60mm. Should this version be available? In that case I suggest deleting one of the different T-34 tanks from '41 since there for reasons unknown are two slightly different uparmoured types from that year. More suggestions might be coming up.

RUsco -> (4/19/2002 9:12:47 AM)
Svennemir, sent you an E-mail. I have spots open. [email]williamrusco@cs.com[/email]

JimPY -> H2H (4/21/2002 9:19:58 AM)
I have played a few scenarios against the AI in H2H. I love the new sounds. The only issue that I had was the lethality of the bazooka, piat, panzerfaust and panzerschreck against infantry. So I lowered all their HE kill ratings to 2. Now I get an occassional infantry kill by one of these weapons, but it is not guaranteed like it was before I made that change.

Panzer Leo -> (4/21/2002 8:11:09 PM)
[QUOTE]The German halftracks had one MG removed - but what about the US ones? Some of those even have three MGs in the game, and that seems a LOT in comparison with the German ones. [/QUOTE] Yep, thought of it, too... My problem is, I don't know the exact location and mounting type of MGs on the US halftracks. It would be helpfull, if someone could explain how many MGs on what HT version could actually fire to the front. MGs firing only to the sides should be counted only if there's one for each side and so on... [B]HELP APPRECIATED[/B] [QUOTE]In my opinion scout vehicles shouldn't be bought at the cost of 3 points as in 7.1 [/QUOTE] 3 points ? Can't follow you...what vehicles ? [QUOTE]But units like trucks have seemingly always been too expensive in comparison to halftracks. Don't you all agree? [/QUOTE] Well, I do :D But that's a tough one...changing truck costs means billions of trucks in the OOBs to be altered plus light vehicles like Jeeps and cars plus horse drawn vehicles plus...to keep the relation...:eek: [B]BUT[/B] I can change the Halftrack costs a bit like M3 costs now 23 to let's say 28 (GMC CCKW costs 16). It's much less to change and widens the gap a bit... [QUOTE]One possible way to make trucks more cheap would be to class their platoons "second line" - I guess the truckers were not the hardiest fighters on the from were they? [/QUOTE] But they weren't cowards either...(gotta be careful here, as I know to many military truck drivers... :D ) [QUOTE]The German 50mm mortars have one tube per unit. The american 50mm mortars have two/three tubes per unit. I heard they should rather have one tube per unit because of firing doctrine. [/QUOTE] That is some sort of leftover from v7.0, I think. Some light mortar units were not changed back to single tube. It looked like it was done intentionally, so I didn't touch it. But I'm not sure why...maybe Paul knows ? [QUOTE]German cpt. T-34s have different armour penetration than Soviet ones. Finnish cpt. KV-1E has different Fire Control/rangefinder than Soviet. [/QUOTE] Oooops...:rolleyes: (most of the T-34s have different FC/RF - changed it already) [QUOTE]T-34/85 front hull armour is listed as 45+15 mm for a totalt of 60mm. Should this version be available? [/QUOTE] I need production numbers (at least a hint, how common it was). Would be no problem to put it in, but not if it was to rare or just experimental. [QUOTE]The only issue that I had was the lethality of the bazooka, piat, panzerfaust and panzerschreck against infantry. So I lowered all their HE kill ratings to 2. Now I get an occassional infantry kill by one of these weapons, but it is not guaranteed like it was before I made that change.[/QUOTE] You changed it to 2 or by 2 ? (e.g. PzFst 60/100 in H2H HE kill = 11 and now 9 or 2 ?). I tested a bit after you mentioned it a few days ago you might be right, that casualties happen a bit to often. This is something, one has to get used to, as these weapons were of no importance in SPWAW before. I did some research, to show how their role in real combat was and I think they were much more important, than usually thought. The PzFst was used as "super heavy handgrenade" quite often. If you look at some numbers: over 8 million were produced, 3 million were still in service on may 45. Of these 5 million used or lost PzFsts, let's assume only one fifth was actually fired at the enemy, the rest lost, captured, destroyed or whatever... That makes 1 million PzFsts launched at the enemy. I think it becomes clear, that the common target of a PzFst was not a tank, but rather a building, pillbox, Mg nest or ... A PzFst warhead carries 800g explosives, that's 1 1/2 times the charge of a 81mm mortar round and directly fired (but lack of sufficiant shrapnel). So they are supposed to cause frequent casualties (and the others like Bazooka and PIAT ofcourse also...). But I have to admit, that with the new splash they went off a bit to strong, so reducing them by 2 points sounds like a good approach... Further comments on this appreciated, as it's not an easy subject...maybe someone has more insight on rocket usage against infantry... [QUOTE]More suggestions might be coming up.[/QUOTE] o.k. :D Here's one I would like to throw in: I am very pleased with the lethality of Arty in v7.1. I think it's the most realistic SPWAW has ever had and it's real fun...But I do have a problem with the amount of rounds batteries are firing. I think it's not enough. In short battles (20 turns or below) I never ever was able to use up my 75mm or 105mm round purchased. With the "out of contact" feature it is really fun working with Arty (or not :D ), but when I get a battery to fire, I want real support, not 5 rounds per gun in a full turn (even if it was a 0.1 order, it's only 8 or so for a 105mm and a whole turn). As I understand Arty support in WWII, it was much more common to throw a larger amount on a single point, that to devide into so many smaller bits like it is now in SPWAW. I made tests with offboard ROF doubled and onboard multiplied by 1.5 and it seems to work pretty good... Comments from Arty experts appreciated..

JimPY -> HE Kill of AT weapons and MG's (4/21/2002 10:09:13 PM)
I reduced the Piat, bazooka, panzerfaust and panzerschreck HE kill to 2. I tried reducing it by 2, but that change had little affect. Even at a HE rating of 2 and infantry toughness at 170. A shot from one of these weapons still produces a casualty about 1/3 of the time. Also, MG's, especially the US .50 cal. and the MG34 seem weaker than in SPWaW v7.1. Were they reduced in HE kill? I am thinking of increasing them.

Svennemir -> (4/21/2002 10:20:13 PM)
Thanks for the answers Leo. I'll start from the beginning. [QUOTE]3 points ? Can't follow you...what vehicles ? [/QUOTE] In 7.1 the pricing formula was reformed. This means, while a truck in the old days cost ~20 and the cheapest jeeps/K�belwagen cost ~16, this has changed to ~10 for trucks and ~3 for jeeps (only the 'stripped' ones without weapons etc.). These changes have NOT made it in H2H, meaning those vehicles retain their 7.0 costs. This is IMO good in some cases, not so good in others. As I said the truck costs seem a bit high. Assuming the price of trucks should probably be changed, there are several ways to do it. One way: [QUOTE]One possible way to make trucks more cheap would be to class their platoons "second line" - I guess the truckers were not the hardiest fighters on the from were they? [/QUOTE] Sorry about that embarrasingly big typo. I meant to say FRONT. Even though truck drivers might have been tough, they might not have received quite so much training with a rifle as other troops, and they (normally) weren't meant to participate in combat the same way as regular infantry. Since they were in most cases supposed NOT to fight this would excuse the -10 morale change - simulating that they were probably supposed to get out of the way. Of course, changing truck formation experience might be as difficult as changing the costs themselves. About 50mm mortars: [QUOTE]That is some sort of leftover from v7.0, I think. Some light mortar units were not changed back to single tube. [/QUOTE] Much of this was implemented by Brian Price, but since he never received the US and UK OOBs the numbers of tubes of mortar units have been messed up badly. I'm sure a lot has been said about this in the OOB Modification subforum. I can't find any numbers on the uparmoured T-34s, but if anyone knows please speak. I have one last question: have the prices of medium tanks like PzIV, T-34 and Sherman types been altered by formula or manually? Just interested...

Svennemir -> (4/21/2002 10:25:49 PM)
[QUOTE]Also, MG's, especially the US .50 cal. and the MG34 seem weaker than in SPWaW v7.1. Were they reduced in HE kill? I am thinking of increasing them.[/QUOTE] Since they have a WARHEAD value of 1 they give almost no splash damage and are therefore handicapped just like rifles/smgs. Increasing KILL value might be a good idea here since those weapons were rather deadly. But of course it's difficult to say by how much they should be increased.

Panzer Leo -> (4/22/2002 12:58:45 AM)
[QUOTE]Even at a HE rating of 2 and infantry toughness at 170. A shot from one of these weapons still produces a casualty about 1/3 of the time. [/QUOTE] That's what I think the lethality should at least be...you don't ? Try firing a 81mm direct at moving infantry and compare the results...that's how I tried to find where the rockets should be settled. [QUOTE]Also, MG's, especially the US .50 cal. and the MG34 seem weaker than in SPWaW v7.1. Were they reduced in HE kill? I am thinking of increasing them.[/QUOTE] The .50 cal was (from 16 to 12 HE kill, like all larger caliber MGs), the MG34 was not (HE 14). But it does not surprise me, that their effect seems quite low with inf toughness at 170% :D Maybe you should tweak on that ?;) [QUOTE]I have one last question: have the prices of medium tanks like PzIV, T-34 and Sherman types been altered by formula or manually? Just interested...[/QUOTE] manually [QUOTE]Of course, changing truck formation experience might be as difficult as changing the costs themselves. [/QUOTE] no, it's much easier :D [QUOTE]These changes have NOT made it in H2H, meaning those vehicles retain their 7.0 costs. This is IMO good in some cases, not so good in others. As I said the truck costs seem a bit high. [/QUOTE] Ahhh...got you now :D Yes, indeed, the basic OOB for H2H is v7.0 with most v7.1 changes worked in. Costs especially trucks did not make it in... I agree, that the truck costs in H2H are to high compared to HTs, but for my taste way to low in v7.1. What happened in earlier SP versions when the trucks were so cheap was, that the players did not care whether a truck survived the battle or not. If it costs you some precious points to decide about winning or loosing, you will take care like real commanders did. I will do something about the gap between HTs and trucks, but I think the costs should stay at around 16 or 18 for a normal truck. Your experience approach is a good option...I will do some tests... [QUOTE]Since they have a WARHEAD value of 1 they give almost no splash damage and are therefore handicapped just like rifles/smgs. Increasing KILL value might be a good idea here since those weapons were rather deadly. [/QUOTE] Do you have the feeling, that they're to weak with inf toughness 130% ? BTW, I think the splash has also much to do with the HE kill. Test a HE kill 16 machine gun and you'll notice quite a lot splash damage... With inf toughness it is really not that easy. As Jim is saying, he usually plays at 170%. I did a lot of testing with machine guns and the difference between 130% and 170% is quite dramatic. With the 170% the casualties were lower than 50% of the casualty numbers with 130%. So when playing H2H, I really do recommend to play with 130% inf toughness, as all weapons testing is based on this value...so before rising any HE ratings it would be good to take a look at it with my proposed settings... have fun...

Eberbach -> (4/24/2002 3:25:50 AM)
is this mod strictly for head to head play or is it a whole game mod. I have not used it yet because it thought it was h2h only

Panzer Leo -> (4/24/2002 4:05:20 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Eberbach [B]is this mod strictly for head to head play or is it a whole game mod. I have not used it yet because it thought it was h2h only [/B][/QUOTE] It is a whole game mod. It is not strictly for H2H play. Anyone can use it in every type of game play, including all AI involving play types. But there're some rules you gotta keep in mind: Do not play scenarios, campaigns or Mega Campaigns, that were not made for the H2H mod and involve Germans. Most other nations will not have any trouble even with scenarios not made for H2H (some trouble can occur with the UK). Scenarios made for H2H (10 or so included in the download) will work against the AI just like in other versions of SPWAW. Some of them are for play ONLY against the AI (Ardennes 44 and After Cassino, e.g.) Mega Campaign Watchtower will most likely work with H2H, the other 2 MCs not (see above). On very rare occasions (didn't happen in testing, but could happen), the AI might purchase units he is not able to use properly (Personnel Shelter, e.g.). I hope there will be some support from scenario and campaign designers to make versions of their work for H2H, so people playing this type of game have enough to fight with H2H. hope that helps...

Eberbach -> Ok thanks (4/24/2002 9:07:34 AM)
Ok thanks Panzer Leo At the moment, is there anyway to install the mod and avoid having it conflict with my original version of SP? As I am just getting into the game this week, I didn't want to go loony yet with mods. But I would like to try this one. I reckon I would have to install SP twice eh? So with that mod installed it would not be wise to play a random game against CPU?

RUsco -> U.S Halftracks (4/24/2002 9:27:33 AM)
I have a long list of Machine Guns mounts on US Army Halftracks. Basically the M series had a Skate Rail completely around the interior of the half track. This had movable mount for 1 .50 cal and 1 or 2 .30 cal air or water cooled machine guns. In this configuratrion, the guns could all shoot from any position in the vehicle. This includes the M4 and M21 Mortar Carrier. The M-A1 series had the skate rail removed and had various Ring mounts over the passanger seat of the halftracks. These had the same movable mount as the Skate Rail and the gun could be fired in a 360 deg arc. The other guns were mounted on permenant pintle mounts, one on each side and 1 in the rear. The Halftracks also carried ground tripods for all the machine guns. :)

Panzer Leo -> (4/25/2002 5:16:42 AM)
Thanks RUsco ! I went over to "TANKS !" and took a look at the mountings. The important question for modeling the halftracks MGs is: What was the usual amount of MGs engaging a single ground target ? For the rail mount on the M series, it is technically possible to have three MGs on one side firing at the same target...but it's questionable if this ever was common practice and if this older version did carry usually that much MGs (1 or 2 seems to be the rule). For the M-A1/A2 series there's also a technically possible way to fire with three MGs at one target and this later version often carried enough MGs. But the only way I could figure out to do this, was to engage a target at 4 to 5 o'clock (.50 cal on ringmount firing over right rear corner, .30 cal on pintle from side and .30 cal from rear right corner pintle mount...). To engage a target with this odd angle seems more than unlikely...not impossible, but...:rolleyes: So for H2H I will take the typical number engaging a single target and that's the .50 on ring and one .30 on pintle from whatever side is closest to the enemy. correct me, if I'm wrong...

RUsco -> (4/25/2002 5:32:28 AM)
Go to this site. [url]www.wwiivehicles.com[/url] It has a lot in it. :D

RUsco -> (4/26/2002 12:12:57 AM)
Also, can you look into the US Army Rocket Sec. #121 Weight of 255 with a crew of 10. There is nothing to tow this sucker with.

Panzer Leo -> (4/26/2002 3:28:45 AM)
Uhhh...that was close, nearly made a mistake...:D Your link for the HTs was really informative. It seems like there was at least one version with three pintle mounts on the sides...if this should be correct, one HT (as before the M3A2) will keep it's third MG as it had in v7.1...thanks, RUsco ! I will take a closer look at the rockets...surprisingly the British also have weight 255...I try to find out if this was done somehow intentionally...if not, I'll fix it...

Kevin E. Duguay -> Fin gun boats (4/28/2002 11:28:18 AM)
Are the Finnish 340ton and 530 ton gun boat suppost to look like M3 halftracks? I used them in an exprimental scenario and they seem to sit there properly and blow up stuff real nice. But they look funny.Just wondering.:confused:

Panzer Leo -> Re: Fin gun boats (4/29/2002 7:26:51 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kevin E. Duguay [B]Are the Finnish 340ton and 530 ton gun boat suppost to look like M3 halftracks? I used them in an exprimental scenario and they seem to sit there properly and blow up stuff real nice. But they look funny.Just wondering.:confused: [/B][/QUOTE] They are not intended to look funny...:D It's an error...I corrected it...340to and 530to are now Naval Bombardments (and therefore Artillery, that does not show up on the map). The other gunboats are now purchasable on the Misc. Screen under the same designation, but do actually show up on the map as ships... Big thanks ! Keep on diggin' out stuff like this, that really helps... !

Kevin E. Duguay -> You asked for it! (4/29/2002 8:59:58 PM)
Ok Leo here you go! 1. What happend to US airborn companies in 1945. When trying to buy them they were not there. You can buy them in all of 1944 but in Jan 45 they are gone. 2.US M39 icon is wrong. should look like M18 Hell cat With no turret.(The same mistake is in the Matrix version 7.1) 3. Anzac Matilda Dozer icon is wrong. Icon shows Matilda Mk1 mineplough. Put a blade on a Matilda II.(Again this exists in the Matrix version) 4. Russian SU-37. Why not replace this vehicle with the SU-45. Only 1 SU-37 was made but about 100 SU-45 were delivered to the Red Army durring 1941. Chassis was that of ST-3 and STS-5 artillery tractors fitted with light armor. A forward fireing 45mm M1937 ATG was mounted to the rear. The V vehicle was built at the Kharkov Tractor Works. Sorry I have no idea what Russian light armor is. (The SU-37 is also in the Matrix edition 7.1) 5. Icons for SU-37(Won't have to fix it if you dump it!) and T-27 are mixed up or wrong. Look at them and see what you think. (Same in Matrix Edition) 6. Nationalist China. Wong icon fo carrier B. I think its suppost to look like a Bren Carrier with an ATR. 7. Did'nt find this one yet, but still looking. Over all the game is very nice. Played Road to Wiltz last night and enjoyed it emensly. AI seemed to work well enough. I could tell by the string of burning wrecks I left behind. One last thing is there any chance of changing the icons for the Panther F and Panther II to cammo? Also I miss the cammo halftracks(German OB). Thanks Leo hope this helps a little, see ya later!

Kevin E. Duguay -> Gunboat artillery (4/29/2002 9:57:27 PM)
Forgot to ask, now that you fixed the Finnish gunboats, how do I? Do I just download HtH again or are you going to post a patch? Thanks again!:D

Panzer Leo -> Re: You asked for it! (4/29/2002 10:58:28 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kevin E. Duguay [B]Ok Leo here you go! 1. What happend to US airborn companies in 1945. When trying to buy them they were not there. You can buy them in all of 1944 but in Jan 45 they are gone.[/B][/QUOTE] An error, when I modeled US paratroopers with the 30 cal MGs in the squad (the "+" platoons). Paras are available now from 45 on. [QUOTE][B]2.US M39 icon is wrong. should look like M18 Hell cat With no turret.(The same mistake is in the Matrix version 7.1) 3. Anzac Matilda Dozer icon is wrong. Icon shows Matilda Mk1 mineplough. Put a blade on a Matilda II.(Again this exists in the Matrix version)[/B][/QUOTE] I need to know if there's a correct icon in the shps. If there are some, I can fix it in the OOB, if not this goes beyond a OOB tweak...If someone knows, please throw the icon numbers in (I will also try to find them in the list...) [QUOTE][B] 4. Russian SU-37. Why not replace this vehicle with the SU-45. Only 1 SU-37 was made but about 100 SU-45 were delivered to the Red Army durring 1941. Chassis was that of ST-3 and STS-5 artillery tractors fitted with light armor. A forward fireing 45mm M1937 ATG was mounted to the rear. The V vehicle was built at the Kharkov Tractor Works. Sorry I have no idea what Russian light armor is. (The SU-37 is also in the Matrix edition 7.1)[/B][/QUOTE] Again more then a OOB fix (I would have to make a pic for SU-45). So this has to stay as is, sorry:( [QUOTE][B] 5. Icons for SU-37(Won't have to fix it if you dump it!) and T-27 are mixed up or wrong. Look at them and see what you think. (Same in Matrix Edition) [/B][/QUOTE] Think you're right...I swapped them... [QUOTE][B] 6. Nationalist China. Wong icon fo carrier B. I think its suppost to look like a Bren Carrier with an ATR.[/B][/QUOTE] Fixed [QUOTE][B] 7. Did'nt find this one yet, but still looking.[/B][/QUOTE] I'm sure there is a 7th, so keep up your good work :) [QUOTE][B] One last thing is there any chance of changing the icons for the Panther F and Panther II to cammo? [/B][/QUOTE] They now have the A-series camo... [QUOTE][B] Also I miss the cammo halftracks(German OB).[/B][/QUOTE] I'm afraid, but you'll have to miss them in the future, too... I had to choose one, as I banned all double appearence of vehicles because of camo (took precious slots and gave an unfair advantage in purchasing). As the first SPWs were grey, I took the grey one... [QUOTE][B]Forgot to ask, now that you fixed the Finnish gunboats, how do I? Do I just download HtH again or are you going to post a patch? [/B][/QUOTE] I'm collecting all fixes like yours and will post a patch once I'm done...this will be an OOB patch only, that's why I'm limited on icon and pic issues (adding or new ones). Will be one quick 320KB download...I'll let you all know, when the patch is ready (but I'm sure there will be quite some issues to come in this thread, so it may take a bit - a few more weeks, I think). This will then be the end of my tweaking on H2H OOBs and therefore my final version...so be sure to ask for changes BEFORE the patch :D

Svennemir -> (4/29/2002 11:21:48 PM)
I think this small thing might be important: The US Thompson SMG has a range of only 2 ! I'm not an expert here, but shouldn't it be 4 or at least 3? Comparisons: US Thompson SMG - range 2 SO PPSh SMG - range 4 GE MP38/40 - range 3 UK Sten MkI - range 2 UK StenMk(uhh...) late model - range 3. The SMGs have already been nerfed a lot since 6.1 in which they might have been too superior, but nerfing then much more than in official 7.1 will not be a good idea I think. In 7.1 the Thompson has range 4 and better ACC than in H2H.

Kevin E. Duguay -> Icons (4/30/2002 1:00:26 AM)
Leo, I've sent the same info on to Mike Amos in the hopes that may be he has or is in the process of making the correct icons. Contact him or look for his postings. From what I've seen so far it looks like Mike is going to do some fix it icons for SP WaW v7.1. May be this will help you. I'll be looking for the updated final version of HtH. Thanks again! :)

Panzer Leo -> (4/30/2002 1:15:30 AM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Svennemir [B]I think this small thing might be important: The US Thompson SMG has a range of only 2 ! I'm not an expert here, but shouldn't it be 4 or at least 3? Comparisons: US Thompson SMG - range 2 SO PPSh SMG - range 4 GE MP38/40 - range 3 UK Sten MkI - range 2 UK StenMk(uhh...) late model - range 3. The SMGs have already been nerfed a lot since 6.1 in which they might have been too superior, but nerfing then much more than in official 7.1 will not be a good idea I think. In 7.1 the Thompson has range 4 and better ACC than in H2H. [/B][/QUOTE] As far as my research went, the Thompson was overrated in v7.1. My rule of thumb for SMG range in H2H is: the usually given effective range (from multiple sources) +1 hex (50m) is the range in the game. Most sources give the Thompson an effective range of 50m (less than the Sten MKI with 70-80m). It is often referred to as incredible inaccurate over 50m. It's large bullet gives it the highest HE kill a SMG has in H2H, but also one of the worst ranges... The PPSH is I think the only SMG with range 4 despite it has a smaller caliber, because the bullet has much more propellant and is said to have fairly good flight caracteristics... So this was actually intended..if you got sources, that could proof me wrong, please throw them in...

Svennemir -> (4/30/2002 7:34:48 AM)
But the rounds go further than the range at which they are capable of hitting accurately, and that means a lot for the suppression. Rifles have ranges of 12 even though it is very difficult to hit anything at that range (also notice that casualties are only rarely seen at those ranges). The 130/130 modifier has also affected the balance a lot. On the other hand I've just conducted a test, and it seems the Thompsons actually cause some casualties at range 4 in v7.1 even when toughness/arty has been set to 130/130. Personally I would set range to 3 for thompsons but well you probably know better...... Hmmm..... Well, another topic: It seems the prices for Motorcycle squads and other fastmoving infantry units have been fixed for the German OOB. But the prices seem to be wrong for SO Cossack SO Cavalry SO Motorcycle squad SO Motorcycle MMG US Cavalry BR Light Cav BR Cavalry There are probably more nations with fast units that seem incorrectly priced, but I don't have time to look through OOBs right now. Another thing: The German PanzerFaust 60/100 team has different stats than the US PanzerFaust 60/100 team.

Svennemir -> (5/1/2002 7:01:11 PM)
I don't remember whether I mentioned this before, but MMGs and HMGs could maybe (in my opinion - all in favour?) use some more killing potential after the 130/130 modification. Those were real meatchoppers really, and German doctrine was to a degree built around those. The Landsers protect the MGs, the MGs do the real killing. Something like that anyway ;)

Henri -> Re: H2H - What do you think ? (5/1/2002 7:50:39 PM)
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Panzer Leo [B]Well, let's see then...it's 1 1/2 weeks since Fabio posted SPWAW H2H on his site and at least one or two downloads were done by now :D [/B][/QUOTE] Leo, I just recently downloaded SPWaW and only ordered the LV megacampaign yesterday. Like others, I am not too keen on doubling the space that SPWaW takes on my crowded hard disk. Finally, I haven't gotten into pbem play with this game yet. A nice idea would be to incorporate your mod into the SPWaW game with a switch that would use the mod fof pbem play but use the regular version for normal play. This could also make it much smaller. If your OOBs are better than those of 7.1, then I am sure that you could come to an agreement with PV on which ones should be used, with the exception of the few that the AI cannot use properly. Henri

Panzer Leo -> (5/2/2002 4:13:58 AM)
[QUOTE]It seems the prices for Motorcycle squads and other fastmoving infantry units have been fixed for the German OOB. But the prices seem to be wrong for [/QUOTE] You're right, I'll take a closer look at it and make them a bit more expensive... [QUOTE]Another thing: The German PanzerFaust 60/100 team has different stats than the US PanzerFaust 60/100 team.[/QUOTE] What exactly ? If you mean the HE pen 222, that is because of armored skirts. I made German HE (HEAT) rounds usable against armored vehicles, but the Allied not. Reason is, that the HE ammo ignores armored skirts. As the Germans have so many tanks with skirts in contrast to the Allied, this seemed to be the only way to handle this problem, without giving German PzFst or PzSchrecks a higher ammo load. It's a disadvantage for Allied vehicles with skirts, as they are vulnerable to German HE ammo from HEAT weapons like the PzFst, but there're only very few (only Churchill tank come to my mind at the moment...)... [QUOTE]I don't remember whether I mentioned this before, but MMGs and HMGs could maybe (in my opinion - all in favour?) use some more killing potential after the 130/130 modification. [/QUOTE] looking into it... [QUOTE]Leo, I just recently downloaded SPWaW and only ordered the LV megacampaign yesterday. Like others, I am not too keen on doubling the space that SPWaW takes on my crowded hard disk. Finally, I haven't gotten into pbem play with this game yet. [/QUOTE] You do not have to install two versions (well, what I propose now is not waterproof, but should work...) My package is changing three types of game components: First is stuff like icons, sounds and terrain. Second are the OOBs and third the mech.exe. A regular version with v7.1 OOBs should work with my icons and sound and the mech.exe also. The mech.exe is only changing some national values like exp/mor and the like, but does not interfere with the OOBs or game play. So if you install H2H and put back the regular v7.1 OOBs in it, they should work. A OOB manager will help you in doing this, if you don't want to do it by hand. You then would have v7.1 OOBs, some of my icons and sound and different exp/mor values then in the regular v7.1, but that's it. It should be possible to play MCs with this setup... I didn't test it, but I can't see a reason, why it shouldn't work... If someone could tell me about how this worked out after trying it, that would be appreciated...

AmmoSgt -> (5/2/2002 1:42:54 PM)
Just a few notes and things to think about with rating SMG's , especially the Thompson... Dang thing was HEAVY .. Heavier than a Garand which was a bad thing if ya had to carry it..but a good thing if you wanted to control it when firing.. Typically accuracy has been reported as 4-5 inch groups at 40 yards and under a foot at 80 yards in short bursts.. Bench rest firing was even better of course. One factor that effects range in all SMG's is the weight of the bullet.. the Thompson fired a 230 grain bullet , the 9x19 (parabellum)mm rounds depending on country of manifacture are a low of 115 grain to a high of 147 Grain (Germany seemed to like 124 grain which was the designed weight for the 9mm luger) , and the 7.62/7.65 x 25 Tokarov/Mauser type run between 85 and 94 grain. Velocity is another Factor, with barrel length causing some varaition, with .45 cal nominally around 1000 fps , 9mm nominally around 1200 fps and 7.62/7.65 in the neghborhood of 1300-1500 fps from typical SMG lenght barrels (German 7.65 Mauser ammo tends towards the lower end due to the design limitations of the .30 cal Luger, while the Russian tended to make a seperate hotter load for their SMG's that was risky to shoot out of their TT33/TT30 pistols . Basically why the Germans went primarily with the 9mm. Basic balistics tell us that the heavier bullet holds it velocity better over distance and of course heavier rounds tend to deflect less from cross winds and light brush ect. The Soumi and Thompson both came with compensators that show an increased muzzel velocity in actual chronographic tests over uncompesated barrels and have a benifical effect in damping first level harmonic vibration in the barrel during auto firing, reducing dispersion of the bullets. The Thompsons Rear sight was graduated from 50-600 yards , heck a lot of rifles are graduated to 2000 yards , so I figure 200 is a reasonable estimate with the above accuracy tests indicating most rounds would hit a man sized tartget at that range, with greater knockdown power and accuracy at that range than 9mm or 7.62/7.65 bullets due to the above ballistic factors. In short, if any SMG can have a claim at being effective at 4 hexes it would be the Thompson's and the Soumi's, if the actual ballistics of the ammo and the capability and features of the weapons is what drives their ratings in the game.

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

2.265625