Loaded Vehicle indication (Full Version)

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



Message

Shooter -> Loaded Vehicle indication (5/18/2000 10:29:00 PM)

I noticed that in W@W, vehicle units now only indicate that they are loaded with something, and not what unit they are carrying. It appears that the only way to identify what is being carried is to right click on the unit, which is inconvenient when sorting through your units to move the correct one first. Is this a programming change? It would be nice to see what's being carried on the summary screen at the bottom of the map when a unit is selected rather than having to go to the detailed unit status screen. Also, big surprise - no more carrying 10 man infantry squads on medium tanks. Looks like you decided "eight is enough". Sort of a tough trade-off for those of us used to always buying infantry tank-riders (especially engineers) for those range 1 close assaults. You can still do it, but you start with an 8 man squad. I haven't figured out whether the lost 2 men count against me as casualties or victory point losses - what's the scoop on that? Other than that - great game and good work, gents. The whole team is to be commended for truly fine work.



Larry Holt -> (5/19/2000 12:00:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Shooter: [snip]Also, big surprise - no more carrying 10 man infantry squads on medium tanks. Looks like you decided "eight is enough". Sort of a tough trade-off for those of us used to always buying infantry tank-riders (especially engineers) for those range 1 close assaults. You can still do it, but you start with an 8 man squad. I haven't figured out whether the lost 2 men count against me as casualties or victory point losses - what's the scoop on that? Other than that - great game and good work, gents. The whole team is to be commended for truly fine work.
I've seen pictures of WWII med tanks with infantry hanging off all over. Some tanks even have hand holds welded on for just this sort of thing. I used the editor and upped the carrying capacity to suit my desires. ------------------ An old soldier but not yet a faded one.



dgstokes -> (5/19/2000 2:17:00 AM)

I agree, we really need a indicater on the main main map screen info box that tells us what units are loaded on the highlighted vehicle. What does happen to those extra men that can't be loaded?



Paul Vebber -> (5/19/2000 2:37:00 AM)

Only Mulder knows for sure :-) They count as casualties. The Soviets are the only country I have found any evidence on that they ROUTINELY (which is what players do) used tanks to carry infantry to contact. Yes they had handholds welded on, but all the evidence shows that this was not very effective. Heck I've got a photo of like 25 guys riding on a Sherman, but its pretty obvious they aren't anywhere near the front lines. The oral histories I've read OVERWHELMINGLY indicate that in the US and British armies anyway, that infantry did not like to get anywhere near a tank, becasue of the fire it drew. Even "hiding" behind the tank while advancing was a "last resort" and not something done gladly... By 1944 even the Russians got the message that carrying infantry on the tanks was retty suicidal. Behind the lines HECK YA they were all OVER them, but once you close near the enemy, infantry got off tanks and had as little close contact with them as they could... To watch SP players one would think EVERY tank was swarming with infantry as it went into combat. I really don't care one way or the other, but I can't find any other than sporadic anectdotal evidence that it ocassionally happened (mostly to bug out!) SO we linked carry capacity to size (ie size x2) excet the russians and late way tanks that were big. We should have restricted teh movement with riders to roads, or to about half movement and had teh men jump off before a main was fired... ITs too firmly entrenched into SP lore that every tank went into combat covered with GI's I guess :-)



Larry Holt -> (5/19/2000 3:43:00 AM)

quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: [snip]The Soviets are the only country I have found any evidence on that they ROUTINELY (which is what players do) used tanks to carry infantry to contact. Yes they had handholds welded on, but all the evidence shows that this was not very effective. Heck I've got a photo of like 25 guys riding on a Sherman, but its pretty obvious they aren't anywhere near the front lines. The oral histories I've read OVERWHELMINGLY indicate that in the US and British armies anyway, that infantry did not like to get anywhere near a tank, becasue of the fire it drew. Even "hiding" behind the tank while advancing was a "last resort" and not something done gladly... By 1944 even the Russians got the message that carrying infantry on the tanks was retty suicidal. SO we linked carry capacity to size (ie size x2) excet the russians and late way tanks that were big. [snip] We should have restricted teh movement with riders to roads, or to about half movement and had teh men jump off before a main was fired... ITs too firmly entrenched into SP lore that every tank went into combat covered with GI's I guess :-)
I've also seen pictures of German soldiers standing on the rear deck of a tank firing their rifles or crouching behind at tank while advancing. U.S tanks had an external phone to allow troops operating right next to them to talk to the crew. Its hard to judge what was done then & how often but that's one of the beauty's of gaming, I don't have to be restricted to history. I'd like to carry what I want to as that is a doctrinal limitation that I can ignore. I agree that physical limitations such as troops on a tank being more prone to take casualities or having to jump off prior to firing the main gun should remain. (I've only seen the M1's 105 fire and it shoke me hard at 20 yards. Even a 37mm would undoubtedly cause eardrum damage, etc. to troops riding on it) I can't ignore the physial limitations of troops on tanks. Next patch? ------------------ An old soldier but not yet a faded one.



Dave R -> (5/19/2000 5:44:00 AM)

Snipped a load of good stuff out We should have restricted teh movement with riders to roads, or to about half movement and had teh men jump off before a main was fired... ITs too firmly entrenched into SP lore that every tank went into combat covered with GI's I guess :-)[/B][/QUOTE] I've got to say that this is one point that I agree with Paul. As an ex tankie, it was my experience that infantry view even friendly armour as a necissary evil. Something to be tollerated rather then wanted. On the whole with the British army 'grunts and armour tollerate each other, and certainly don't mix (grins)



dgstokes -> (5/19/2000 12:21:00 PM)

But what about an indicator for what troops are loaded on the vehicles that can and do carry them. It can be a major pain the way it is now to try to search out specific loaded units. Also, this ol' brain ain't the best at remembering who is on what from turn to turn. After all, my head is full of all of those armor penetration tables.



Larry Holt -> (5/19/2000 7:44:00 PM)

quote:

Originally posted by dgstokes: But what about an indicator for what troops are loaded on the vehicles that can and do carry them. It can be a major pain the way it is now to try to search out specific loaded units. Also, this ol' brain ain't the best at remembering who is on what from turn to turn. After all, my head is full of all of those armor penetration tables.
As a work around to trying to find the right needle in the haystack now, I rename my leader units based on what they are doing. If I deploy my E unit, a tank platoon on the N flank, I rename EO to N Flank. Then I can to into the troop list and pick the right unit right away. ------------------ An old soldier but not yet a faded one.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.71875