(Full Version)

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



Message

AlvinS -> (7/4/2001 10:21:00 PM)

So far so good. You guys are amazing. :cool:



Greg McCarty -> (7/4/2001 10:37:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by David Heath: Ok Guys By now everyone knows that SPWaW v6.0 has been released! What we are looking for here is ideas... a lot which will be used in Combat Leader and / or a patch. Now first big change is that the Machine Guns are much more deadly and how they should be. The troops are just as tough... just they die when they get hit. Crews not also seem to act how they should. These are our views... what do you think. P.S. please report any bugs, ideas, problems etc... as always.
First of all, a thousand thank-yous to the Matrix staff who continue to refine this game to levels which we can only marvel at. With regard to the question about crew behavior: the one thing that has always struck me as odd about this is their propensity for sticking around their abandoned vehicle for extended periods of time and behaving really feisty with small arms in the face of overwhelming fire. If I were in that situation I would break and run in any direction of cover not infested with the enemy. On the other hand, there are some other angles that occur to me. 1. It can be desireable for a crew to at some point reoccupy an abandoned vehicle if not immobilized. 2. The current behavior seems to preoccupy the AI with an obsessive desire to eliminate crews before moving on. This may or may not be realistic. 3. This current behavior, if I under -stand the point system properly, may lead to more points being awarded due to unneccessarily high crew losses because of their behavior. 4. Perhaps the simplest explanation is that the crew cannot move because of suppression from close range fire --in which case, the behavior is sensible and under --standable. But if they can fire, are they truely too suppressed to run? My instincts tell me the crews would be more likely to seek shelter first, then return to the vehicle if two checks pass: 1. they are not under fire. 2. the vehicle is not immobilized. Overall, I think 6.0 is the BEST YET. It really seems to model infantry behavior and weapons behavior well. I certainly am very pleased. There's my two cents. [ July 04, 2001: Message edited by: Greg McCarty ]



A_B -> (7/4/2001 11:03:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by David Heath: Ok Guys By now everyone knows that SPWaW v6.0 has been released! What we are looking for here is ideas... a lot which will be used in Combat Leader and / or a patch. Now first big change is that the Machine Guns are much more deadly and how they should be. The troops are just as tough... just they die when they get hit. Crews not also seem to act how they should. These are our views... what do you think. P.S. please report any bugs, ideas, problems etc... as always.
My latest area of interest is in improved night fighting, especially as regards infantry combat.



troopie -> (7/5/2001 12:22:00 AM)

The AI now makes fire errors like a human player. I saw a rifle section and an armoured car take damage (the AC was destroyed) when a tank fired into the hex. One of my sections was also in the same hex. Is this bug, from v.5.02-5.03 fixed? You would brew up a Konigstiger, difficult but possible with a heavy enough gun, and it would be replaced by a burning SdKfz icon. troopie



Lars Remmen -> (7/5/2001 1:33:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by General Mayhem: [Cut] But forget MMG's, even maybe HMG's. They're now quite hopeless. [Cut] [ July 04, 2001: Message edited by: General Mayhem ]
MMG's and HMG's quite hopeless?!? Tell that to my poor British troops slugging it out with the Italians. 8mm Breda HMG One shot -> 5 casualties :mad: . 13.2mm HMG three shots -> 10 man unit gone :( . I think the crew served MG's are now killers they should be.



Panzer Leo -> (7/5/2001 1:40:00 AM)

Yep, now you're close to perfect... BUT I found one thing, I do not like about v6.0... :( Infantry in entrenchements gets the same suppression like troops in the open. They retreat out of the entrenchement way to early. A squad, that uses up it's rally (down to 0) in it's turn and is fired upon in the next enemy turn, will almost always flee when getting a single casualty. I had squads giving up their positions although their strength was no less then 8 or 9 men :eek: I don't think you wanted it that way and it maybe got lost from 5.3 to 6.0, but the 5.3 bonus for entrenchements was an important (and very realistic) part of the infantry combat. Now melee makes no sense again, cause squads will rather run before you can get to their positions (and that's a loss of tactics and fun)... :( Everything else seems to work great :D



General Mayhem -> (7/5/2001 2:00:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Lars Remmen: MMG's and HMG's quite hopeless?!? Tell that to my poor British troops slugging it out with the Italians. 8mm Breda HMG One shot -> 5 casualties :mad: . 13.2mm HMG three shots -> 10 man unit gone :( . I think the crew served MG's are now killers they should be.
Allright, mmgs only. I didn't hit with Stuarts and normal mmgs Japanese advancing on clearings. I also played US vs. germans and even there mmgs were quite ineffective. I tried Germans vs. Polish frontal assault and there Ib's at maxium got 2 men kills, mostly they did not hit and when they did 1 men went. Germans mmgs were better than US mmgs, but I suspect because they have more experience. All this on troop on clear ground. I do not see what sense is it anymore to use mmgs. They don't shoot well on any range and if infantry get's close it has better chance to hit them than them hitting the infantry. Despite any modifiers. Anyway, there is no really annoying tendency troops to walk forward, while mmgs only kill one or two of them. Then some 8 men squads shoots lucky shots using rifles on a unit on higher ground and voila! some small group goes away on one shot. Has happened to me more than once. I can't use settings to repair this, as adding infantry toughness makes mmgs even more ineffective, on the other hand rifle squad firing with rifles(or better) seem to hit always better. Well, I can always go back to 5.3 . Now I'll stop complaining altogether. I've said what bothers me. [ July 04, 2001: Message edited by: General Mayhem ]



Paul Vebber -> (7/5/2001 2:52:00 AM)

If men are in the dirt, especially in cover, then yse, MGs will keep them down in the dirt, buit cause few casualties. Rifles in this case are even less prone to get kills. But against troops advancing and especially moving 2 or more hexes - MGs will be quite effective. That is as it should be! We did not change the suppression bonus removal for being in entrenchments. in cover , building, behind wall, in bocage or in rocks all lose 12 suppression point automatically at the end of the turn. What I think you are noticing is that troops in hard cover now tend to take more suppression, so the 12 point bunus now often is not enough to get them back to pinned again. This brings up the use of HQ tents that now should be more useful at stiffening a defence as they reduce suppression by 15-20 (for untis within 3 hexes) Before units tended to die before it made a difference! [ July 04, 2001: Message edited by: Paul Vebber ]



Panzer Leo -> (7/5/2001 3:15:00 AM)

Hmmm...but then I would need a tent for every platoon - quite a lot and pretty expensive to purchase... :rolleyes: I made further tests and the results are all the same: Squads will retreat out of entrenchments even with only one casualty (troops were German 43, so good exp and mor). The excellent simulation of "digging" the infantry out of their cover in 5.3 is completely gone. I think it is very unlikely, that you can force a whole platoon out of their cover by handweapon fire, but this is exactly what happens now every time... :( The ratio attacker/defender (just changed in v6.0) is corrupted again, cause now you don't need that much attackers any more...just keep heads down and fire from save distance - defender will flee... The way it is now (not talking of the new ranges/effectiveness of rifles/MGs - they're great and the best you ever made), the entrenchements are a step back to 5.1 - and that's kind of frustrating, as I love all the new things in 6.0 and don't want to go back to 5.3 :D I want to suggest to dramatically decrease the suppression dealt to entrenched and lower it a bit to troops in cover to get the good 9and realistic) 5.3 feeling back :D one short word to you, General: I don't know what went wrong in your play, but I testes Panzer Ib and it mowed down 20 out of 40 troops advancing fast on it at a range of 300-400m in the open with 5 shots. if that's no good MG performence... ;)



Nemesis -> (7/5/2001 3:28:00 AM)

I patched my 5.01 to 5.2 and then to 6.0, but it still says that I'm running 5.01. Is it Normal? Did the update install properly?



Don -> (7/5/2001 3:36:00 AM)

quote:

I patched my 5.01 to 5.2 and then to 6.0, but it still says that I'm running 5.01. Is it Normal? Did the update install properly?
Doesn't sound like it - in the installer, if you use "browse" to find the game file to install to the installer will then add "/Steel Panthers World At War" to the line. If you don't remove that before installing then you have a nested folder and no upgrade. Delete steel.prf before upgrading!



Nemesis -> (7/5/2001 3:38:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Don: Doesn't sound like it - in the installer, if you use "browse" to find the game file to install to the installer will then add "/Steel Panthers World At War" to the line. If you don't remove that before installing then you have a nested folder and no upgrade.
Damn, that's exactly the problem! Oh well, off to upgrade again. Yep, it works now! Thanks for help :)! And big thank to Matrix!!!! You guys are simply awesome! [ July 04, 2001: Message edited by: Nemesis ]



General Mayhem -> (7/5/2001 4:29:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Panzer Leo: one short word to you, General: I don't know what went wrong in your play, but I testes Panzer Ib and it mowed down 20 out of 40 troops advancing fast on it at a range of 300-400m in the open with 5 shots. if that's no good MG performence... ;)
I don't know. Currently I have hill that two Japanese squad advance towards. On higher ground on 5 hexes I have one unsuppressed mmg that does not cause casualties. Okay it did kill couple when whole squad moved towards it on about distance of 8 hexes. Now as unit is retreating, I got one casualty to it. But basically, I'm lucky if I get from it and another MMG one next to it a one casualty at turn to a advancing Japanese squad. However US army 11 riflemen shoot from lower ground on range of 3 hexes, causing 3 casualties in one turn to same Japanese squad in same stance. They're using only 1903 rifle, Browning Automatic Rifle and a rifle grenade. This is basically pattern I've encountered time after time. Uh, and that same notorious squad also hit my 2 men mmg on hill, that couldn't hit it either well. I think from higher ground at 250 yards, MMG should have better chance to cause casualties to moving target than infantry in 150 yards with rifles. Or I'm I wrong? [ July 04, 2001: Message edited by: General Mayhem ]



Igor -> (7/5/2001 5:00:00 AM)

I've noticed that improved positions don't seem to provide cover to anyone else in the hex besides the target unit. Having noticed that other units in the hex seemed to suffer more than the target, I set up a long line of double entrenched soviet infantry, and entrenched MG-34 MMGs to shoot at them. In 21 of the cases, out of 50, someone in the hex suffered a visible adverse result (losses, retreats, elimination). In only 3 of those 21 cases did the actual target unit suffer as badly or worse than the non-target unit. If I had to hazard a guess, it looks like the game is doing the skill based damage avoidance test without reference to cover. Granted, my shooting gallery was all in the new open terrain (mixed), so I don't know if inherent terrain based cover is considered. Still, I've started to shoot at units I don't care about to hit the units I do...



Panzer Leo -> (7/5/2001 5:03:00 AM)

Well, General, I suppose you play against the AI. So try this: When your MG is on the hill and the Japs are moving in at let's say 8hexes and the computer asks you op-fire or not, do not fire ! Let them advance their maximum distance they can in the turn - no op-fire. Then, in your turn, open fire on the squad, that should have 3-7mph movement. If you don't get any good results on this try (open ground-no cover for Japs - that's important), I would say you either don't have v6.0 installed or you're the unluckiest person on earth ;)



Alexandra -> (7/5/2001 5:58:00 AM)

Well, I've finished my first scen with 6.0 - Bill's 'Flying Chindits'. Got a MV. My MGs were awesome - just mowed down the Japanese as they attacked. The only thing I've seen that may be a 6.0 glitch is that Soviet Rifle squad's rifle's make no sounds :) Alex



MalleusDei -> (7/5/2001 6:05:00 AM)

Improved positions appear to be buggy in 6.0.



Charles2222 -> (7/5/2001 6:34:00 AM)

General Mayhem: Get this. Playing bit of a USSR campaign with the first battle against the Finns in 12/39 with a visibility of 3. I'm desperately trying to defend some timed frontal hexes, and as of turn 12 they have been defended well. The only problem is a rearward flank hex area that isn't timed, but that is being threatened by at least a platoon of ski troops. My whole defense for the area was 2 45mm ATGs and 4 GAZ-4M-AAs (trucks with an AA mount). My ATGs were pitifully lost and only inflicted like one casualty. I'm desperately sending like 3 sections of armor to the area from what will take at least 7 turns to get there. My scant artillery has accounted for another one or two casualties in that area. So, here was the big test.....(drum roll). I hadn't expected to use these AA trucks in this battle, and had their destination routed to the back of the board. My last ATG is vaporized and the trucks lie about 5 hexes distant, which are like four hexes north of the objective cluster. Finn player turn sees the first ski troop enter 1 truck's measely 3 LOS, with the truck in woods while the skis are in clear (mixed). The truck fires and kills two, and the ski doesn't return fire. Another ski in the clear enters LOS and the truck fires, 2 are killed again, and again no return fire. Now, my player turn, what do I do? The Finns are still those two squads in LOS. If my truck goes towards the rear objective he is safe, and considering the vulnerability of the trucks, they could all escape. The truck commander decided to open fire, and thought he could perhaps slow them down slightly while the others escape; even though they could all get away. First shot, wipes out one squad; no return fire from the other. Second shot kills another 2 or 3, with no return fire. Next shot wipes them out.



General Mayhem -> (7/5/2001 6:46:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Panzer Leo: Well, General, I suppose you play against the AI. So try this: When your MG is on the hill and the Japs are moving in at let's say 8hexes and the computer asks you op-fire or not, do not fire ! Let them advance their maximum distance they can in the turn - no op-fire. Then, in your turn, open fire on the squad, that should have 3-7mph movement. If you don't get any good results on this try (open ground-no cover for Japs - that's important), I would say you either don't have v6.0 installed or you're the unluckiest person on earth ;)
I'm sure I'd get maximal kills by that tactic, but point of having mmg is to be able to give high rate of fire quickly and cover wide area. Now I don't see it is anyway making a diffrence. I think MMG is questionable value, if only way it can do significantly bigger damage than a rifle squad, is to wait a enemy squad run up to it in full speed. To me it seems that if I'd rely to that tactic to get kills, many cases my machine guns would be overrun by quick infantry with sufficient numbers. Anyway, I can't be always fighting on situation and terrain which allows to use such tactics fully. Thanks anywa for help.



General Mayhem -> (7/5/2001 6:58:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Charles_22: General Mayhem: Get thisNow, my player turn, what do I do? The Finns are still those two squads in LOS. If my truck goes towards the rear objective he is safe, and considering the vulnerability of the trucks, they could all escape. The truck commander decided to open fire, and thought he could perhaps slow them down slightly while the others escape; even though they could all get away. First shot, wipes out one squad; no return fire from the other. Second shot kills another 2 or 3, with no return fire. Next shot wipes them out.
You were using quad 7.62 maxims with firecontrols and rangefinders on range of 3?



Charles2222 -> (7/5/2001 7:26:00 AM)

The commander decided to fight rather than run. The maximum visibility is 3, so there is no choice. They were not ever intended to fight in the first place because of the low visibility, but the line couldn't be held everywhere, there was just too much woods and too little visibility.



Charles2222 -> (7/5/2001 7:51:00 AM)

General Mayhem: I'll have to amend my previous report. The truck in question was 'in cover' but in the clear, not woods. Two turns later saw another Finn ski troop show up during Finn player turn. Truck opens fire again. First opfire misses. Second opfire kills 1. USSR player turn: Truck opens fire kills 2. Next shot destroys squad. All this time there's been no return fire, almost as though the infantry are instructed to ignore unarmored vehicles. I wonder if I drove the truck towards any future units if they'll fire? If I remember I'll save the game before I do anything, with my plan to open fire again, and make an experimental move forward instead of firing. With the vulnerability of those trucks, though I've used the somewhat armored German SPAA before, I never thought I would use the USSR ones for direct fire (unless at the most extreme of ranges in very isolated situations. Yeah this Finn situation qualifies). I've been looking over AA units recently, like the deadly 25mm triple AA of Japan's (kill of 18 and range of 40) and I thought that was good. Guess what the USSR truck is? Kill of 28!!!, range of 30.



Jasper -> (7/5/2001 8:42:00 AM)

4 MMG bursting effect is the worst u can image. A single MMG is easily overrun. The American later in the war place 4 .5 HMG in a halftruck and they nickname it Meatchopper not for nothing. :o



Paul Vebber -> (7/5/2001 11:39:00 AM)

I made a test scenario with a 44 German platoon in woods and one entrenched in woods and assaulted by Brits over open (mixed) ground from about 600 yards. I played it in both 5.3 and 6.0 and found that the basic levels of suppression that cause units to retreat are teh same if "in cover" in teh woods or in entrenchments. Now teh cover level of entrenchments was a tad higher (97 instead of 95) in 5.3 over 6.0 so What I thnk is happening is that suffering a casualty can cause a retreat if you are suppressed enough, so since its easier to get a kill in 6.0 (especially at close range) you are seeing more entrenched units retreat. Another tweak to expereiment with to make entrenchments in cover tougher is to reduce searching to 50-70 making units (particularly MGs) entrenched in cover "camoflaged" and very difficult to spot and return fire at. Also since the AI isn't smart enough to Melee, the 5.3 setup made some scenarios unplayable. The time needed to "root the enemy out" conflicted with a lot of scenarios so we made it so you need to use teh HQ tents to get that same level of "stiffness". Now we can extend the range of effect of HQ tents, and perhaps reduce the suppression given to entrenched troops nearby as well? For General Mayhem, are you playing with inf toughness on 150? You are comparing results with everyone else playing at 100 I think. MMgs will not have the number of multiple hits at that setting - try 125 inf toughness and turnig searching down to 60-70 and you will get fewer caualties in open ground, but the hidden units will be harder to keep targeted.



Jasper -> (7/5/2001 1:17:00 PM)

Can the next version be added with a shortcut key for disable and enable the main gun? Pls refer to new post msg for details........ :p



Panzer Leo -> (7/5/2001 6:28:00 PM)

Maybe the extended range of tents would help a bit, but I think what you described (taking one casualty when you already got a lot of suppression and then rout) is the main problem. If I understood it right, the tent decreases your suppression at the end of your turn. The problem occurs in the enemy turn and even with a tent it will only have the effect of delaying the rout, as you need two or three shots more, that produce suppression till you rout them with one kill. Also I always thought these tents are higher level HQs. I think tents will not appear on battlefield below batallion level HQ and that makes for a maximum of one in SPWAW scale. To me the easiest way (o.k. it's no big deal for me to say this, cause I don't know the codes/routines you got to deal with) seems to be to put in a factor for suppression a unit takes from an attack. For units with the status entrenched *0.3 and in cover *0.7 (just an example). That way, the units won't get so much suppression and will not rout, when they get a kill (and they still will get enough suppression to be realistic, cause casualties are now more frequent in entrenchements, then before). This will solve the problem of fleeing from entrenchements and giving up positions (but it can still happen), that are usually a better garant for surviving then headless running around in green and getting mowed down... :D To me it sounds quite logical, that troops in prepared defenses receive less suppression then troops that just went down and took some improvised cover. Except you're about to get erased by heavy support weapons like big guns or so, it is very unlikely any soldier would leave the trenches, cause he knows, the chance for surviving is way better in the trench, then in the fields behind it...and did you never wonder, why officers are equiped with pistols ? It's to keep your guys in the trenches... :D :D :D (and I want that damned melee back - I love it) :D



General Mayhem -> (7/5/2001 6:30:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: For General Mayhem, are you playing with inf toughness on 150? You are comparing results with everyone else playing at 100 I think. MMgs will not have the number of multiple hits at that setting - try 125 inf toughness and turnig searching down to 60-70 and you will get fewer caualties in open ground, but the hidden units will be harder to keep targeted.
OK. I'll tweak to that direction. 140 was the inf toughness setting. However, I feel that at level of below 130 kills are bit too easy for my taste. Not just in open ground. Also the tweaking searching propably affects me too if I want to be fair? Whatever the case, thanks for input. I appareciate it. :)



Kharan -> (7/5/2001 6:49:00 PM)

I'm glad small units aren't invincible anymore... Also it's interesting that destroyed infantry units finally give points according to their cost and not just the number of men. Should make the player be a little more careful. Since you are concentrating on play balance, how about modifying the infantry routine which causes routed or retreating units revert back to pinned? I understand the rationale of it, but it just happens way, WAY, WAAAYY too frequently (like with a 95% chance). Since it causes the player to just not shoot routed/retreating units, and generally destroys the sense of being there, it should be cut down to about a third or half. Can the retreat logic be tweaked also? It's really annoying when your partisans or flanking force have only your retreat hex in mind and retreat directly towards the enemy. Why can't they just retreat the opposite direction where the fire that caused them to retreat came from? And could you finally take an another look at counter-battery fire? I have a hard time believing it's meant to be as useless as it is. BTW, bomber strikes aren't still shown, with or without Fast arty. A few questions I've asked before but haven't gotten answers: Shouldn't there be an asterisk setting in the preferences, or am I just blind? Otherwise how do you tell your opponent isn't using it? How should a timeout work? The manual probably incorrectly states it's identical to a command intervention, but in practise it only pauses the game for the duration of the fanfare (3 seconds). Shouldn't there be a greater chance of a breakdown in forests or is the text just missing from terrain.txt? Oh yeah, there's another trivial bug to add to the list: if you play with the same countries, victory hexes aren't shown. [ July 05, 2001: Message edited by: Kharan ]



TheZel66 -> (7/5/2001 7:10:00 PM)

love it!!!!!!



General Mayhem -> (7/5/2001 7:12:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by Kharan: Can the retreat logic be tweaked also? It's really annoying when your partisans or flanking force have only your retreat hex in mind and retreat directly towards the enemy. Why can't they just retreat the opposite direction where the fire that caused them to retreat came from? [ July 05, 2001: Message edited by: Kharan ]
I agree. Another thing that bit bothers is tanks retreating. Few times my tanks have started to retreat through buildings and other obstacles that immobilize them. I could understand if they in panic turn around, and rush few tens of yarsd to building. But it is bit funny to look unit that moves 4 hexes, and misses seeing building front of it, finally ramming itself to it. I say, eye glasses to tank rews! :cool: Not big worry, but at some stage(when time) tank issue could be fixed.



Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
1.234375