RE: Combat Values (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Tigers on the Hunt



Message

Rosseau -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 2:54:21 AM)

Unlike almost every other game I've bought from Matrix, the mechanics, counters, movement, etc., were clearly shown in a detailed series of streams and videos. Full disclosure, so buyer beware.

Fortunately, I have no idea what "Is the fixed A-H fire power affected when firing in good order at an adjacent enemy?" Nor do I care. I also like creating scenarios and experimenting with tactical situations, so knew this game was for me.

I agree if a full-info counter patch or mod can be made, it should be, unless there are copyright issues. The ASL mod is pretty darn good, so far.

Good luck Bismarck with the review. I do not envy you!



Peter Fisla -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 3:19:23 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Missouri_Rebel


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bismarck

This discussion confirms my long-time suspicion that two types of people play wargames:

1. gamers

2. combat accountants.



You forgot

3.Accountable Combative Gamers


I'm #1 on that list



dox44 -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 3:43:00 AM)


nvm



RFalvo69 -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 5:08:11 AM)

I seldom post on these fora, but now I feel forced to do it, because I'm among those who bought TotH on impulse, and now I'm deeply regretting it.

I won't enter into details, even if discovering that the values hidden "because they are not important" can actually be discovered via the ASL counters is, to say the least, worrying.

No, I'll simply point out two things:

- First: experience. Sorry, but "learning with trial" doesn't hold water. Some scenario either do or will portray veteran troops: people who learned the capabilities of their and enemy soldiers, vehicles, artillery et. al. via the crucible of war. I can't imagine that ALL the paratroopers launched in Normandy, or ALL the tank crews who fought at Kursk were "green" (also because either they actually are, and so their morale would break easily, or they have good morale... and thus, where the heck they learned how to fight??)

Just to be clear, I'll mention a scenario: Elst.

Also, to justify this choice by talking about a "narrative experience" has no meaning. A tank commander knows the capability of his tank. A King Tiger crew doesn't discover that his tank moves like a turtle only the very moment it engages the enemy for the first time. A Tiger commander doesn't seek cover when an M3 half-track appears just because "you can never know". Actually, even if you know that your Tiger has possibility of 42% to penetrate the side armour of a T-34 at a certain distance, this is not a deterministic value BY FAR: it simply symbolises what is the perception of the situation by the crew, based on experience. Then, like in many wargames and PC wargames, practical results can move away from the average. CRTs were born for this very reason.

Speaking about ASL, my son told me about the "rule of 7" (I played SL in the '80s but not much: now I plan to re-start with the starter kits). The rule of 7 says that since in ASL you usually roll two dice, 7 is the most common result, with 6 and 8 as the second common. So, when you plan an attack, consider that your experience on the field tells you that "a result around 7" is what can happen. But then when things get moving what really happens is in the lap of the Gods: easy shots fail, tank guns jam, concealing smoke fails to ignite... and maybe your squad running in the open under fire, while praying and praying, actually reaches a safe spot thanks to an incredible streak of bad rolls from the enemy.

Now. This sounds the perfect mix between troop experience, excitement, and, yes, narrative.

- Second: what is even more amazing is how every squad/platoon level game I played on the PC gives you basic info about fire range, movement and LOS via a simple hotkey or a button since the mid '90s (20 years ago!): Panthers in the Shadows, Steel Panthers, John Tiller Campaign Series... And each and every one of these games also gives you the relevant data about your units. Be assured that, over the years, I had many exciting moments with them.

Case in point, JTCS does seem to me the most closest example of what TotH should have done: not only movement, LOS and range of fire are all one hotkey away, but it even includes a fast method for selecting only the relevant units in a stack. you click on the whole stack, and, in a sidebar, select only the one you want to act with.

Just to underline again what I mean, I'm talking about an UI created in 1998, recently upgraded by this very company, and used for a new platoon-level game about the Arab-Israeli Wars. But a game "ten years in development" somehow missed what happened during the last twenty.

I'm sorry, but given both the above and, I'm sorry to say, the discovery that every time you actually look under the hood you find another ASL value "ported" to TotH... well, my nostrils are filled with a smell of fish. Or, at the very least, of amateurism (we really have to input the hex coordinates to check LOS? like in an Apple II?!)

I hope to be proved wrong. What I do not hope is to be proved wrong via paid expansions: I had the money either for this or for the new DC: Barbarossa (or even, ironically, for ASLSK #3). Fine: I rolled the dice, and I got a bad result. Next time I'll plan better.

Edited for typos.



Perelandra67 -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 12:54:09 PM)

the above post is right on. (DC:Barbarossa is a good game, with "decisions" being ass important as military tactics. If you haven't already, check out CO2 and Schwerpunkt WWiiE, great games.)

I went back and tried to figure out why I was so disappointed. I played 10-12 scenarios in the first day or two thinking, "it MUST get better," "maybe the next scenario will be different" "I SIMPLY HAVE to be missing some feature because it can't really be like this." But no.

Then I looked again at the advertisement for TotH and it dawned on me,

Three difficulty levels with varying levels of command and control implementation.
A dynamic AI which never reacts the same way twice to a player’s plan. Scenario designers need only designate the AI as an attacker or defender and the game engine will do the rest!
Tigers on the Hunt uses Fog of War; if a unit doesn’t have LOS to any enemy unit(s) it will not be able to see or engage the enemy unit(s). LOS is detailed, down to a pixel level.
Statistics: objectives, casualties, outcome of the scenario.
Create any tactical situation in World War II with a full suite of editors:
a. Map editor

b. OOB Editor

c. Campaign Editor

Battle it out in virtually any engagement on the Western/Eastern/Mediterranean Front using detailed American, German, Russian and British armies.
A massive library of units:
a. All German/Russian/American/British Infantry Units: Squads, Half-Squads, Leaders and Crew


b. 40 Support Weapons (LMG, MMG, HMG, DC, FT, PSK, PF, ATR, PIAT, Molotov Projector, Radio, Bazooka, Light MTR)

c. 95 Ordnance (Mortars, Anti-Tank Guns, Anti-Aircraft Guns, Artillery)

d. 162 Vehicles (Light/Medium/Heavy Tanks, Tank Destroyers, Assault Guns, Armoured Cars, Half-Tracks)

e. 28 Off Board Artillery Pieces including Mortar/Howitzer/Rocket

Use the myriad units in small as well as massive battles which support up to: 200 Infantry units, 100 Support Weapons, 100 Ordnance pieces and 50 Vehicles per side.
Scenario sizes can range from small and intense to massive and grand (up to 97 x 40 hexes)
Campaigns (really just a long scenario) last up to 504 turns - roughly about 2 months of combat (8 turns per day + 4 turns in the night).
Scenario difficulty can be: Easy, Normal and Hard. The difficulty is associated with Command & Control rules. Easy means human player always have command over all its units. Normal difficulty - Normal Command & Control rules are used. Hard - tougher Command & Control difficulty rules are used.
Scenario/OOB/map editor, maps can be created by painting each hex individually or a whole map can imported by loading templates that come with the game. The scenario editor supports 12 maps put together. 4 maps in a row and 3 maps in a column. You can assign each map to each sector or you can allow the computer to randomly import the map templates to make the overall scenario/campaign map random.


all the stuff that got my attention was in the editor program. And to be fair, nowhere does it say "complete with unit information, ToE, and tools so that a gamer can know what's going on."



mainsworthy -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 1:07:13 PM)

Perelandra67, I hope I can help, here is what I found, if you goto mods and scenarios and download JMass VASL mod for TotH, you will find an ASL type game, the AFVs Tanks etc... have the correct Movement points on the chits eg: 1 point to start engine, 1 point to change direction and 1 point to move a hex on clear ground, you can check this on a blank map with a tank. the infantry move correctly for ASL 4 hexes plus 2 with a leader, plus one if you start and stop on a road, plus 2 double time, the legged units in ASL have 3 numbers FIRE POWER,FIRE RANGE,MORAL, the mod takes the A to H fire-power and converts it to ASL for you, you can check range of fire with the menu to show range, moral is stars converted to ASL.

what all this means is the Mod counters have meaningfull numbers on the chits, you can go to the vassalegine site and download the ASL module(rename it with a zip extention and unzip it) it has all the ASL charts.



blackcloud6 -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 1:39:45 PM)

quote:

Speaking about ASL, my son told me about the "rule of 7" (I played SL in the '80s but not much: now I plan to re-start with the starter kits). The rule of 7 says that since in ASL you usually roll two dice, 7 is the most common result, with 6 and 8 as the second common. So, when you plan an attack, consider that your experience on the field tells you that "a result around 7" is what can happen.


The "rule of 7" in ASL is not in the rulebook, it is one a player learns how it works through experience.

I think that the laments about not knowing the data are misplaced. After just a few playings you will get a feel of what the units can or cannot do.

Someone either in this thread or another commented something like "combat leaders will know how farther units will go in two minute." We, no because you don't think that way in the field. (I was an infantry officer and commanded a rifle company twice). You think this way: LT, have your platoon take that machine nest out in that house; get moving in 10 minutes. Company mortars will support you." As to numbers, you think in terms of units and the basic 3-1 combat ratio rule of thumb. You have an enemy squad to attack, you send three squads to do it. Or two squads and two company machine guns in support and so on. And you know how your weapons will affect things. Now any wargamer worth his salt knows the basics of WWII weapons and will know that you need to bring up the MMGs to suppress the Bad Guys in the stone building down the street.

As to counting movement points. It appears to me that the designer wanted to get away from hex counting. For example, in ASL I see over and over, and do it myself from time to time, the guy counting out the MPs when trying to figure out where his Sherman will go: " 10, 12, 13... dammit, I don't have enough to stop. Well maybe here 1, 2, 3, 4...10, turn tca, turn VCA, 11,12, 13..damn, can't go there either." Ugh, this is the stuff that makes ASL tedious and unrealistic because you the player are the PL telling that tank commander to get his ass down the street to shoot at the enemy in the fortified house. Just move the damn thing and stop trying to figure out the most optimal hex. Now TotH takes that away. You have to just start moving and figure out what you want to do when you get near the position. Do you risk further moves etc? (There is some sort of trepidation when you make a long tank move in this game) which is somewhat of a fog of war when you think about it. And BTW, it really is unrealistic that tanks will move top speed back forth across the map because in real combat, when enemy contact is imminent, they move quit deliberatively.

If you read the replays of ASL scenario plays from early in its history, you find that the designers intended the game to be played fast, the charts and stuff were merely to resolve actions, not used as planning tools.

I find it refreshing that the designers of this game are trying to break the mold of "wargaming for engineers" as I call the math loving games, and force players into thinking purely tactically. break the data chains my friends, just start playing and you find the TotH is quite enjoyable without numbers.



kylania -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 1:42:38 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Perelandra67
And to be fair, nowhere does it say "complete with unit information, ToE, and tools so that a gamer can know what's going on."


That's because basic unit information is such a core concept that no one could imagine not having access to it. It's as if you went to buy a car and all you were told about it was "it has the proper amount of doors and goes as fast as you'd expect".



Dietrich53 -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 1:57:42 PM)

"The cardboard AFV is not what it was when SL rolled out the door. I share your sorrow that things weren't perfect the first time around. However, as an engineer, I'm not surprised by this-just as I'm not surprised that Wilbur and Orville failed to build a Piper Cub."

This is what Mr. Medrow wrote in The General vol. 23, no 2 when he introduced the AFV counters of ASL. Why don 't have some of the hard core ASL player the same attitude towards this game? It is very early and nothing is in stone. It took 30 years to come up with this and give it another 2-3 years and it will be even better than it is already.
It also should be very easy to come up with a combat value and movement sheet, just copy ASL.

Have a great day!
Dietrich



blackcloud6 -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 2:02:44 PM)

quote:

This is what Mr. Medrow wrote in The General vol. 23, no 2 when he introduced the AFV counters of ASL. Why don 't have some of the hard core ASL player the same attitude towards this game? It is very early and nothing is in stone. It took 30 years to come up with this and give it another 2-3 years and it will be even better than it is already.
It also should be very easy to come up with a combat value and movement sheet, just copy ASL.


Yep... good post.

BTW, the data sheet that everyone wants might actually make the game more expensive. Have you seen how big Chapter H is from ASL? And that only covers vehicles and Ordnance Weapons.



RFalvo69 -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 2:03:29 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mainsworthy

Perelandra67, I hope I can help, here is what I found, if you goto mods and scenarios and download JMass VASL mod for TotH, you will find an ASL type game, the AFVs Tanks etc... have the correct Movement points on the chits eg: 1 point to start engine, 1 point to change direction and 1 point to move a hex on clear ground, you can check this on a blank map with a tank. the infantry move correctly for ASL 4 hexes plus 2 with a leader, plus one if you start and stop on a road, plus 2 double time, the legged units in ASL have 3 numbers FIRE POWER,FIRE RANGE,MORAL, the mod takes the A to H fire-power and converts it to ASL for you, you can check range of fire with the menu to show range, moral is stars converted to ASL.

what all this means is the Mod counters have meaningfull numbers on the chits, you can go to the vassalegine site and download the ASL module(rename it with a zip extention and unzip it) it has all the ASL charts.


Are you aware of what the above means?

TotH values are actually mutated - wholly or in part - from ASL. Fact is: neither the manual nor the developer recognize this, even if the developer MUST know from were the values he used come from.

Let's say that now I have a better understanding as why neither in the manual nor in the program itself we have the actual data used in-game.

Regarding this, I have an open and direct question for the developer: did you use, in part or wholly, data taken from ASL for your game? I'm only asking for a simple answer: yes or no?

And, from what I'm seeing, "extrapolating" the correct data from the program is not a difficult task: only boring and time-consuming. I really don't see why it should fall on the paying public to do this. How this could get past the play testers is beyond me (but, after all, we are talking about a game whose manual shows in the Ordinance Tables that a Panzer IV A has the same stats of a Panther D; so, by now, anything is possible, and, to be honest, I'm getting more and more an unpleasant idea as why everything is so elusive and opaque; I just hope to be proved wrong).



Peter Fisla -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 2:05:07 PM)

I'm thinking about adding percentage tool, which would help the human (when enabled) to determine if it's a good idea to fire at a target or not. Example, should the human player fire with his squad and a leader at AI infantry stack at 50% chance to hit or should the human stack fire at the AI AT gun with 35% chance to hit.



mainsworthy -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 2:07:36 PM)

Peter, yes that would help SPWaW does this too.



blackcloud6 -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 2:08:55 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

I'm thinking about adding percentage tool, which would help the human (when enabled) to determine if it's a good idea to fire at a target or not. Example, should the human player fire with his squad and a leader at AI infantry stack at 50% chance to hit or should the human stack fire at the AI AT gun with 35% chance to hit.


If you do this, I'd recommend that it only be allowed on Easy and Normal settings. Players should not have this while playing on the Hard and Very Hard. One is not playing on harder settings if one is using a crutch.



mainsworthy -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 2:23:58 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RFalvo69


quote:

ORIGINAL: mainsworthy

Perelandra67, I hope I can help, here is what I found, if you goto mods and scenarios and download JMass VASL mod for TotH, you will find an ASL type game, the AFVs Tanks etc... have the correct Movement points on the chits eg: 1 point to start engine, 1 point to change direction and 1 point to move a hex on clear ground, you can check this on a blank map with a tank. the infantry move correctly for ASL 4 hexes plus 2 with a leader, plus one if you start and stop on a road, plus 2 double time, the legged units in ASL have 3 numbers FIRE POWER,FIRE RANGE,MORAL, the mod takes the A to H fire-power and converts it to ASL for you, you can check range of fire with the menu to show range, moral is stars converted to ASL.

what all this means is the Mod counters have meaningfull numbers on the chits, you can go to the vassalegine site and download the ASL module(rename it with a zip extention and unzip it) it has all the ASL charts.


Are you aware of what the above means?

TotH values are actually mutated - wholly or in part - from ASL. Fact is: neither the manual nor the developer recognize this, even if the developer MUST know from were the values he used come from.

Let's say that now I have a better understanding as why neither in the manual nor in the program itself we have the actual data used in-game.

Regarding this, I have an open and direct question for the developer: did you use, in part or wholly, data taken from ASL for your game? I'm only asking for a simple answer: yes or no?

And, from what I'm seeing, "extrapolating" the correct data from the program is not a difficult task: only boring and time-consuming. I really don't see why it should fall on the paying public to do this. How this could get past the play testers is beyond me (but, after all, we are talking about a game whose manual shows in the Ordinance Tables that a Panzer IV A has the same stats of a Panther D; so, by now, anything is possible, and, to be honest, I'm getting more and more an unpleasant idea as why everything is so elusive and opaque; I just hope to be proved wrong).


I think I'm not mistakem, that tables and numbers cant be owned by anybody. you cant copyrite a table, eg you cant copyrite a formula - like einstiens theories

great job Peter



Peter Fisla -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 2:42:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: blackcloud6


quote:

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

I'm thinking about adding percentage tool, which would help the human (when enabled) to determine if it's a good idea to fire at a target or not. Example, should the human player fire with his squad and a leader at AI infantry stack at 50% chance to hit or should the human stack fire at the AI AT gun with 35% chance to hit.


If you do this, I'd recommend that it only be allowed on Easy and Normal settings. Players should not have this while playing on the Hard and Very Hard. One is not playing on harder settings if one is using a crutch.



Cool, thanks for your feedback! ;)



surfcandy -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 3:53:26 PM)

Peter really enjoying the game. Great idea to add the percentages. Please add something that can tell the player how many movement pts. for a particular move including actual number values over different terrain.So I have an idea if I can reach a particular hex safely and be in a position I would like.

Just one one little thing that is tedious.Less clicking after selection of units to further select them with crtl to move or fire also load saved game from within the game itself without having to exit then re-enter the scenario.

Thanks I haven't gotten to the editor yet but wow that's already seems a huge part of the game with a lot of possibilities for modes.



Gerry4321 -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 3:59:12 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: blackcloud6

If you do this, I'd recommend that it only be allowed on Easy and Normal settings. Players should not have this while playing on the Hard and Very Hard. One is not playing on harder settings if one is using a crutch.



Agree very much with this.

Yet players need some help. Rather than a % chance give them a table for terrain protection values. Use letters if you need to. So we should be able to compare firing against a wood building versus an emplaced gun for example.



Angiel -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 4:29:34 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

I'm thinking about adding percentage tool, which would help the human (when enabled) to determine if it's a good idea to fire at a target or not. Example, should the human player fire with his squad and a leader at AI infantry stack at 50% chance to hit or should the human stack fire at the AI AT gun with 35% chance to hit.


Thanks !! [:)]
This would definitely be a good idea.



chrisleko -> RE: Combat Values (2/29/2016 10:29:45 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Gerry


quote:

ORIGINAL: blackcloud6

If you do this, I'd recommend that it only be allowed on Easy and Normal settings. Players should not have this while playing on the Hard and Very Hard. One is not playing on harder settings if one is using a crutch.



Agree very much with this.

Yet players need some help. Rather than a % chance give them a table for terrain protection values. Use letters if you need to. So we should be able to compare firing against a wood building versus an emplaced gun for example.


Forcing users to go look up something in a table defeats the entire purpose of adding the tool in. I also disagree heavily that it makes the game "easier" and shouldn't be allowed on the harder settings. Especially if the main difference in the harder game is the command and control rules (at least from what I gather). I'd like to be able to play with them, but I'd also like to be able to play with the command and control rules as well.

Perhaps you can just make it an optional rule (toggle or something), so that those who would like to use it can, and those that don't can't. I know the turn structure would never really support a PBEM, so at worst two players playing hot-seat decide if they want to use it or not. And that way when I play against the AI, I can get a sense.

I think the core of the issue is that the assumption was made somewhere that all players who buy this will have experience in ASL. I see the point that the developer doesn't want it to become a table and math fest. The reason I play games like Lock N'Load or Combat Commander on the tabletop is because I don't have to fiddle with all the table and such in ASL (and, thus, have never actually played ASL). So I when I boot up this game I had NO idea that all infantry units had 4 movement points (even though I guess this is commonly known to ASL players) with leaders giving an extra 2 and roads a further 1. I thought different units might have different values, and it didnt even occur to me to load the game into an empty map to test (which, as posted above is quite tedious).

I don't WANT 100% info about everything so I can math out the exact thing that will happen. I just like a clear idea of what my units can do. The range unit is fine. Movement points left would be helpful, and some sort of description about how ammo works (the description in the manual is really hazy on this as well.. what causes a gun to lose its ROF, and what are the odds that it will happen so I can decide when to take the important shots), and some idea of the odds of a successful attack, or the chance that I'll hurt an enemy. Right now I have 0 idea the odds of my units even damaging my enemies. I don't even know how those damages are inflicted (do 2 pins equal a destroyed?), so it's really hard to make any sort of decisions.

I think The Lock N'Load game from Matrix (which seems to be unsupported now) does it well. I know how many movement points I have left, and when I hover over an enemy, I get a % of the attack being successful. That's really all I need. I know the game was playtested, but I'm curious how many play testers had no ASL experience. Because if the game was designed only for ASL players who wanted a PC experience, that's a niche of a niche of a niche.

I hate to sound negative about the game. The flexible design tools and scenario tools are really fantastic. The ability to, almost effortlessly, make my own maps and scenarios is what got me really excited about the game. The UI has a lot of places it needs to improve, but it's functional and I can deal with that (I'm a wargamer after all, most wargame UIs need a lot of work). I just think if I had a tad more info this would push the game into my top 5 favorites. It has the scale I love, a great tool for me or others to design scenarios, a competent AI... I just need to know what the heck I am doing.



dynaman216 -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 12:12:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Angiel


quote:

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

I'm thinking about adding percentage tool, which would help the human (when enabled) to determine if it's a good idea to fire at a target or not. Example, should the human player fire with his squad and a leader at AI infantry stack at 50% chance to hit or should the human stack fire at the AI AT gun with 35% chance to hit.


Thanks !! [:)]
This would definitely be a good idea.


And I disagree very strongly. It should be a totally separate option. You want to play on Hard but have the percentages appear? That should be possible - or conversely to play on Easy and not have them appear.



Rosseau -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 1:03:22 AM)

Sounds like a great feature.

BTW, Dockal owes us all $50 [;)]



kirtapbun -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 1:35:47 AM)

+1



Richie61 -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 1:36:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: dynaman216


quote:

ORIGINAL: Angiel


quote:

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

I'm thinking about adding percentage tool, which would help the human (when enabled) to determine if it's a good idea to fire at a target or not. Example, should the human player fire with his squad and a leader at AI infantry stack at 50% chance to hit or should the human stack fire at the AI AT gun with 35% chance to hit.


Thanks !! [:)]
This would definitely be a good idea.


And I disagree very strongly. It should be a totally separate option. You want to play on Hard but have the percentages appear? That should be possible - or conversely to play on Easy and not have them appear.


I agree! I would rather it be an option too.

IMO it's a gamey feature. Battle Academy 1 and 2 have the % to hit and kill. I don't see this feature in HPS
Squad Battles or Panzer Battles. It's basically like the charts at BGG that tell you the percent to do this or that.

Never thought about it, but I must be an old school tactical guy after all. % tools to figure out if I should shoot or what damage I could inflict on target?

Maybe a Siri voice to explain the % too can be added [:D]

Sorry Peter [&:]



z1812 -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 2:11:11 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Peter Fisla

I'm thinking about adding percentage tool, which would help the human (when enabled) to determine if it's a good idea to fire at a target or not. Example, should the human player fire with his squad and a leader at AI infantry stack at 50% chance to hit or should the human stack fire at the AI AT gun with 35% chance to hit.


Great idea! But please make it optional.



jascou -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 3:41:18 AM)

Yes, optional. I love the current state of the game, where experience and intuition are my guides.

I'd like to think that, with all of the crushing defeats that I've accumulated playing SL/ASL, Steel Panthers/SPWAW and Ln'L over the decades, my hard-earned humiliations might finally...FINALLY... come in handy somehow.[:D]



RFalvo69 -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 8:25:40 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: mainsworthy
I think I'm not mistakem, that tables and numbers cant be owned by anybody. you cant copyrite a table, eg you cant copyrite a formula - like einstiens theories


Since I was in the Navy for eight years (from 1988 to 1996)... well, I was a cook ("Ah! A goddamned cook!", like my daughter loves to quote :D) I bought both Harpoon and Command. I actually beta-tested Command.

Now, I know that there was a big brouhaha surrounding these two games, something about databases and database data. Don't ask me for the details, because I stayed very, very far from these proceedings. However, it is my understanding that this accident led the developers to the decision of locking Command's database (which is just fine by me). This does seem to show that Matrix takes very seriously these matters.

Regarding the specific copyright laws, I admit I don't have a clue. But to take work done by other people (for example the conversion from real life factors into game stats) and use it without even recognising the thing does seem at least unethical to me.

Just my 2 cents.



mainsworthy -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 8:32:44 AM)

If the databases have strings of words in I think you can copyrite, if a tank when calculate can fire 20 hexes, then all games taking the real life factors into account would also find 20 hexes, a table just with numbers belongs to all I think. eg if you photo all the earth from space you would not own the copyrite to all maps it belongs to all of us.

If you found you had discovered a great formula Pi * 22.6 + gravity *1.4 = speed of light \ 1000, you would have to keep it secret,because if you you tried to patent it - you would be refused.

1 cent



Brazouck -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 3:01:03 PM)

oh yes, having an optional % tool would be great, and leftover MP (or MF for foot :) ) would be great too !



telengard -> RE: Combat Values (3/1/2016 3:37:29 PM)

I would be OK with the % (as long as it could be disabled), but that's more than what I would personally want. I'd would just like to know the basics to make some decisions, range, firepower, etc. The VASL mod, assuming it maps to the in game values, is so far providing that to some degree.



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.609375