Navy problem (Full Version)

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



Message

Gavris Narcis -> Navy problem (4/1/2001 3:01:00 PM)

I want to know what is with this navy ships which can be bought on a campaign and it is possible to deploy them on mountains, woods, etc,not on seas or rivers, for example. Is this accurate ? How is this intended to be ? It's a bug ? I have SPWAW version 2.3. Narcis.



Latka -> (4/1/2001 3:59:00 PM)

I'm no expert, but I would guess that if there was a bug such as that, it was fixed. Have you considered upgrading to a more recent version of SPW@W?



skukko -> (4/1/2001 5:25:00 PM)

Upgrade and look what happens :) But, yes, you can buy as support-units some boats and barges. Then you can deploy them to hills and so on if deploy-limits give you a chance. :D Did you know that you can deploy tank on the building, and after it gets too hot in there, you can just calmly drive tank away without penalties. Some maps have real high stonebuildings, so placing IE Tiger to one would be very interesting...Best tower I've seen is in some Italy map (WB) its height is 75 :D LOL mosh



RolandRahn_MatrixForum -> (4/1/2001 5:26:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Latka: I'm no expert, but I would guess that if there was a bug such as that, it was fixed. Have you considered upgrading to a more recent version of SPW@W?
Hello, I have Version 4.5 and it is still possible to place R-Boats on Mountains, woods e.t.c.. I am also not an expert, but I guess that it makes sense if you want to simulate a ship that is beached. (It is not possible to move ships on land) Personally, I have placed ships onto a land hex in a scenario: Making a scenario, it is possible to change the speed of a unit, therefore you can simulate a tank with broken engines by setting the speed of the tank to zero. Unfortunetly, it is only possible to change the *land speed*, but not the *naval speed* (note: these are two different values, an amphib tank could for example have a land speed of 5 and a naval speed of 7). Therefore, there is no way (?) to simulate a destroyer with "broken engines". In order to make a scenario with a destroyer that is unable to move, it is necessary to place the destroyer on a beach (or other land) hex. Therefore, fixing this "bug" would disable the possiblility to include an unmovable ship in a scenario. I never saw the computer placing a ship on a mountain or something like that, the only way to have a ship sitting on a mountain is (as far as I know) that the player / the author of a scenario has deliberatly placed it there. However, I am certainly not an expert on SPWAW, so if anybody sees that there is another way to simulate a ship "dead in water", please correct me. Kind regards, Roland



Christian Blex -> (4/1/2001 6:50:00 PM)

quote:

originally posted by stukko Did you know that you can deploy tank on the building, and after it gets too hot in there, you can just calmly drive tank away without penalties.
:confused: Never managed to do this. How did you?????



ruxius -> (4/1/2001 8:28:00 PM)

I confirm that in version 4.5 it happened that I let the enemy see a very funny spectacle from their trenches..a huge steel boat lightening from the top of a hill... "Finally we found where the Holy Noah's ark has been hidden" they could think...or just "Look at the Italians...I was told they were not properly equipped..but this is very unexpected to me.." :) :) Apart from kidding and getting seriously AT ONCE I think that should be an oversights of the early programmers...it seems to me that navy were so unused in the common battles that no one never realized that...it was so out from logic to put a LCS into the ground that there was no need to put a special constraint in the source code..but the problem had been inspected in some way in fact on the contrary the player is not allowed to put terrain units and tanks into deep water hexes... So we can call this minor bugs..they do not influence the game engine except for "theoretical beliefs"... As RolandRahn pointed and according to my love for scenario designer's freedom it would be nice (if ever this minor bug will be corrected) to let navy placeable in terrains but limiting this to specific terrains like beach.. also the possibility to have a navy immobilized should be allowed if its speed is set to zero... As Skukko said ...to have a tank into the top of a building leaves me really wondering..was it thrown into the air by any intense nearby ammo dump explosion ? Odd things...sometimes happen... :)



Gavris Narcis -> (4/1/2001 8:29:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by skukko: Upgrade and look what happens :) But, yes, you can buy as support-units some boats and barges. Then you can deploy them to hills and so on if deploy-limits give you a chance. :D Did you know that you can deploy tank on the building, and after it gets too hot in there, you can just calmly drive tank away without penalties. Some maps have real high stonebuildings, so placing IE Tiger to one would be very interesting...Best tower I've seen is in some Italy map (WB) its height is 75 :D LOL mosh
Very I want to know how the peoples of WWII can deploy a tank on top of a building ! Technologically was almost imposible and without logical reason ! Or, even more hard, to deploy a navy unit on top of a mountain. It is ILLOGICAL !!! To deploy this onto shores it was very posible but in other maner it was a big BUG !!!!! The next version of the game must corect this ! Leo



Gavris Narcis -> (4/1/2001 8:32:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by RolandRahn: Hello, I have Version 4.5 and it is still possible to place R-Boats on Mountains, woods e.t.c.. I am also not an expert, but I guess that it makes sense if you want to simulate a ship that is beached. (It is not possible to move ships on land) Personally, I have placed ships onto a land hex in a scenario: Making a scenario, it is possible to change the speed of a unit, therefore you can simulate a tank with broken engines by setting the speed of the tank to zero. Unfortunetly, it is only possible to change the *land speed*, but not the *naval speed* (note: these are two different values, an amphib tank could for example have a land speed of 5 and a naval speed of 7). Therefore, there is no way (?) to simulate a destroyer with "broken engines". In order to make a scenario with a destroyer that is unable to move, it is necessary to place the destroyer on a beach (or other land) hex. Therefore, fixing this "bug" would disable the possiblility to include an unmovable ship in a scenario. I never saw the computer placing a ship on a mountain or something like that, the only way to have a ship sitting on a mountain is (as far as I know) that the player / the author of a scenario has deliberatly placed it there. However, I am certainly not an expert on SPWAW, so if anybody sees that there is another way to simulate a ship "dead in water", please correct me. Kind regards, Roland
You wrote: ''Therefore, fixing this "bug" would disable the possiblility to include an unmovable ship in a scenario''. In this case the game is not real and I think that it is still posibil to fix this ''bug'' ! You wrote: ''I never saw the computer placing a ship on a mountain or something like that, the only way to have a ship sitting on a mountain is (as far as I know) that the player / the author of a scenario has deliberatly placed it there.'' But the human player could put a ship on a mountain/plain/hill/etc. Myself I tried this many times. I have SPWAW version 2.3 Leo



RolandRahn_MatrixForum -> (4/1/2001 10:40:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Gavris Narcis: You wrote: ''Therefore, fixing this "bug" would disable the possiblility to include an unmovable ship in a scenario''. In this case the game is not real and I think that it is still posibil to fix this ''bug'' ! You wrote: ''I never saw the computer placing a ship on a mountain or something like that, the only way to have a ship sitting on a mountain is (as far as I know) that the player / the author of a scenario has deliberatly placed it there.'' But the human player could put a ship on a mountain/plain/hill/etc. Myself I tried this many times. I have SPWAW version 2.3 Leo
Yes, but disabling the possibility to put a ship on a land hex without the possibility to set the ships naval speed to zero would make it impossible to have an unmovable ship in the game - wait a second, having one hex of ocean, surrounded by land hexes, and placing the ship into this lonely ocean hex would also lead to an immobile ship, but it would not look realistic :) . You are right that it is not very realistic to place a destroyer into the middle of a desert, but if the author of a scenario *deliberately* wants to build something that is simply nonsense, why should the program stop him/her from - placing a hex with snow into a desert - creating a river 10 hexes wide, placing a one hex island into the middle of the river, and placing a Panzer Maus on it (and placing coral riffs around the island, in order to make it less likely that this monster could have been transported onto the island) :) - e.t.c. If a user (Player or scenario author) places a ship on a mountain, then he/she deliberately makes nonsense (or at least something that would need an explanation). This is (IMO) not a bug. SPWAW has a quality that is better than most of the commercial wargames, it has very few bugs and it is free! (Big thank you to Matrixgames :) ) By the way: Why did you try to place a ship on a hill? Kind regards, Roland



Wild Bill -> (4/1/2001 11:40:00 PM)

Ofen in life there are things that you "Can" do and things you "should" do. In this situation, the fact that you can deploy ships, boats or amphibious craft "anywhere" does not mean that you should. The same goes with tanks in or on buildings. It is expected that the gamer will use a little simple logic and put them where they are supposed to be. Of course, if you prefer your tank in a tower, you could put it there :eek: ... or a ship on a mountain (Modern Noah's ark) One of the reasons for this is to allow the player to place them freely, and to use them sensibly. It would be hoped that the player would know that boats go in the water and tanks go on the ground. Now if you prefer to do it another way, that is your call, but I would prefer in that case that you not send me an e-mail game with that kind of setup :D Wild Bill



Randy -> (4/2/2001 1:26:00 AM)

:p Since I live in California, when the Big Earthquake comes I'll be ready since my boats in the desert will be at the coast when California falls into the sea. Semper Fi Randy



Figmo -> (4/2/2001 2:28:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Randy: :p Since I live in California, when the Big Earthquake comes I'll be ready since my boats in the desert will be at the coast when California falls into the sea. Semper Fi Randy
LOL - That's one of the reasons I live on the East Coast now. :D IMO - leave the ability to place ships anywhere in - I can see making a scenario where there is a ship yard and the boats could work like trains - heck there might be both in it. wasn't there some fighting around the shipyards of Antwerp? As for placing tanks in buildings - that was done on purpose. The idea is you place your tank in the building then come out at some time. I would think if you put it on a tower - then when you try to move, it will become immobilized and have no LOS - line of sight - because it will have building all around it - to buy a tank and put it there eleminates it's mobility - too expensive for me. IIRC - The Russians and Germans put tanks in buildings a lot when on the defense - remember the SP in "The Big Red One"!! Figmo



skukko -> (4/2/2001 2:46:00 AM)

Tanks on the building is not what I want to do. Count that as a joke of capabilitys :D But I would like to put tank IN the house and by this make it have shelter from air-raids and lower experienced infantry. To my knowledge this was used in a war. I know that it can be immoed by driving it inside that house, and icon of that hex shows pretty clearly that it is broken house and a tank. I would more like that it shows houses roof and maybe part of a tank. As you can drive under pillboxes and bunkers and your parts can be seen, same procedure...but c'mon, only a thoughts no need to get upset. Just place at deploy-phase tank on the house. Start the game and drive tank away. -That is what I did few months ago when it was in topic's last time. Not in pbem thou :D Besides putting anything else than smallest guns in high buildings is stupidity. They can see alot, but alot can see them, and once spotted they are history. I know. I've done it with 20Flak's many times. Only good unit in hightower is FO and HMG. mosh :D



Possum -> (4/2/2001 8:07:00 AM)

Hello all. Thinking of Ships up mountains; I know of one case where this did occur. In the 1880's when Krakatoa ( a Volacno in the East indies) exploded, a RN cruised off the coast of Borneo was caught by the resulting Tusimina?, and deposited 2 miles inland at an altitude of approx 400 feet. IIRC there where some survivors, and the ship was beached upright.



panda124c -> (4/2/2001 7:56:00 PM)

quote:

Apart from kidding and getting seriously AT ONCE I think that should be an oversights of the early programmers...it seems to me that navy were so unused in the common battles that no one never realized that...it was so out from logic to put a LCS into the ground that there was no need to put a special constraint in the source code..but the problem had been inspected in some way in fact on the contrary the player is not allowed to put terrain units and tanks into deep water hexes... [/B]
During setup for invasions you can unload your units from the LC to rearrange the loadout. At this point you can place any unit in deep water. What happens when you start the game, I don't know, do they sink or just sit there????



Paul Vebber -> (4/2/2001 8:07:00 PM)

They sink...



Charles2222 -> (4/2/2001 8:20:00 PM)

:p In the 'I couldn't resist department': Loose lips, sink tanks. Or to be a bit more poetic: Stupid pranks, sink tanks.



Gavris Narcis -> (4/2/2001 8:35:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by RolandRahn: Yes, but disabling the possibility to put a ship on a land hex without the possibility to set the ships naval speed to zero would make it impossible to have an unmovable ship in the game - wait a second, having one hex of ocean, surrounded by land hexes, and placing the ship into this lonely ocean hex would also lead to an immobile ship, but it would not look realistic :) . You are right that it is not very realistic to place a destroyer into the middle of a desert, but if the author of a scenario *deliberately* wants to build something that is simply nonsense, why should the program stop him/her from - placing a hex with snow into a desert - creating a river 10 hexes wide, placing a one hex island into the middle of the river, and placing a Panzer Maus on it (and placing coral riffs around the island, in order to make it less likely that this monster could have been transported onto the island) :) - e.t.c. If a user (Player or scenario author) places a ship on a mountain, then he/she deliberately makes nonsense (or at least something that would need an explanation). This is (IMO) not a bug. SPWAW has a quality that is better than most of the commercial wargames, it has very few bugs and it is free! (Big thank you to Matrixgames :) ) By the way: Why did you try to place a ship on a hill? Kind regards, Roland
You wrote: ''Yes, but disabling the possibility to put a ship on a land hex without the possibility to set the ships naval speed to zero would make it impossible to have an unmovable ship in the game''. I don't think so ! It's impossible to have no ways to program the source of the game to simulate this ! I means I believes that it is fully possible to make the game to interdict to put navy units in other places other than water hexes or shore ones. But the problem is not so hard for coding the game than to make a good/strong pricipals to follow them. Even a navy unit on docks is on a shore hex, isn't it ? It's illogic and unreal to have docks far inland ! You wrote: "You are right that it is not very realistic to place a destroyer into the middle of a desert, but if the author of a scenario *deliberately* wants to build something that is simply nonsense, why should the program stop him/her from - placing a hex with snow into a desert - creating a river 10 hexes wide, placing a one hex island into the middle of the river, and placing a Panzer Maus on it (and placing coral riffs around the island, in order to make it less likely that this monster could have been transported onto the island) - e.t.c.'' When I put this problem of the navy units I don't make references to customised maps/scenarios (created by players, where they could make anything) but I put this for campaigns or game scenarios ! For example I WANT I can't place in real or generated campaigns navys on mountains ! But I want to do this in customised campaigns, where anything is possible in the mind of the player. This because I want the game to simulate more real the reality ! Understand this ? Leo



Gavris Narcis -> (4/2/2001 8:36:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Wild Bill: Ofen in life there are things that you "Can" do and things you "should" do. In this situation, the fact that you can deploy ships, boats or amphibious craft "anywhere" does not mean that you should. The same goes with tanks in or on buildings. It is expected that the gamer will use a little simple logic and put them where they are supposed to be. Of course, if you prefer your tank in a tower, you could put it there :eek: ... or a ship on a mountain (Modern Noah's ark) One of the reasons for this is to allow the player to place them freely, and to use them sensibly. It would be hoped that the player would know that boats go in the water and tanks go on the ground. Now if you prefer to do it another way, that is your call, but I would prefer in that case that you not send me an e-mail game with that kind of setup :D Wild Bill
You wrote: ''One of the reasons for this is to allow the player to place them freely, and to use them sensibly. It would be hoped that the player would know that boats go in the water and tanks go on the ground.'' I'm not on your side here. Because in a campaign (early campaign) I place a german rawmboat into a key-site (on top of a key-hill) from she destroyed almost everything that enter in she's LOS (with head quartes adjacent) and provide opportunity fire a lot because of many shots who have. That it is tricky/usefull but unreal ! Leo



Arralen -> (4/2/2001 10:12:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Gavris Narcis: You wrote: ''One of the reasons for this is to allow the player to place them freely, and to use them sensibly. It would be hoped that the player would know that boats go in the water and tanks go on the ground.'' I'm not on your side here. Because in a campaign (early campaign) I place a german rawmboat into a key-site (on top of a key-hill) from she destroyed almost everything that enter in she's LOS (with head quartes adjacent) and provide opportunity fire a lot because of many shots who have. That it is tricky/usefull but unreal !Leo
At first, it's "Räumboot" (=> "Minenräumboot" : Minesweeper ; if the "ä" does not work with your character set, think "ae" instead :) ) Second - you may o.c. place your boats anywhere you like in the desert scenario .. but if you're trying to do this against a human player, you'll find yourself without opponents soon. It's just that if you insist on being an idiot, there are few possiblities to help you - and it's definitly not the programmers' job to take care of this !!! A.



Gavris Narcis -> (4/3/2001 2:43:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Arralen: At first, it's "Räumboot" (=> "Minenräumboot" : Minesweeper ; if the "ä" does not work with your character set, think "ae" instead :) ) Second - you may o.c. place your boats anywhere you like in the desert scenario .. but if you're trying to do this against a human player, you'll find yourself without opponents soon. It's just that if you insist on being an idiot, there are few possiblities to help you - and it's definitly not the programmers' job to take care of this !!! A.
I think a real idiot is who don't make the diference between real posibilities and what a program can do ! And what a program can do is definitly the programmers job ! And I am still conviced that SPWAW can do more than this ! Of course with our efforts ! Want you stoping this dirty words ? Or you imagine that I can't tell you a few likely ones........



Gavris Narcis -> (4/3/2001 2:43:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Arralen: At first, it's "Räumboot" (=> "Minenräumboot" : Minesweeper ; if the "ä" does not work with your character set, think "ae" instead :) ) Second - you may o.c. place your boats anywhere you like in the desert scenario .. but if you're trying to do this against a human player, you'll find yourself without opponents soon. It's just that if you insist on being an idiot, there are few possiblities to help you - and it's definitly not the programmers' job to take care of this !!! A.
I think a real idiot is who don't make the diference between real posibilities and what a program can do ! And what a program can do is definitly the programmers job ! And I am still conviced that SPWAW can do more than this ! Of course with our efforts ! Want you stoping this dirty words ? Or you imagine that I can't tell you a few likely ones........



Gavris Narcis -> (4/3/2001 2:44:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Arralen: At first, it's "Räumboot" (=> "Minenräumboot" : Minesweeper ; if the "ä" does not work with your character set, think "ae" instead :) ) Second - you may o.c. place your boats anywhere you like in the desert scenario .. but if you're trying to do this against a human player, you'll find yourself without opponents soon. It's just that if you insist on being an idiot, there are few possiblities to help you - and it's definitly not the programmers' job to take care of this !!! A.
I think a real idiot is who don't make the diference between real posibilities and what a program can do ! And what a program can do is definitly the programmers job ! And I am still conviced that SPWAW can do more than this ! Of course with our efforts ! Want you stoping this dirty words ? Or you imagine that I can't tell you a few likely ones........



Gavris Narcis -> (4/3/2001 2:45:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Arralen: At first, it's "Räumboot" (=> "Minenräumboot" : Minesweeper ; if the "ä" does not work with your character set, think "ae" instead :) ) Second - you may o.c. place your boats anywhere you like in the desert scenario .. but if you're trying to do this against a human player, you'll find yourself without opponents soon. It's just that if you insist on being an idiot, there are few possiblities to help you - and it's definitly not the programmers' job to take care of this !!! A.
I think a real idiot is who don't make the diference between real posibilities and what a program can do ! And what a program can do is definitly the programmers job ! And I am still conviced that SPWAW can do more than this ! Of course with our efforts ! Want you stoping this dirty words ? Or you imagine that I can't tell you a few likely ones........



Possum -> (4/3/2001 8:21:00 AM)

Hello All A good reason to leave the ability to deploy boats/ships on land is that you can often find boats/ships on land, but I've yet to see, or hear of a tank on the water. Examples of situations that may crop up in a SPW@W scenario. A PT boat drawn up on a service ramp. A Destroyer caught while being serviced in a dry dock. A LCT left stranded up a beach by low tide. A Gunboat stuck in a once flooded field. A Chinese Light cruiser stuck halfway up a hill because the Japanese demolished the dam that was retaining the lake the cruiser was sailing on. A Russian Heavy cruiser in a Leningrad/Rostov shipyard being used as a heavy artillery battery even though it's not yet completed, or even launched!



chanman -> (4/3/2001 9:19:00 AM)

You know, I smell a Wild Bill scenario coming on.... Norway, the Tirpitz in drydock, the expected opposition will be green security troops (Elite SS, at least a regiment), no tanks (probably at least one platoon of IIIj's), and no mines (there will be thousands). The player will have a large force of British Paratroops (which means the AI will have a flak battalion) supported by RN air.



USMCGrunt -> (4/3/2001 11:09:00 AM)

If I recall correctly, there was one historical event when a major ship was beached purposely. The Japanese beached the Yamato on Okinawa in preperation to defend against the invasion. I beleive the US bombed and shelled the living daylights out of it, so it wasn't actually much use, but it was there.



RolandRahn_MatrixForum -> (4/3/2001 12:58:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by USMCGrunt: If I recall correctly, there was one historical event when a major ship was beached purposely. The Japanese beached the Yamato on Okinawa in preperation to defend against the invasion. I beleive the US bombed and shelled the living daylights out of it, so it wasn't actually much use, but it was there.
Err, no. The Yamato was *intended* to be beached on Okinawa in April, 1945. She only got enough fuel for a one-way-trip, and her last trip was planned to be coordinated with a massive offensive of Kamikaze planes. However, she was sighted early by an american sub and sunk by massive US airraids (some of her escorting destroyers were sunk, too) on April 7, 1945. The US lost all in all 10 planes (including landing accidents). It would be a nice what-if sceanrio, also I have no idea how to simulate a beached battleship in SPWAW.... :) Maybe two beached destroyers with modified unit data? :confused: (The Yamato would have a length of approx 5 Hexes) Kind regards, Roland



USMCGrunt -> (4/3/2001 1:18:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by RolandRahn: Err, no. The Yamato was *intended* to be beached on Okinawa in April, 1945. She only got enough fuel for a one-way-trip, and her last trip was planned to be coordinated with a massive offensive of Kamikaze planes. However, she was sighted early by an american sub and sunk by massive US airraids (some of her escorting destroyers were sunk, too) on April 7, 1945. The US lost all in all 10 planes (including landing accidents).
I stand corrected.



Billy Yank -> (4/5/2001 4:52:00 AM)

How about this one: [img]http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/reference/Normandy/LST-UL25.jpg[/img] And this: [img]http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/reference/Normandy/SC193082t.jpg[/img] And this: [img]http://www.army.mil/cmh-pg/reference/Normandy/Omaha2.jpg[/img] From: The Normandy Invasion: The Story in Pictures at the Center for Military History.



Page: [1] 2   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.328125