(Full Version)

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



Message

Nikademus -> (3/27/2001 3:46:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by victorhauser: Well perhaps I am mixing apples with oranges here... I NEVER play with Historical Characteristics turned ON. I ALWAYS play with Historical Characteristics turned OFF. This makes a HUGE difference! I only play where I can set my own Troop Quality. HOW you play is as important as WHAT you play with. I believe this thread takes on a whole different meaning and unit price ratios are very different when playing with Historical Characteristics turned OFF as I do. To request pricing changes based solely on one type of play is inappropriate unreasonable and unjustifiable. I would NEVER make such a request because I would have no idea what the effects such changes would have on games where people actually do use Historical Characteristics. In addition, even if a squad of German infantry has only 9 men (an advantage BTW for riding on tanks) they get 4 squads per platoon (36 men) where the US gets 3 squads per platoon (36 men). I would always choose the greater tactical flexibility offered by the German platoon even if a one-on-one firefight might favor the US.
Given what others are experiencing i'm starting to feel that the setting should be off too. To be honest i was never totally comfortable with the feature given that some of the 'characteristics' are somewhat arbitrary. What really throws me off is that when i can actually take the time to fully look over my troops and see which one's have the best rally ratings and exp levels, they may be canceled out by the hidden characteristics at work and cause frustration. Agreed on the setting troop quality. The averages are a little too middle of the road. Like some variety in there :-)



Nikademus -> (3/27/2001 3:59:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by JTGEN: At least somebody brought it up but how can anybody think that BAR's bring any firepower superiority. They were outdated allready in the '41, with small magazine and heat problems(according to the US book on ww2 in my library). Have not seen any BAR's in use today but the german machineguns are still in use and in the TV the macedonian army seemed to have them in use against the albanian guerillas. [/B]
Have to admit but i was surprised to see that the BAR's HE and Accuracy ratings did'nt make them stand out, at least in my mind in terms of creating a signifigant to-hit advantage. the M1 does though, and in some squads there are 2xBAR which would give said firepower advantage. German squads are no slouches either, as they have an MG34 LMG and later an MG42. Many has been the casualites i suffered, especially if i've moved more than one hex in a turn vs a well sited German MG. Deadly. I think the FC ratings are playing a larger part than be thought too.



K_Tiger -> (3/27/2001 4:16:00 AM)

Jtgen: I fully agree with you.. Did you see the dokumentation about the troops in the normandie..or in france overall?? Full companies of on eyed, one armed (yes..soldiers with only one arm)..and other injured mens...(i must remember, knigths of the coconut, monthy pythons.. ;) ). No wonder, why so many surrendered. Its like..the pope hase a figth with lenox lewis..and mike tyson kicked his but from behind.. ;)



Paul Vebber -> (3/27/2001 4:22:00 AM)

The new country training levels were "tightened up" because of all teh complaining that we were "pro-German" and the high experience Germans kept making mincemeat out of the Allied units. Now with fixes to how experience counts in the point value, things may need adjustment back - bracketing and halving is often the only way to zero in on the combo that seems most realistic. Now just like charateristics can be turned off, so can country training and you can designat tehe ratio you want. THe COuntry training numbers are gross approximations to give generlaly reasonable ratings over teh year. There were also theater differences as well. IF you don;t like the settings we picked - use the training and rout rally prefs to adjustthe units more to your liking. Its impossible to pick one set of units and please everybody, if the Germans have an experience advantage we are "pro german" if teh german do nothave a significant exp advanatage, we are pro- US. We can't win ;) But you can! Use the Training and Rout/Rally (and even searching, hitting, toughness etc) to skew things in subtle (or not so subtle) ways to get the feel you are looking for. ITs frustrating to here of complaints that infantry or tanks or something "aren't realistic" because folks think one or the other are too vulnerable or don't have the proper significance at the default settings. We set out to give the "SP1 experience" in a windows game with significant improvements. So teh defualt settings were set up to be suggestive of how things worked (at least tank/infantry/arty interaction) in SP1. Now whether this is "realistic" or not is a matterof taste. Folks who like infantry that is darn near invincible to tanks can increase the infantry toughness. If you think tanks are too tough andneed to be more sucesptible to AT fire, raise teh tank toughness 20 or 30. Artillery canbe tweaked relative to artillery or infantry. Not to chide anyone on this thread for the valuable constructive criticsm, but if folks spent the time arguing about the defaults on experimenting with pref settings they thought were accurate in different circumstances and sharing them, I think everyone would benefit more! What settings create an accurate US German June 44 battle. How does it change by Sept? Or moving to Italy? Use teh National characteristics to represent special capabilities in a batle - mix them up! Want fanatical Finns on the defense? Select Russia and defend scenario type and then change nation to buy Finn forces - with country training off you can give them 90 experience...OK they may get Russian objective flags...but use your imagination! We put those prefs in the game fo people would use them! Arguing about the defaults is once again constructive and please don;t take this as a rant against such discussion! Its just that only playing with the defaults is like driving a Porsche arond in 2nd gear all the time :-0 You miss most of the fun!



K_Tiger -> (3/27/2001 4:34:00 AM)

Nika: If for the game...i would say yes..to double the price for a tiger vs panther..like in real..or low cost for us and russian tanks..and equipment..but one prob we have..you could not implement the taktical superiority from the germs...or must i say the mistakes..from the others.. So...let us setup a game..g vs r..germs 10 MIII and russians..may 20 bt`s and 5-7 t43...so i would say no chance...and i forgot the soldiers.... I like it to play so...but my opinnion isnt from interest..i play only GC`s...and if the pricing is historical correct..you couldn made fair pbm games. Ammosgt. You compare Wolverine and hellcats with JPanther?? 2 different weapon systems..or?...first tanks r offensive weapons..the turretles r for defend. The other thing is your statement about your "top notch" .50 cal...its a joke or??...Heavy..also the ammo...a real us weapon.."spray and pray"...no fast barrel change...sitting position...(50er r nice targets)...yes good pennetration...but you need first hit with it.. As an AA mg on tanks..its good..but to carry one with me..nooo..



Nikademus -> (3/27/2001 4:48:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: We can't win ;) !
heh, dont i know it. Let me take the opp to acknowledge the hard situation you and the rest of the Matrix gang are in as SP:WAW develops. I for one appreciate your listening to the gamers like myself. :D



Nikademus -> (3/27/2001 4:53:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by K_Tiger: Nika: If for the game...i would say yes..to double the price for a tiger vs panther..like in real..or low cost for us and russian tanks..and equipment..but one prob we have..you could not implement the taktical superiority from the germs...or must i say the mistakes..from the others.. So...let us setup a game..g vs r..germs 10 MIII and russians..may 20 bt`s and 5-7 t43...so i would say no chance...and i forgot the soldiers.... I like it to play so...but my opinnion isnt from interest..i play only GC`s...and if the pricing is historical correct..you couldn made fair pbm games.
True, but unlike SP-1, we can set the # of battle points per game so even if Panthers and Tigers are very expensive as opposed to Shermans or T-34's one can still create a situation where say a lucky German officer gets his birthday wish and gets to take a whole Panther battalion into the fight vs a motley bunch of warn out Mk III's or IV's :eek: :eek:



Pack Rat -> (3/27/2001 5:04:00 AM)

I'm going on the presumtion that what I saw on tne history channel was not propoganda for the Israelis. They, as most are aware of, during their fight for survival in 49 had a very wide (wide being an understatement) variaty of weapons, including German rifles made during the war. They discovered upon testing them they couldn't hit the broad side of a barn with them. Turns out the the rifles where made by Czechs, more then likly slave labor. They had discovered a way to screw up the sights. Having said that, I don't think it possable to model this into the game. One has to wonder though if equipment for the Germans did play some type of variable in the performance of their infantry. (OT: I made AmmoSgt aware of this some time ago in an email, where upon she informed me of a trip as a guest of the Israelis, while she was in the Service, and still feels honor bound not to talk about much of what she knows. I won't go any further about her as it was private, but I will add that, be careful as most of her books are autographed :)) I can't imagine the comparison between the BAR and the MG42 being anything but unequal. So I would guess this adds to the German cost vs American. It's my understanding that the American M-60 of today is very close to a MG-42, slowed down. The M-60 was/is a very sweet shooter. Given the chance I was on the 60 and the hell with that M-16 piece of crap. I never did like the .222/.223 caliber even before I went in the Army, give me open sights and a heavy grained bullet any day, they will plow through stuff the sun won't shine through. That damn Garande rifle of the Americans though is a son of a gun. I've learned to dread its sound when in a fire fight with the Americans. It was the first weapon issued to me in the Army, although I suspect it was a variation, it is very accurate straight out of the box, where as the Mausuars while having a very sweet action don't compare as well, IMO. Mausuars are still popular deer rifles in my area, with new sights, hehe. This rifle plus the number of troops in an American squad seems to me to be the focal point for any real decision on cost. Basic training. How much material/time could any country afford to spend on new recruits? While I think it a given that combat is the best teacher, basic training can be a very big factor. Every drill instructor I had when in was a Nam vet, that was then. My understanding of American basic during the war was they had a huge problem getting the knowledge the combat vet knew back to the troops being trained. It just didn't happen. It wasn't until in the line that the information was passed along. I've never heard how other countries handled it. But one must admit that the Americans had the time and material luxury. So I'm not sure how I land on this issue. I do wonder though how many troops had North Africa exp. though, for the French landings.



K_Tiger -> (3/27/2001 5:10:00 AM)

Nik: I think the bigger problem is the missing of an strategical layer..mean..like in my last french battle..i faced 90 suomas...with my, may 30 38t,and IIIer with 37mm guns...no way..i won with help from 3 88 batteries..but if the AI do worked better...he would kicked my butt..no problem with an strategical part...so i can send there reinforces or suround them with other forces...and do not lost the hole war..in on single battle..i have no problem to loose..war is a streak of loosing and winning. All in all..i play it..and its fun..until nothing better r on the market.



Pack Rat -> (3/27/2001 5:12:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by K_Tiger: The other thing is your statement about your "top notch" .50 cal...its a joke or??...Heavy..also the ammo...a real us weapon.."spray and pray"...no fast barrel change...sitting position...(50er r nice targets)...yes good pennetration...but you need first hit with it.. .
Maybe I've misunderstood your post. The 50cal is an extremely accurate weapon. I didn't spray and pray I hit what the hell I was shooting at the first time. While I'll admit they are very heavy the barrel can be changed pretty fast by an experienced crew. Oh I did cuse it out alot because ours were older 50's and jammed more than I liked. But I suspect we had the same 50's from WW2, well at least Korea :) My friends from the Nam didn't have this problem. One named Wild Bill who was with the 8th Cav. (no not our Wild Bill, because I asked him years ago) said he could lift a box of 50 ammo with one hand in the heat of the Tet in 68. Adrenalin rush.



Nikademus -> (3/27/2001 5:33:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by K_Tiger: Nik: I think the bigger problem is the missing of an strategical layer..mean..like in my last french battle..i faced 90 suomas...with my, may 30 38t,and IIIer with 37mm guns...no way..i won with help from 3 88 batteries..but if the AI do worked better...he would kicked my butt..no problem with an strategical part...so i can send there reinforces or suround them with other forces...and do not lost the hole war..in on single battle..i have no problem to loose..war is a streak of loosing and winning. All in all..i play it..and its fun..until nothing better r on the market.
Hear you on that one. Ver 5.0 will (hopefully) address the uber tank selection from countries that historically did'nt concentrate them much. I was thinking more in terms of online and PBEM.



K_Tiger -> (3/27/2001 7:27:00 AM)

Pack rat: wat was the range you fired??..50ft..100?? and how you targeting...? I carryd in my army time the new model MG3..(modern version of the mg 42) with me...and must say..please not more weigth..12 kg..is enougth..i prefer..the ligth mgs..especialy if you must walk more than 25 km with them. The mg42 was also a spray weapon..if you did not used it rigth...but with bursts..its realy a good one..



CaptainBrian -> (3/27/2001 8:07:00 AM)

quote:

. The 50cal is an extremely accurate weapon. I didn't spray and pray I hit what the hell I was shooting at the first time. While I'll admit they are very heavy the barrel can be changed pretty fast by an experienced crew.B]
Amen to PackRat! The "Ma Deuce" is still one of the world's most accurate HMG's 70+ yrs. after its initial introduction. In Vietnam it was also used as a sniper weapon in the single shot mode, routinely achieving hits at 1,500+ meters. I also hear you about the WWII vintage stuff. I once noticed one my Battery's M-2s had two Maltese Crosses engraved on the feed tray cover. Only one place and time it would have earned those !!!



Pack Rat -> (3/27/2001 8:15:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by K_Tiger: Pack rat: wat was the range you fired??..50ft..100?? and how you targeting...? ..especialy if you must walk more than 25 km with them. ..
I honestly couldn't tell you anymore, as it was about 30 years ago, what the range was. I'm not even sure where we fired, Texas or New Mexico, anymore. We were set up on a tripod with the oil pot hanging near by. Most of the small arms ranges had some kind of limit on max range, unlike the 20mm where the sky was the limit. That and the Sarge with the cutoff switch telling you to stop shooting at the drone, but to shoot at the target. Yeah, ok, right, sarge just turn it back on , please, I'll be good ;) Walk? Poor guy, we was armored :)



chaos45 -> (3/27/2001 12:35:00 PM)

Okay I even turned off the national characteristics and the prices stayed the same. So that is not a solution, also keep in mind this is for league play which means tweaking things isnt an option. I think the point difference is a valid problem that needs to be addressed. Matrix games is going an excellent job on the game, just alittle balancing is my only major problem.



victorhauser -> (3/27/2001 3:58:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by chaos45: Okay I even turned off the national characteristics and the prices stayed the same. So that is not a solution, also keep in mind this is for league play which means tweaking things isnt an option. I think the point difference is a valid problem that needs to be addressed. Matrix games is going an excellent job on the game, just alittle balancing is my only major problem.
In June 1943, the US Rifle squad costs 30 points at Troop Quality 70 (the base encyclopedia value which I call TQ70) for 12 men which comes out to 2.5 points per man. The German Rifle squad for June 1943 costs 28 points for 10 men, or 2.8 points per man, at TQ70. Finding a least common denominator of 420 points means that for every 14 US Rifle squads you buy (14*30 = 420) you can buy 15 German Rifle Squads (15*28 = 420). This is 168 US riflemen versus 150 German riflemen. The Americans are equipped with M1 rifles, rifle-grenades, and BARs. The Germans are equipped with Kar98 rifles, rifle-grenades, and MG34s. The Germans have a Fire Control of 3 and the Americans have a Fire Control of 2. The M1 is superior to the Kar98 but the MG34 is superior to the BAR. The Americans have to cause 105 casualties to disperse all 15 German squads (70%, or 105/150) while the Germans have to cause 112 casualties to disperse all 14 American squads (66.6%, or 112/168). Thus the Germans are 3.4% more efficient on a man-for-man basis. In addition, having 15 squads means that the Germans will have more opportunities to "double up" against single US squads than vice-versa. I would guess this to be directly correlated to the 15/14 ratio of German to US squads which is an advantage of 7.14% of what I'll call "tactical flexibility" in favor of the Germans. A long-range engagement favors the Germans since they have better fire control as well as their MG34s. A short-range engagement favors the Americans since their inferior fire control is not as important. This means that in most battles the Germans have the advantage. I say this because the Germans do not have to advance to get the maximum use of their force. They can establish a position, go into cover, and force the Americans to come to them. The Americans pretty much have to advance to offset the German advantage. The Germans should seek open fields of fire and long-range firefights--very much like Panthers vs. T-34s. I conclude that given the usual meeting engagements in mid-1943 (daylight and plains) that IF PROPERLY EMPLOYED the Germans have advantages that the Americans must work hard to overcome. I see no problems with the current point costs for these units.



Pack Rat -> (3/27/2001 5:33:00 PM)

A couple of small points. The only difference between the two range wise, is the German rifle has a one hex advantage. If you've used the German rifle you know what the to hit percent is at max range 2%. The MG34 and the BAR are equal with a range of 16. The Garand has a kill of 2 vs the German 1 per weapon. I myself would not let this be the basis for planning long range engagements, even if it were possable, which in all the battles I played really isn't. The 2 to 1 kill can't be overstated as we know if you're on the recieving end of the Garand. The American platoon comes with a squad that has a bazooka at the added cost of 4 points, which actually means you don't get the 420 common denominator. A 2 man bazooka team cost 18 points if you were to buy just the bazooka, there in itself is a bargin, since you're getting it for 4. This still actually supports your point. However it isn't infantry vs infantry we are always talking about. This added antiarmor ability makes them wicked against any armor. It is also not a bad anti infantry weapon, supression wise it's a terror. It may be we are splitting hairs and with 5.0 around the corner it may all be a mute issue any way. But I did like your homework I thought it very well done. The arguement will probably go on and on. It is kind of fun if the tempers are kept out. :)



victorhauser -> (3/28/2001 2:49:00 AM)

Pack Rat: Yes I was hoping to keep this strictly an infantry vs. infantry discussion which is why I didn't mention the bazookas in the headquarters squad. I also agree that fighting at long ranges is not always possible in most battles. Indeed, most of my battles with infantry tend to be short ranged and bloody. It has also been my experience that whoever gets the first shot has an enormous advantage in such circumstances and you can often throw relative point costs out the window at that point. But my point was that short-ranged fighting does not play to the strengths of the German infantry. So as a German tactical doctrine I would always strive to keep the infantry engagement range at 7+ hexes. The biggest advantage the German infantry has is its superior Fire Control of 3 vs the FC of 2 for the American squads. This means that at longer ranges the German infantry will get higher to-hit percentages than the Americans (even 3% to 2% is a whopping 50% firepower advantage). And the increased hitting power of their MG34s will also be more noticeable. That, combined with their greater tactical flexibility and per-man efficiency, should give the German rifle squads an edge. My point being that I didn't agree with the basic premise of this thread. I do not believe that there is a pricing problem with 1943 American infantry vs. 1943 German infantry. All too often I watch players throw troops willy nilly around SPWaW battlefields with no apparent rhyme or reason. Then they complain when they suffer disproportionate losses. All infantry have strengths and weaknesses. Developing a good tactical doctrine means maximizing strengths and minimizing weaknesses. We all know that there will be times when our units get caught at a disadvantage. But if you know what you are TRYING to do with your troops then you can make those situations as rare as possible. [As an aside, the extra 4 points for the M1 bazooka isn't much of a bargain from my perspective. Rifle-grenades work just fine in an anti-tank role for me. Also, the dedicated bazooka team is size 0, has a higher movement allowance, and uses the bazooka as its primary weapon which gives it more shots per turn.]



chaos45 -> (3/28/2001 7:19:00 AM)

first off with standard national exp on american squads without bazookas are 22 points each not 30 that is the error in you calculations victor. that includes being 22 pts with the national characteristics turned off in the preferences. Which means way more americans than your totals which puts the germans at a decided disadvantage.



Pack Rat -> (3/28/2001 7:30:00 AM)

All good points you bring up. I think you've done a fine job in putting it in "black & white", VAH. A question for you and others. When backtracking to check out your work, I have noticed this and I'm unsure why. When I set the troop quaility to 70 I get numbers for the units as was discussed. When I leave it at the default, the buy panel says exp is at 70 for Americans in the buy panel, but unit cost is 24 and 22, German price is 26 for troops at 70 exp. I do notice a difference in leadership values, is this the cause?



AmmoSgt -> (3/28/2001 8:21:00 AM)

Near as i can tell each of the three factors morale , leadership, experience all affect the point value... as does national characteristics ..play with it a bit you get strange effects .. Another factor that is interesting to look at is the point value in the Unit Screen ( right click on the unit itself on the map ) this screen has a point value for the unit that is awarded when it is killed ... this point value is often different the the buy points .. Typicaly it is 25% to 40% higher point value for americans and 10%-25% higher for the Germans .. this results in a "bonus" ammount of Victory points for the german player when they kill U S Inf as opposed to when the US kills German Inf ..which is yet anoher German advantage at the current pricing ... play with the settings it is hard to find a pattern



Paul Vebber -> (3/28/2001 9:22:00 AM)

Don;t spend too much time on 4.5 - we changed it a fair bit in v5. ONly experience matters. True troop cost will include a modifier at buy time for experience, with true troop cost off you pay the "standard OOB cost". Morale and leader numbers don't play. The basic idea is that when you buy units, the cost is based on the average experience value (the one shown in the purchase screen) When you actually buy it and the unit characteristics are rolled for, then there is a % gain or loss based on unit exp-70 percent so a 40 exp unit is worth 30% less victory points and a 100 exp unit is worth 30% more. 4.5 was a bit weird when it came to how that was figured out. When v5 comes out everyone can get out their green eyeshades and figure out who we "skewed the game" toward and who is juste "skewed". As I found in 15 years of ops analysis work, you can always find a metric to prove any point you want to make when it comes to comparing 2 combat systems ;)



victorhauser -> (3/28/2001 11:23:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by chaos45: first off with standard national exp on american squads without bazookas are 22 points each not 30 that is the error in you calculations victor. that includes being 22 pts with the national characteristics turned off in the preferences. Which means way more americans than your totals which puts the germans at a decided disadvantage.
That's a good question... I play with True Troop Cost turned ON. Maybe that has something to do with the points discrepancy you mention. All I know is that with the settings I use in my Preferences Screen, all my units cost the same as their stated Encylopedia prices at TQ70.



Paul Vebber -> (3/28/2001 9:15:00 PM)

With true troop cost on if a unit has 70 for base experience it will cost the same as in the oob, if the expereince base is higher, it costs more, if less it costs less. The "average" is used becasue the experience of individual units isn't diced for until you buy them. That is why there is sometimes a discrepency between buy cost and victory point cost. The former is based on the average, the latter based on what you actually get.



chaos45 -> (3/29/2001 1:12:00 AM)

Yep vicor evidently I my comp didnt change things that day when I was messing with it you are correct about the point costs with national characteristics off. I like those point totals much better, and have decided thats the way to play for now.



john g -> (3/31/2001 12:34:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by chaos45: Okay I decided to go and get numerical stats on the infantry to prove my point. Here it is: all 1943 German Base 70morale 70experience 70leadership American Base 70morale 70experience 65leadership Doesnt look like a big difference to me. Costs: German regular 10 man squad=26pts no panzerfaust American Regular 12 man squad=22pts American 12 man w/bazooka=25pts Para German 10 man=28pts with K98s and no fausts American 12man=22pts come on? German 10man=33pts with autorifles and fausts American 12man=25 with Bazooka Looks real balance to me huh. I dont think so the costs should be reversed. At the worst equal not less than. The numbers pretty much prove my point I do believe.
Unless the oobs changed quite a bit from the ones I am using 4.3b with the fixed oob's from tankheads or someother website, these numbers are all wrong. The US 12 man squads are armed with the M1903 not garands. When you look at the Garand and bazooka equipped 9 man squads they are 40 points base cost, more than the German spec ops, SS or FJ. Comparing early war squads, the Germans have a better squad mg, better grenades and better support behind them. It could be that the US infantry is overpriced instead of underpriced. Hopefully the experiance and leadership ratings for the 1930's will be fixed in v5.0, there should be a dip during each countries expansion of their military, as they went from a small professional force to a conscripted mass army. The US army should have better ratings in the early and mid thirties and not dip until the big callups prior to the US entry in the war. In a similar fashion, the German army of 1930 was not the same caliber of army as it had in 39 after it gained experiance in Spain. thanks, John.



AmmoSgt -> (3/31/2001 12:49:00 AM)

Victorhausen just to quiet any concerns you have about Chaos45 and his experience as a wargamer .. he is not only the top Axis player in the 43 "up the boot league" ,he gave me the closest and hardest fought game i have played so far ... He and I deeply disagree on the pricing issue.. and i am sure we both hold good reasons for our opinions .. some of mine seem to be outside of the concerns of some folks here..and some of his I believe to be based more on myth than fact ... But there can be no question as to the Chaos45's ability at this game.. Chaos , darn good game, never played one closer or harder...Thanks



skukko -> (3/31/2001 3:15:00 AM)

Adding my opinion: perhaps US and Sovjets are sooo cheap against German that it helps to build battles against AI controlled allied ? Ai has nothing to say against human if playing with equal points and experience and so on.. I am considering that buying 32 portees against one company of infantry is a bit ridiculous... mosh :D



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.03125