Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: Next Patch

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> RE: Next Patch Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 6:33:26 AM   
Menschenfresser

 

Posts: 252
Joined: 3/26/2004
From: United States
Status: offline 		I'd like to see an editor variable which would increase the movement point loss as a unit runs down on supplies. I'm not sure what the low is now exactly...50%? I'm not sure how it scales, but this would greatly help large scenarios where supply is an issue.

_____________________________

Make wargames, not war.

(in reply to SMK-at-work)
Post #: 31
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 11:09:49 AM   
a white rabbit


Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill

Could we please do something about the combat replay in PBEM, it is truly awful. I gave up watching it in my last PBEM as half the time I couldn't work out where it was showing me.

At least, if nothing else, make it full screen. It would also be useful be able slow down and speed up the replay.

Also we don't really need it to spend 10 minutes tell us we missed 600 consecutive hidden moves. Lets just scrap the hidden move results. It should be FOW anyway. "Commander, our recon planes have spotted the sixth army moving West along the Minsk highway. They also reliably inform me that n units moved a total of m hexes, where n x m = 316. They couldn't say much else about this except m times n was definitely 316"


...nooooooooooo....

..kk it's a bore but, at least you know it happened, and the "where"s your guess..

..better than no info at all...

_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,

(in reply to MarcA)
Post #: 32
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 5:08:21 PM   
MarcA


Posts: 1181
Joined: 3/2/2005
From: England
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: a white rabbit

quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill

Could we please do something about the combat replay in PBEM, it is truly awful. I gave up watching it in my last PBEM as half the time I couldn't work out where it was showing me.

At least, if nothing else, make it full screen. It would also be useful be able slow down and speed up the replay.

Also we don't really need it to spend 10 minutes tell us we missed 600 consecutive hidden moves. Lets just scrap the hidden move results. It should be FOW anyway. "Commander, our recon planes have spotted the sixth army moving West along the Minsk highway. They also reliably inform me that n units moved a total of m hexes, where n x m = 316. They couldn't say much else about this except m times n was definitely 316"


...nooooooooooo....

..kk it's a bore but, at least you know it happened, and the "where"s your guess..

..better than no info at all...


Why is it better than no info at all? It is information of no value that you shouldn't have. Surely in this case it would be better not to have it. If you wanted all the info just play with FOW off.


(in reply to a white rabbit)
Post #: 33
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 5:17:15 PM   
a white rabbit


Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill

quote:

ORIGINAL: a white rabbit

quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill

Could we please do something about the combat replay in PBEM, it is truly awful. I gave up watching it in my last PBEM as half the time I couldn't work out where it was showing me.

At least, if nothing else, make it full screen. It would also be useful be able slow down and speed up the replay.

Also we don't really need it to spend 10 minutes tell us we missed 600 consecutive hidden moves. Lets just scrap the hidden move results. It should be FOW anyway. "Commander, our recon planes have spotted the sixth army moving West along the Minsk highway. They also reliably inform me that n units moved a total of m hexes, where n x m = 316. They couldn't say much else about this except m times n was definitely 316"


...nooooooooooo....

..kk it's a bore but, at least you know it happened, and the "where"s your guess..

..better than no info at all...


Why is it better than no info at all? It is information of no value that you shouldn't have. Surely in this case it would be better not to have it. If you wanted all the info just play with FOW off.




..i like to know he's moving, whatever, where ever, i'll play the unknown as if it was me..

..any information is better than no information at all..

..damn, who said that ?


_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,

(in reply to MarcA)
Post #: 34
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 7:40:40 PM   
m5000.2006


Posts: 168
Joined: 11/10/2006
Status: offline 		talking of displaying info - correct me if i'm wrong but i have the impression that the number of destroyed aircraft in the air briefing isn't accurate but approximate, i remember reading about it in a different thread and someone said it is approximate and random to some extend - it changes when you move and click your mouse


if it is, wouldn't it be a agood idea to add some information that it is approximate, e.g. "estimated number of destroyed aircaft" or something similar

the problem is that most other types of information display are not approximate - you get accurate readiness, proficiency, supply, even how many rounds you're left with, but all of a sudden you get a random number of destroyed aircraft that changes when you move your mouse and click (?!) and you aren't even certain it is really random because it isn't stated anywhere

so it would be nice to at least have the information that it is

in fact, i was wondering why not make it accurate? really, the way it works now, it seems useless, i mean, why should i even bother to look at the aircraft figuers if i know they are approximate and randomised, what's the point...?

i know that there may be something like the fog of war or communication problems on the battlefield, but if we really acknowledge that they influence the information that we have of various aspects of the game, then why is e.g. supply accurate, surely it is possible in the heat of a battle that the hq thinks its subordinate units are supplied while in reality, they aren't

in fact, the same goes for proficiency, readiness, movement points, attack/defence value, remaining rounds, and most, if not all, of other sorts of information display, most notably the casualties information which you get at the end of each land battle, to the best of my knowledge, it isn't randomised...

so if aircraft figures are randomised why not make the rest randomised too? what's the point in having only one randomised kind of information display - that of destroyed aircraft

and if the rest is to remain accurate, then why should we have approximate aircraft info?

< Message edited by m5000.2006 -- 4/28/2007 7:51:16 PM >

_____________________________

"Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?"
"That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," said the Cat.
"I don't much care where –" said Alice.
"Then it doesn't matter which way you go," said the Cat.
LC

(in reply to a white rabbit)
Post #: 35
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 7:55:07 PM   
Veers


Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline
quote:

the problem is that most other types of information display are not approximate - you get accurate readiness, proficiency, supply, even how many rounds you're left with, but all of a sudden you get a random number of destroyed aircraft that changes when you move your mouse and click (?!) and you aren't even certain it is really random because it isn't stated anywhere

quote:

You will always know
your own losses exactly, but enemy losses are subject to misinformation.
Pilots are notorious for inflating and double-reporting
enemy planes shot down. Damaged aircraft (those sent to
the Replacement Pool) are not included in the Loss Report.

Pg. 45 in the manual, under the heading of, surprise, surprise, Air Briefing.


quote:


really, the way it works now, it seems useless, i mean, why should i even bother to look at the aircraft figuers if i know they are approximate and randomised, what's the point...?

Lets see...Oh, I know, I know. To get an aproximate idea of how many aircraft your enemy has lost, compared to the number you know you have lost.

quote:


so if aircraft figures are randomised why not make the rest randomised too? what's the point in having only one randomised kind of information display - that of destroyed aircraft

and if the rest is to remain accurate, then why should we have approximate aircraft info?
With this, however, you have a point, though I recommend that you don't mix usless babbling with your good points next time, as others may stop reading before they get to the parts fo your post that made sense.

< Message edited by Veers -- 4/28/2007 7:57:59 PM >

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to m5000.2006)
Post #: 36
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 8:18:06 PM   
m5000.2006


Posts: 168
Joined: 11/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers

quote:

the problem is that most other types of information display are not approximate - you get accurate readiness, proficiency, supply, even how many rounds you're left with, but all of a sudden you get a random number of destroyed aircraft that changes when you move your mouse and click (?!) and you aren't even certain it is really random because it isn't stated anywhere

quote:

You will always know
your own losses exactly, but enemy losses are subject to misinformation.
Pilots are notorious for inflating and double-reporting
enemy planes shot down. Damaged aircraft (those sent to
the Replacement Pool) are not included in the Loss Report.

Pg. 45 in the manual, under the heading of, surprise, surprise, Air Briefing.


quote:


really, the way it works now, it seems useless, i mean, why should i even bother to look at the aircraft figuers if i know they are approximate and randomised, what's the point...?

Lets see...Oh, I know, I know. To get an aproximate idea of how many aircraft your enemy has lost, compared to the number you know you have lost.

quote:


so if aircraft figures are randomised why not make the rest randomised too? what's the point in having only one randomised kind of information display - that of destroyed aircraft

and if the rest is to remain accurate, then why should we have approximate aircraft info?
With this, however, you have a point, though I recommend that you don't mix usless babbling with your good points next time, as others may stop reading before they get to the parts fo your post that made sense.



really, Veers you've outdone yourself this time, so many clever remarks in one post, well done, well done

unfortunately, what you wrote doesn't answer anything, but is yet another attempt to pick on someone else's post

had good fun reading it

------

i've read the manual and know of the page you're referring to, in other words i do know the official explanation, but the problem that i desribed above is this - why is aircracft briefing the only kind of information display that is randomised?

one can come up with an explanation similar to what is written on pp 44-45 for any kind of information display - supply, readiness, land battle reports, etc, etc...

so, sadly, the questions from my post above do remian unanswered



< Message edited by m5000.2006 -- 4/28/2007 8:41:02 PM >

_____________________________

"Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?"
"That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," said the Cat.
"I don't much care where –" said Alice.
"Then it doesn't matter which way you go," said the Cat.
LC

(in reply to Veers)
Post #: 37
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 8:54:50 PM   
Veers


Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline 		Yes, it was jolly good fun to write.

But, more seriously:
I wasn't trying to answer questions. I was agreeing with you, adding weight to your question. With more people wanting to know the answer, hopefully it will attract James or Ralph.

Furthermore, the air briefing is even more pointless to have randomized because, once you know the integers at which it randomizes (2,2.5, and 3, if memory serves), all you have to do is click the button enough times to see the three different randomizations and then you can know almost exactly how many aircraft your opponent has lost over the turn. (This also answers the question of what good the display is.)

As well, this display is much less usefull for the first player than it is for the second player. The second player gets to know the total losses for the whole turn, whereas the first player only gets to know losses during his turn. A helpfull addition to the air briefing screen, at least for the first player, would be a report for last turn's air losses.

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to m5000.2006)
Post #: 38
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 9:47:14 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m5000.2006
i've read the manual and know of the page you're referring to, in other words i do know the official explanation, but the problem that i desribed above is this - why is aircracft briefing the only kind of information display that is randomised?

It's not the only information display that is "randomized".. There is a degree of randomization in the distribution of lost/returned to inventory for disabled results. You can determine a rough, overall effect from looking at your own inventory columns at the end of each series of battles (if you are so inclined) but the exact distribution of the enemy losses/returns is hidden from you.

quote:

ORIGINAL: m5000.2006
one can come up with an explanation similar to what is written on pp 44-45 for any kind of information display - supply, readiness, land battle reports, etc, etc...

so, sadly, the questions from my post above do remian unanswered

So, what is the thrust of your questions? Is it "Why don't we have more Fog of War?" Or, is it "Why have Fog of War at all, since it is not totally implemented?"

(in reply to m5000.2006)
Post #: 39
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 10:52:21 PM   
m5000.2006


Posts: 168
Joined: 11/10/2006
Status: offline 		well, i was just under the impression that there is a focus on air cambat results fog of war, while ignoring other possible sources for fog of war, e.g. land combat results, so "the thrust of my questions" was towards the justification why so much focus on air combat while disregarding other aspects, e.g. land combat, supply

it may be that this impression regarding focus on air combat results stems from the fact that the figures change while you click with your mouse so that you can see the different numbers, and so the fact that they are random is emphasised, it isn't so in land combat so they appear without any changes, and you may not notice the "approximate land losses' on the panel , which i've just done after having read in your post that there's some degree of randomization included in land combat results too...

so now that we know that both land and air combat results are randomised why not add 'approximate' in air combat so that it is more obvious for everyone that these are in fact randomised figures too

------

anyway, JAMiAM, yours is the kind of explanation that is really friendly and helpful

Veers, really, there's no need for all those spiteful remarks, a constructive message would have been far more helpful


_____________________________

"Would you tell me, please, which way I ought to go from here?"
"That depends a good deal on where you want to get to," said the Cat.
"I don't much care where –" said Alice.
"Then it doesn't matter which way you go," said the Cat.
LC

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 40
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 11:09:07 PM   
MarcA


Posts: 1181
Joined: 3/2/2005
From: England
Status: offline 		Is there any FOW on the location of enemy units which can be seen on the map. At the moment, I assume, you get an incomplete picture of enemy dispositions but with the locations of units you can see being accurate. There should be FOW on location as well, which should become greater with distance from the front.

(in reply to m5000.2006)
Post #: 41
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 11:09:45 PM   
Veers


Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline
quote:

Veers, really, there's no need for all those spiteful remarks, a constructive message would have been far more helpful

Spiteful? I love you guys, how'd you get spiteful out of my remarks? It's all in good fun. Did ya not even read my follow-on response?

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to m5000.2006)
Post #: 42
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 11:17:30 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: m5000.2006

well, i was just under the impression that there is a focus on air cambat results fog of war, while ignoring other possible sources for fog of war, e.g. land combat results, so "the thrust of my questions" was towards the justification why so much focus on air combat while disregarding other aspects, e.g. land combat, supply

I think the simple answer to that question is that Norm served in the Air Force, so his personal experiences therein, bear out in certain aspects of the game. Designer's perogative, I guess...

(in reply to m5000.2006)
Post #: 43
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 11:19:07 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: mantill

Is there any FOW on the location of enemy units which can be seen on the map. At the moment, I assume, you get an incomplete picture of enemy dispositions but with the locations of units you can see being accurate. There should be FOW on location as well, which should become greater with distance from the front.


That's a good idea, even if not really feasible for TOAW III. Maybe something in the future...

(in reply to MarcA)
Post #: 44
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 11:22:45 PM   
JAMiAM

 

Posts: 6165
Joined: 2/8/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers

quote:

Veers, really, there's no need for all those spiteful remarks, a constructive message would have been far more helpful

Spiteful? I love you guys, how'd you get spiteful out of my remarks? It's all in good fun. Did ya not even read my follow-on response?

Ahh...the joys of internet (mis)communications...

Since the two of you are normally chipper and helpful, I'll assume that you'll work out things on your own, without a call for kisses, hugs and handshakes...

(in reply to Veers)
Post #: 45
RE: Next Patch - 4/28/2007 11:37:48 PM   
Veers


Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline 		*skips the handshakes and goes in for the kisses and hugs!!!

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 46
RE: Next Patch - 4/30/2007 2:38:19 PM   
a white rabbit


Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline 		..ok, next patch...

..an automatic save (without having to reload.......) after every combat round..

..and a message that says " this game was reloaded from combat round x, y times" if you've just soo gotta do an anti-cheat thing..

..yahh, he really likes the combat rounds...

_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,

(in reply to Veers)
Post #: 47
RE: Next Patch - 4/30/2007 2:44:05 PM   
a white rabbit


Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: JAMiAM


So, what is the thrust of your questions? Is it "Why don't we have more Fog of War?" Or, is it "Why have Fog of War at all, since it is not totally implemented?"



..more Fog-of-War..

..more Fog-of-War..

..more sensual native beauties...sorry, i was distracted..


_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,

(in reply to JAMiAM)
Post #: 48
RE: Next Patch - 4/30/2007 6:08:37 PM   
Veers


Posts: 1324
Joined: 6/6/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: a white rabbit
..an automatic save (without having to reload.......) after every combat round..
..and a message that says " this game was reloaded from combat round x, y times" if you've just soo gotta do an anti-cheat thing..

Why?

_____________________________

To repeat history in a game is to be predictable.
If you wish to learn more about EA, feel free to pop over to the EA forums Europe Aflame Forums.

(in reply to a white rabbit)
Post #: 49
RE: Next Patch - 4/30/2007 6:50:47 PM   
freeboy

 

Posts: 9088
Joined: 5/16/2004
From: Colorado
Status: offline 		keystroke monitor of the enemy? ok that was silly! If you don't trust folks, do not play with them!
as for fow, I do think we see way too much info on the enemy re their supply and proficieny etc. maybe a setting or toggle to switch to uber fog, shows us the type of unit and the nationality and a guess at the size and quality?

(in reply to Veers)
Post #: 50
RE: Next Patch - 4/30/2007 6:58:14 PM   
a white rabbit


Posts: 2366
Joined: 4/27/2002
From: ..under deconstruction..6N124E..
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Veers


quote:

ORIGINAL: a white rabbit
..an automatic save (without having to reload.......) after every combat round..
..and a message that says " this game was reloaded from combat round x, y times" if you've just soo gotta do an anti-cheat thing..

Why?


..1/ he's 1 yr old, n luvs pushing keyboards

..2/ she's 20 yrs younger than i am...and......

..3/ i'm busy doing my best to rewrite large sections of the peasant-agriculture for an island of 18 million people..

..4/ cos it makes bloody sense, for a game as complicated as t3..sheeesh...

..one combat round, one auto-quick save labelled c1, c2 etc

_____________________________

..toodA, irmAb moAs'lyB 'exper'mentin'..,..beàn'tus all..?,

(in reply to Veers)
Post #: 51
RE: Next Patch - 4/30/2007 8:48:34 PM   
cantona


Posts: 239
Joined: 4/29/2006
From: Gibraltar
Status: offline 		may have been mentioned but what about a whole formation dig in button or something along those lines to save digging in each individual unit

_____________________________

1966 was a great year for english football...eric was born

(in reply to a white rabbit)
Post #: 52
RE: Next Patch - 5/1/2007 7:55:23 PM   
saintsup

 

Posts: 133
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: La Celle Saint-Clouud
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: cantona

may have been mentioned but what about a whole formation dig in button or something along those lines to save digging in each individual unit


I want that !!

(in reply to cantona)
Post #: 53
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Norm Koger's The Operational Art Of War III >> RE: Next Patch Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.734