Has anyoneelse noticed!? (Full Version)

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



Message

Riun T -> Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/25/2005 1:23:13 AM)

So I'm in the middle of my 25th battle in a long camp. as the canadians,and I'm seeing a scary coincidents of extremely high infantry casualties when ever the infantry are in the same hex as a vehicle. Now I know that the code was changed to allow riding troops to suffer hits and thats wounderful but I think that the problem now is that the AI is mistaking ANY troops in the hex whether riding or entrenched get the same low defence rolls as if their standing on the vehicle and not seeking any sort of cover around the said vehicle or fortification.
I guess Mike Woods would be whom I'm directing the question; is there a unexpected oversight in the coding that would make the AI mistake entrenched infantry in the same hex as a vehicle moving threw the hex to lose their defencive factors??.
I initially thought it was a little too easy to get 4-7 hit from a meeting engagments first turns after sighting and it doesn't seem to happen to squads that don't have any other stuff in their entrenchments?? and hurts really bad when u entrench other units ontop of fortifications!! I could understand a direct hit by heavy stuff but I'm talkin about everything even the slingshot and firecrackers the tank crews get are getting some stupid lucky kills on both sides. RT Should also mention this review is done on all 25 battles the first 7 where fought under VER.8.3 all following battles in VER. 8.4



Svennemir -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/25/2005 5:14:33 AM)

Perhaps you could perform a small test, using the mapeditor, comparing casualties depending on whether there is any vehicle in the same hex. If you post the statistics along with the test scenario, it would be very easy to replicate the error and establish its presence. If, of course, the error is not already known.



chief -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/25/2005 8:02:54 AM)

RiunT:

I've noticed a couple of things along that line in the latest versions, (1), If I enter a bldg. which is occupied by my own troops with a tank I cause casualties, I accept this as OK. (2) If I enter a hex, nada problemo. This is not an endorsement of 8.4 either I still prefer 8.3 with respect to infantry standing up and fighting tanks. My two cents.



KG Erwin -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/25/2005 10:01:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: chief

RiunT:

I've noticed a couple of things along that line in the latest versions, (1), If I enter a bldg. which is occupied by my own troops with a tank I cause casualties, I accept this as OK. (2) If I enter a hex, nada problemo. This is not an endorsement of 8.4 either I still prefer 8.3 with respect to infantry standing up and fighting tanks. My two cents.


Chief, just be patient. The patch to 8.4 will correct the problems with sighting and other issues. The thing is, without the players testing new versions, the programmer has no idea of what the issues are. In this light, consider 8.4 to be a beta of the final version.

I cannot emphasize enough what a great service Michael Wood is doing for us -- he's doing this upgrade process on his own, so he deserves our whole-hearted assistance and support. [&o]



soldier -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/26/2005 9:17:19 AM)

quote:

The thing is, without the players testing new versions, the programmer has no idea of what the issues are.


KG Erwin also said in another post
quote:

There were some changes after 8.4, but they are not publically available yet -- as far as testing 8.401 is concerned, the testers have no complaints (that would be me & Alby).


Heres an issue
There are no testers except yourself, someone who i don't think has ever made a critical remark about WAW and who seems unable to find any problems within the game... Didn't you test 8.4 which had the spotting anomaly in the first place ?
Sorry to say but Testing may actually require some criticism or even suggestions on what could be improved. I don't mean any offence here but problems are there (aircraft revealing your units and narrow LC maps etc). I know in the end its all up to what Mike either has time to fix or has the discretion to look into and i also appreciate the efforts (because i know they are needed).



Alby -> RE: Has anyone else noticed!? (11/26/2005 4:59:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: soldier

quote:

The thing is, without the players testing new versions, the programmer has no idea of what the issues are.


KG Erwin also said in another post
quote:

There were some changes after 8.4, but they are not publically available yet -- as far as testing 8.401 is concerned, the testers have no complaints (that would be me & Alby).


Heres an issue
There are no testers except yourself, someone who i don't think has ever made a critical remark about WAW and who seems unable to find any problems within the game... Didn't you test 8.4 which had the spotting anomaly in the first place ?
Sorry to say but Testing may actually require some criticism or even suggestions on what could be improved. I don't mean any offence here but problems are there (aircraft revealing your units and narrow LC maps etc). I know in the end its all up to what Mike either has time to fix or has the discretion to look into and i also appreciate the efforts (because i know they are needed).



Basically 8.41 just returned the spotting/assualting to where it was in 8.3 and took away snipers ability to assualt tanks. so really not much "testing" was really needed to confirm this.
the spotting problem in 8.4 was definately missed during testing...[:(]




Alby -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/26/2005 6:30:31 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Riun T

So I'm in the middle of my 25th battle in a long camp. as the canadians,and I'm seeing a scary coincidents of extremely high infantry casualties when ever the infantry are in the same hex as a vehicle. Now I know that the code was changed to allow riding troops to suffer hits and thats wounderful but I think that the problem now is that the AI is mistaking ANY troops in the hex whether riding or entrenched get the same low defence rolls as if their standing on the vehicle and not seeking any sort of cover around the said vehicle or fortification.
I guess Mike Woods would be whom I'm directing the question; is there a unexpected oversight in the coding that would make the AI mistake entrenched infantry in the same hex as a vehicle moving threw the hex to lose their defencive factors??.
I initially thought it was a little too easy to get 4-7 hit from a meeting engagments first turns after sighting and it doesn't seem to happen to squads that don't have any other stuff in their entrenchments?? and hurts really bad when u entrench other units ontop of fortifications!! I could understand a direct hit by heavy stuff but I'm talkin about everything even the slingshot and firecrackers the tank crews get are getting some stupid lucky kills on both sides. RT Should also mention this review is done on all 25 battles the first 7 where fought under VER.8.3 all following battles in VER. 8.4


I ran a few tests firing at a tank with dismounted infrantry in the same hex..
The infrantry were sustaining casualties...but I thought this had been around since early SP days
where anything in same hex takes damage or casualties??
Guess we need confirmation.




chief -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/26/2005 6:49:05 PM)

Alby:

What I meant to say (item2) is that when I enter a hex, with friendly troops, no one gets crushed which I consider correct.[:)] If I go into an enemy hex I expect to have a fire fight (overun also) form the infantry, which also seems to be the case. SOOOOO no problem there.[:-]


Gunny:

I use 8.4, 8.4 mod, and H2hfr all the time, I also realize that a change is coming down the pike, I also have been around here long enough to know about WAITING for work done by few volunteers for many gamers. [&o]This is also appreciated. No where did I say I had to have the fix now, in my original post. At my age you plays the cards as they are dealt and that goes for 8.4. Now I will patiently wait for 8.xx(?) Heck the variations of the game over the years (right or wrong) just make it that more interesting. [8D] Now if I can only beat the AI I'll go to the big fleet in the sky happy.[:D]

PS: I have 8.3 on my laptop, just so's ya no I'se don play no fav-or-ites[8|]





Riun T -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/26/2005 6:49:41 PM)

OK, I've done probably the most unorthadox method for testing this. I went and deleted the last five battles,which is where I first started noticing the severity of the casualties in mostly vehicle cooccupied hexes. I figured that was the best place to go and review the individual stats of the squads and the circumstances of their position on the field,and their morale,experience,and command #'s before there being inflated as to the rash of kills they got to exchange with the Italians and Germans threw these battles from Bir Hacheim to Tobruk and try and put some historic reference in there too if I can find it ! EH GUNNY![:'(] RT



soldier -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/27/2005 8:34:24 AM)

From the manual
"experienced units in the same hex as a tank can no longer be effectively engaged by shooting at the tank. This may still work against lower quality troops that tend to bunch up near armoured vehicles".

If your 25 games into the long campaign and your entrenched troops are still getting hit then "houston we have a problem" because you should have loads of experience by now. If it is against some low quality minor opponent then it sounds about right.
It could be a result of the lower XP ratings because once again the infantry have to pass a special experience check to stay safe in occupied hexes. Low XP ratings are a killer for the infantry in 8.4 because they also fail "tank panic" & "assault" checks (even fire checks sometimes). It really takes away infantry initiative reducing troops to the status of dumb drones. Those that said 8.4 restored infantry to their proper place on the battlefield have some serious thinking to do [&:]
(its a tank lovers paradise). The depot mod helps troops by lowering super cavalry and motorbikes to reaslistic levels
According to the manual wrecks on the other hand should provide troops with some cover.
I don't remember seeing the above issues in H2H (the real WAW)



Riun T -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (11/28/2005 5:47:46 AM)

And now I get the Italians at El alimein trying their best to delay me, with 18 vis and calm conditions I think its time to be a ****. Gonna drop one company of Assie paras on their northen set of rear VH's and Gunny you'll love this, one company of USMC paras on the south ones just for sport. 8/17/42 the first month the marines get the M1 bazooka and I put a squad of them in with the Astralians too, these trashing companies pop shoots on turn 11 and the rest of the core force line has advanced to the points of their muzzles are jutting over the first line of enemy infantry entrenchments- keep in mind I'm spesificly watching how high and how differant the infantry casualties are gonna be!!??RT



cadmus -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (12/2/2005 3:45:58 PM)

In an item earlier in this thread, Alby referred to 8.41. But I only see a download for 8.4 available in the Matrix Members area. Is 8.41 the one we're all waiting for, or is it a genuine patch currently available somewhere else?



KG Erwin -> RE: Has anyoneelse noticed!? (12/2/2005 7:47:23 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: xeno

In an item earlier in this thread, Alby referred to 8.41. But I only see a download for 8.4 available in the Matrix Members area. Is 8.41 the one we're all waiting for, or is it a genuine patch currently available somewhere else?


8.41 is a work-in-progress, and it is not yet available as a download.



Page: [1]

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.7734375