Vehicle breakdowns (Full Version)

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



Message

Rory Gallagher -> Vehicle breakdowns (2/5/2001 4:53:00 AM)

Yo All, Saw this below on Tankhead's site with regards to the ver 5.0 :8. Reduced vehicle breakdown chances by one-third and weapon breakdown by half. Also increased chance of repair for both (weapon more so than vehicle). Any thoughts on this? I actually like this vehicle breakdown feature(been big proponent of it since SSI asked for suggestion list for SP long time ago!), and as far as I can tell, the weather/location affects the breakdowns. Winter and Desert are when most things breakdown or malfunction and that's what's I've noticed with game. Playing in plains and good weather, no breakdowns. Desert, several breakdowns. This is realistic, and I like this. I can see upping the repair ratio for weapons but my opinion breakdowns should stay. Anyone care to agree or disagree? BTW, quick question, am I correct in believing breakdowns occur less frequently if you do not use full shot/moves each turn? Seems the units that were most active for me were ones that broke down. Is this built into ratio? Or is it just law of averages? Thanks ------------------ Best, STEELER



Anomaly27 -> (2/5/2001 4:55:00 AM)

I think they should set breakdown factors according to the vehicle. I mean, a Tiger II is going to break down about 15x as much as a T-34 or Sherman.



Belaja smert -> (2/5/2001 6:39:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Anomaly27: I think they should set breakdown factors according to the vehicle. I mean, a Tiger II is going to break down about 15x as much as a T-34 or Sherman.
I think something like that is already featured in vehicle breakdowns. IIRC the breakdowns are handled differently for each country. One thing I would like to see would be the option of user-defined breakdown chances in the preferences. 10%-50%-100% of default, and so forth... ------------------ Belaja smert [This message has been edited by Belaja smert (edited February 05, 2001).]



Paul Vebber -> (2/5/2001 8:56:00 PM)

Breakdowns should be handled on a vehicle by vehicle basis, but the data please? How much more liable to breakdown is a Hetzer over a Marder? Of am M3 HT over an M5? We did it by country to keep it managable. One can always acocunt in a model for things we intuitively know are true, but absent data of validity, it gets very difficult. Our philosophy in Combat Leader is to provide the ability to include such data where it is a avaialbale, but use "country averages" where it is not. We can't do that in SP. [This message has been edited by Paul Vebber (edited February 05, 2001).]



WW2'er -> (2/5/2001 11:28:00 PM)

Paul, In many different threads you keep talking about the limitations of SPWAW and how they will be overcome in Combat Leader. I'm really starting to salivate at the thought of the new game. Hope you realize you're "raising the bar" and making us gamers raise our expectations. From all I know, you guys are more than true to your word! Thanks! WW2'er



victorhauser -> (2/6/2001 6:44:00 AM)

Assuming in a given battle you drive a vehicle 20 hexes per turn for 30 turns, that is 600 hexes. 600 hexes is 30,000 yards, or almost exactly 17 miles. I'm willing to bet that most players rarely, if ever, drive any of their vehicles that hard in their games. My guess is that 17 miles even under extreme combat conditions is not likely to cause a high percentage of breakdowns even to vehicles that have a known tendency to be unreliable. I am very happy with and very much in favor of the new v5.0 implementation of a kinder gentler breakdown rate for vehicles and weapons. Is it possible to build yet another button into the Realism Panel to allow players to adjust breakdown rates in the same manner as they can for Rout/Rally, Artillery Effectiveness, etc.?? [This message has been edited by victorhauser (edited February 05, 2001).]



Mike Rothery -> (2/6/2001 8:35:00 AM)

The funny thing is that "the more you use it, the more likely it is to break down" philosophy actually produces an affect oposite to the what you want to be historicaaly acurate. Normally you will move your fastest vehicles the longest distances, thereby increasing the chances of experiencing a breakdown. I'll use an example. Let's say we a fighting the battle of Beda Fom in the Western desert. I send a British armoured column to cut off the Italian forces. My Matildas are slow, so they take a direct route and cover the minimum distance and have the least chance of a breakdown. My armoured cars race across and probe the Italian column, picking off a few trucks, and pulling back if the italians un-hitch a field gun and start shooting back. My armoured cars are much more likely to get a breakdown. Now, what happened historically. The exact opposite. The Matildas trundled across the desert at their top speed and suffered a lot of breakdowns, with only a few able to cut off the Italian column. The armoured cars suffered almost no mechanical problems and run around all day bothering the Italians. The same happens with weapons with high rates of fire, as they get used more they are therefore more likely to suffer a breakdown. I am now turing off both switches in my games these days, whilst it may be a novelty, it just isn't accurate.



LeibstandartePzD -> (2/6/2001 9:47:00 AM)

I welcome the changes coming in version 5.0. While it is impossible to 100% accuratly model abstract things such as breakdowns in a game I think Matrix is handling it in the best possible way given the limitations of the SP engine. While there will always be room for improvement there comes a time when it's time to move on. As much as I love SPWaW I'm ready for other games to be produced. Thanks Matrix for all your hard work. I look forward to your future products. Additionally I'd like to thank all the posters here on the forums for all their insite and knowledge. I learn something everyday from these boards. ------------------ Former member of the 8th US cavalry and a grandson of a Leibstandarte tanker. Former name on these boards was Leibstandarte.



Major_Johnson -> (2/7/2001 2:58:00 AM)

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Rory Gallagher: [B]Yo All, Saw this below on Tankhead's site with regards to the ver 5.0 :8. Reduced vehicle breakdown chances by one-third and weapon breakdown by half. Also increased chance of repair for both (weapon more so than vehicle). Any thoughts on this? QUOTE] Actually I'm looking forward to the update. I don't mind the breakdowns as long as they can be repaired, and sooner than before. there were some battles were I lost 2 out of 5 tanks on the first turn!! Needless to say I had to enter the battle personally to make sure a victory was assured!!! So bravo to the programming team!! ------------------ MJ We serve others best when at the same time we serve ourselves.



ZinZan -> (2/7/2001 4:08:00 AM)

Hi all, Whilsty it would be nice to have individual vehicle breakdown ratings, it would then be necessary to have varying standards due to exp of crews, time of year, year and length of time at the front!!!! Most are impossible to ascertain with any accuracy. i prefer the idea of keeping things as they are (or will be in 5.0) ------------------ peter@myhelliconia.freeserve.co.uk http://www.myhelliconia.freeserve.co.uk



Fredde -> (2/7/2001 2:41:00 PM)

Crew experience should have a big impact here. I read an account from the Spanish civil war dealing with the Russian tanks used there. If I don't remember all wrong the tanks manned by tank instructors/skilled tankers was working much more frequently than those manned by poorly trained recruits. I think it even ended with all the best tankers occupied as drivers [img]http://www.matrixgames.com/ubb/wink.gif[/img] This agrees with my own army experience as well, where the less skilled drivers always managed to get stuck and break their vehicle when passing through bad terrain. Of course, many things are completely out of the crews control, but some things can be prevented by skillful handling of the vehicle.



B52g -> (2/7/2001 10:03:00 PM)

I will welcome the reduction of the breakdowns. With a lot of scenerios, I have to turn them off. I dont think the scenerio designers take breakdowns into account when they make their scenerios. A lot of scenerios are "The last stand of Custer" type deals. You might have six tanks to deal with 35 enemy tanks. Because you only have six tanks, you are using more oppotunity fire, more movement, more everything. So you start losing tanks that you couldnt afford to lose in the first place. This is real bad in the Eastern front scenerios where you have about a dozen German tanks taking on about 50 Soviet tanks. Its not uncommon for me to lose about half of my tanks to vehicle breakdowns and gun malfunctions. What can I do? If I dont use my max shots they will overrun me. If I use my max shots each turn I get gun malfunctions. If I run they will take the objective. It becomes a ficious circle. A reduction sounds good to me.



k1w1 -> (2/9/2001 6:31:00 PM)

I too have found vehicle breakdowns frustrating but this brings in a chance factor making the game more enjoyable as the mine clearing tank that you relied on to clear your way just broke down forcing you to rethink your tactics.Every good comander has to think on his feet. ------------------ Is attack the best form of defence?



jaro -> (2/9/2001 9:50:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Belaja smert: I think something like that is already featured in vehicle breakdowns. IIRC the breakdowns are handled differently for each country. One thing I would like to see would be the option of user-defined breakdown chances in the preferences. 10%-50%-100% of default, and so forth...
T-34 wasnt so good as you think.they has very breakable transmission.For example sometinng about 5000 tanks were counted as destroyed due to mechanical failure or something like that.:-)) For soviet tankers was too hard to repair heavier breakdown.They just call for new tank from factory. ------------------ Jaro Jakubov



Grumble -> (2/10/2001 12:29:00 AM)

"Assuming in a given battle you drive a vehicle 20 hexes per turn for 30 turns, that is 600 hexes. 600 hexes is 30,000 yards, or almost exactly 17 miles. I'm willing to bet that most players rarely, if ever, drive any of their vehicles that hard in their games. My guess is that 17 miles even under extreme combat conditions is not likely to cause a high percentage of breakdowns even to vehicles that have a known tendency to be unreliable. I am very happy with and very much in favor of the new v5.0 implementation of a kinder gentler breakdown rate for vehicles and weapons." SHACK. IMHO, this is a remnant of the "ASL School O'Chrome", along with weapons breakdowns. I've submitted before that rules such as these don't quite fit the scale of action recreated here. If one looks at notoriously unreliable vehicles: Panther D, T35, Crusader I, the problem WASN'T failure in battle; it was failure to GET TO the battle/off the startline. A way to simulate the EFFECT rather the mechanics (no pun) is to simply increase the price of these vehicles relative to other, more reliable AFVs. Spend more points, get less equipment. I believe a related issue are "low-fuel/low-ammo" rules. Easy, just reduce the timeframe to complete objectives. Simulates the pressure that you gotta "make it happen" fast, or your vehicles are going to start running of fuel/ammo.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
4.015625