|
Paul Vebber -> v7.1 status report (1/8/2002 1:53:00 AM)
|
We are currently working on a fix to the "synch bug" and a few issues with the two player campaign (most notably when done online).
We are also looking into a way to address one aspect of the artillery delay issue, but I not sure if the fix will pan out.
What has been fixed in the current test build is:
1) too many men fire primary inf weapons - this has been corrected so only primary inf weapons in SLOT 1 are fired multiple times. Also a suppression componant has been added so supression reduces the number of "multiple men" firing. This should help the problem of unsuppressed defenders taking excessive losses because suppressed attackers still attack with the same number of men as unsuppressed units. Likewise this reduces this will reduce teh casualties taken when an attacking force has a significnat numerical superiority and suppresses the daylights out of defenders.
This will in general increase the effectiveness of preparatory and overwatcing fires.
The effect is now: Roll DIE(200) for each man in the squad , if the result is less than (experience-(suppression/2)) the man fires. The result is added to the base of at least 1 man always firing.
2) Flame weapons are too destructive: Flame weapons has a base 60% chance of penetration vice "automatic" penetration.
3) APCR T/d calcualtion incorrect: Repaired. This reduces the effectiveness in undermatched engagements (ie armor significantly greater than projectile diameter)
4) Slope effect on effective resistance tweaked slightly upward. (this makes the effective resistance slightly higher)
5) Modified the ricochet routine to do a check for "shatter gap" tendency (though with a significant randon element) based on the chance of shatter starting at about T/d = .75 and reaching max at about 1.25. Penetration to effective resistance ratio ramps from a minimum at ramping up linearly from 1.01 to max at 1.11 and at the high end more variably in a "hump" centered at 1.25 but having significant tails form about 1.10 up to 1.4. Note the max shatter probability is capped at .5 and testing has shown it generaly much less, but wanted to include this effect as part of the ricochet routine.
6)Introduced a more linear variabilty into vulnerable location hits, The chance ramps up from 300m on in rather than a step function at range 150.
7) Bit the bullet and added a rudimentory "armor quality" function that works a lot better than the thickness germandering I tried to do. Since the effective resistance of high hardness or cast armor had a bigger T/d dependance than I originally thought.
For those complaining about this I have come around to the error of my ways ![]("frown.gif")
The "Skirts" data element in the OOBs is now coded like radio to allow 5 different armor types:
0,1,2,3 Single digit gives the vehicle 0, 10, 20 , or 30mm skirts on Flank hits. Vehice is assumed to have MOSTLY "normal" 240 BHN RHA type armor
10,11,12,13 As above but armor is superior quality to "regualar" RHA.
20,21,22,23 As above but vehicle has "high hardness" armor of moderate quality.
30,31,32,33 As above but has "high hardness" armor of poor quality.
40,41,42,43 As above but armor is cast.
Now these categories are a bit vague, but allow for inclusion of T/d into the quality equation, namely that armor deficiency is most pronounced when siginiicantly overmatched, and in the case of high hardness can actually be a benefit when the T/d is high.
This means that 37 vs T-34 will be generally ineffective, 50mm will be a wash with the "old values" and 75 and 88 in particular will see less effective resistance. This will allow the enhanced effect of 75mm and 88mm rounds without giving the 50 and in particular 37mm APCR a free ride.
I am presently updating the vehicel stats with this additional value. ARmor values have been restored to v6 standards, in the case of some vehicels penalized for cast armor, enhanced. (KV, IS and Churchill types the most effected. THis allows for an appropriate T/d to be calculated based on actual armor thickness, and not a reduced value. I am also changing some of teh front hull values to a more uniform use of "most significant plate" with a slope modifier if a more vulnerable plate is present, again so T/d calculations are not skewed. This works withthe change in vulnerable loaction hits to allow for "lessor" plates to be engaged with more range dependance (its hard to hit them outside 300m, but much easier at 1 hex)
This OOB update will take me another week or so to get done with. I have instituted the updates Alby had made form the threads here and the mortar changes (less some the extr FO's).
|
|
|
|
![]("cool.gif")
Could it be anything else?? ![]("smile.gif")
![]("biggrin.gif")
