(Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns



Message

Randy -> (8/27/2002 12:06:57 PM)

:) :D WOW this sounds great. I've been playing SPMBT lately and have been generaly happy, but a WAW version will be awesome! I'm not very computer savy, but if you need info on Marine Corps vehicles I could offer some help/info. Sounds great!!



J.Wood -> (8/27/2002 7:43:35 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Frank W.
[B]hey ho!!

try firing with MLRS batteries!
they donīt stop to fire.... the have
ROF of 255 listed in OOB.

and havnīt the soviet tank a little bit to
weak armor?

but keep it up with this modern mode.
itīs fun. [/B][/QUOTE]

That's because MLRS doesn't fire individual rockets, but hundreds of grenade-sized submunitions. The only way to replicate the effect was to give it hundreds of shots and max ROF. That way it empties itself in one volley and lays waste to anything it hits...just like they do in real life.

The Soviet tanks have low regular armour values, yes, but the newer ones have extremely high skirt ratings to reflect their reactive/composite armour. Unfortunately that only shows up in the OOB editor. Soviet tanks have much thinner armour than first line western tanks anyway, because of differing design philosophies.

J



J.Wood -> (8/27/2002 7:50:26 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Frank W.
[B]another thing came to mind:

you said something with armor slopes?

is that anymore important with chobham or
composite armor? when you look at leopard 2
or challenger tank they have allmost zero slope.
but it does not have much impact on the stength
of the armor of these vehicles.

and: is the number of "armored skirts" relative to
heat protection??
....... [/B][/QUOTE]

The Abrams has more Chobham armour than anything else and it's sloped like a sports car. The reason older Chobham tanks like the Leo 2 and the Challenger are more vertical is because laminated armour is trickier to work with than good 'ol steel and the engineering process is more demanding. It's easier to build a rectancular box than something that's all ergonomic like the Abrams' turret. And yes, slope still matters A LOT. The laws of physics don't change, slope still equals higher ricochet occourances by making it harder for AP projectiles to "bite" on the armour face, and they have more material to go through if they do because they're going in diagonally.

Also, skirts add to a vehicle's protection vs HEAT effects. It's not a perfect substitute for composite or explosive reactive armour, but it seems to function pretty well given the limitations of the engine.

J



Frank W. -> (8/28/2002 12:01:46 AM)

but the MLRS firing takes to long.....without "fast arty"
and i generally donīt use "fast arty"

in WW2 the "armored skirts" protect only the sides of
the tank. or not??

i donīt agree completly with the USSR tanks values, at least the
front steel armor should be somewhat higher by some models as
T80 U / BM or even T72 BM and the like.....

okay, but at least they should be much cheaper than western
models...... havenīt looked at the prices till now.
but iīm not THAT expert in modern armor values, so i better
shut up now........;)



[QUOTE]Originally posted by J.Wood
[B]

That's because MLRS doesn't fire individual rockets, but hundreds of grenade-sized submunitions. The only way to replicate the effect was to give it hundreds of shots and max ROF. That way it empties itself in one volley and lays waste to anything it hits...just like they do in real life.

The Soviet tanks have low regular armour values, yes, but the newer ones have extremely high skirt ratings to reflect their reactive/composite armour. Unfortunately that only shows up in the OOB editor. Soviet tanks have much thinner armour than first line western tanks anyway, because of differing design philosophies.

J [/B][/QUOTE]



Bing -> (8/28/2002 11:31:31 PM)

Unless the various MLRS and Cruise Missile ROF's are changed, PBEM will most likely be next to impossible. Fast Arty ON we have found cannot be used with PBEM - if it is ON the second player will not see his arty, at the most he will get a couple of rounds from the first and/or second entry on his bombardment targeting screen, that will be it. Furthermore, message delay for most current computer systems will have to be set to ~70, further aggravating the MLRS et al problem.

I would think there has to be a way to solve this problem within game terms. Sure, the "real" MLRS might have a lot more than 255 individual bomblets - I've heard of as many as 425 in a cluster bomb (my Phantom driver friend who used them in 'Nam referred to cluster bombs as "fruit baskets"). We could sit arond all day waiting for cluster munitions to finish their business. I am going to try fewer and more significant booms per fruit basket and we'll see what happens. After I get better helo graphics and sounds, that is.

The chainguns also need a better .wav file.

Bing



Bing -> (8/29/2002 12:06:17 PM)

I am making headway on getting helo graphics into JAM. I've (literally)dredged the forum archives, got all of Fred Chalanda's good spilc/spile files and started using them. I have an Excel spreadsheet with all current 1,320 icon entries in it.

Here's the question for the graphics whiz kids in the house: Icon graphics #'s - not to be confused with Iconxxx.shp numbers - indicate helo graphics were used in the range of Icon0009 thru Icon0158.

But ... when the mech.exe is made to cough up what actually is in there, only a fraction of the helo graphics have been used and they appear to be the ones left over from earlier SP versions - most likely SP2 or perhaps 3. The graphics FILES (again, NOT the Icon files) make use of individual tiles in Icons 0009 thru about 0058 and that's it. There are other, better looking helo grpahics in 0109, 0133, 0134, 0139, 0140, 0141, 0153, 0156 and 0158 (nothing beyond that last number).

Does anyone know if this was deliberate - was this done intentionally or were the graphics just left there, forgotten by programmers? I don't see any references to these files in any of the 1,320 graphics files to those tiles and it would be nice to use them. Body files and "turret" files (turret = rotor blades for a helo) ignore the above entires. Why?

Further question: Copy them over to existing Icon-nnn.shp files in the 1100 range or so - or create a brand new Icon file in that range? If I cover up whatever is in the 1100 range am I doing harm to WAW graphics?

Thanks for the help and by all means scoot this thread over to another section if it will get more attention.

Bing



Randy -> (8/29/2002 2:05:08 PM)

Bing, I know you have a big job ahead of you, but when you do the choppers make sure the "heavy lifters" can carry small vehicles. In SP2 & 3, they omitted this and I think it hurts the game. It has been included in SPMBT and works nicely. Thanks.



Warhorse -> (8/29/2002 6:43:54 PM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Bing
[B]I am making headway on getting helo graphics into JAM. I've (literally)dredged the forum archives, got all of Fred Chalanda's good spilc/spile files and started using them. I have an Excel spreadsheet with all current 1,320 icon entries in it.

Here's the question for the graphics whiz kids in the house: Icon graphics #'s - not to be confused with Iconxxx.shp numbers - indicate helo graphics were used in the range of Icon0009 thru Icon0158.

But ... when the mech.exe is made to cough up what actually is in there, only a fraction of the helo graphics have been used and they appear to be the ones left over from earlier SP versions - most likely SP2 or perhaps 3. The graphics FILES (again, NOT the Icon files) make use of individual tiles in Icons 0009 thru about 0058 and that's it. There are other, better looking helo grpahics in 0109, 0133, 0134, 0139, 0140, 0141, 0153, 0156 and 0158 (nothing beyond that last number).

Does anyone know if this was deliberate - was this done intentionally or were the graphics just left there, forgotten by programmers? I don't see any references to these files in any of the 1,320 graphics files to those tiles and it would be nice to use them. Body files and "turret" files (turret = rotor blades for a helo) ignore the above entires. Why?

Further question: Copy them over to existing Icon-nnn.shp files in the 1100 range or so - or create a brand new Icon file in that range? If I cover up whatever is in the 1100 range am I doing harm to WAW graphics?

Thanks for the help and by all means scoot this thread over to another section if it will get more attention.

Bing [/B][/QUOTE]

If the icon # already implements a graphic for one of the helo's, you can use it, the helo shp files were just imported over from the existing SP3 engine, but we never got around to using that file. We had wanted to make many more useable associations, when compiling the list for Mike Wood, but in the rush to get things done in time, many of the associations are useless, w/o using Spile/Spilc to make them viable, since some body/turret ***. are already partly in use!!

Any of the shp files like 01XX, or 03XX, are just mirror files for 0000, and 0200 files, you will see they are exactly the same, this goes back to when if green vs green in the desert, or whatever, one side would 'change' to a tan color, this is why Japs don't always use the tan color!! So, that being said, you can't just use any of the 0100, or 0300, and not do the corresponding 0000, and 0200 files, they must be the same!!

Hope this helps, e-mail me for further advise if needed!!



Tinhead -> (9/12/2002 12:49:29 AM)

Hi J,

excellent idea! I'd love to contribute to your project. It's something I wanted to do for myself for a long time now. SPMBT is great, but lacks some stuff. Would love to get your OOB's and test them out. Also would spend some time on icon-work. Mail address is in the profile.

Thanks and have fun,
Tinhead



Jacc -> (9/12/2002 1:53:28 AM)

I'd love to participate, even with just playing and whining. I have nothing but spare time till January, when I have to go and serve my country. In Tank Brigade... Yuck.

Oh, and I do have another thing. It's called ISDN... :(

Let me know if I can be of any help (can you say that?).



J.Wood -> (9/14/2002 9:07:07 AM)

OK, people, if you want OOBs you have to give me your email addresses. The profile screen doesn't tell me anything, it just has a fill-in-the-fields automailer. Mine is consumeATshawDOTca

Thankee.

J



Tinhead -> (9/16/2002 1:58:28 PM)

OK, sorry.

Here goes:
[EMAIL=jymbob7@phometor.com]Tinhead's e-mail[/EMAIL]

Looking forward..Thanks

Tinhead



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.578125