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: Artillery R.O.F.

 
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] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Re: Artillery R.O.F. Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Re: Artillery R.O.F. - 1/15/2003 9:02:36 AM   
Irinami

 

Posts: 746
Joined: 9/4/2002
From: Florida, USA
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Capt. Pixel
[B]
Another item I'd like considered is the US .50 cal HMG. This weapon, IMHO, provides the US forces with an unfair advantage. Having a HMG with penetration capability, that fires everytime the main gun fires, just give the US forces too much advantage. The same could be said for the SO 12.7 HMG.

It's one of the reasons that I don't care to play with or against US forces. :rolleyes: [/B][/QUOTE]

The problem I have with this is it isn't realistic. The .50BMG (and the 12.7mm Soviet) is an HMG (a real one, not a GPMG on a tripod like the MG42 "HMG"), and does have penetration capability.

Did you ever notice how writeups on modern soft vehicles (M-113, for a single example) tend to note the vehicle has resistance to or is "protected from" up to 12.7mm rounds? Why not 20mm? Why doesn't anyone settle for 7.62x54mm? I think you've stumbled onto the answers; 12.7mm/.50cal proved it's worth in WWII as a round large enough to defeat thin-skinned vehicles, with a chance at damaging heavier equipment, while still retaining effect against infantry without using a warhead (that is, it is a solid round requiring much less complexity than an explosive round).

Why would you change the truth? o_O?

_____________________________



Newbies!!
Wild Bill's Tanks at Munda Mini-Campaign. The training campaign for comb

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 31
- 1/15/2003 12:23:08 PM   
AmmoSgt

 

Posts: 1002
Joined: 10/21/2000
From: Redstone Arsenal Al
Status: offline
I don't think it is speed per se that is the problem , on roads these vehicles can really roll. But the terrain modifiers are problematic and that I think is where the problem might lie. A tank that can do 30 MPH on a road can't manage much more than 10 mph cross country or 15 MPH on a dirt/ unimproved road... not because it can't phsically go any faster, but because the crew can't physically take the beating, suspension systems carrying that kinda weight were the weak part, not so much because they would break, but because they transferred to much shock to the crew and equipment. To ths day kidney damage is still a real possibility for tankers from going to fast across country .. visibility buttoned up really slows down a driver . One of the things that made the HVSS Sherman so good was the suspension . I also think ground pressure , weight per square foot of track touching the ground should play a role in mobility.
However as to the intial complaint that to fast movement conveys some special advantage in siezeing the victory hexes to the player that moves first , I will say for the 100th Time , trying to sieze all the center hexes on the first move just spreads out the guy who moves first.. anybody moving second that masses thier forces and attacks just one of the outside/ edge victory hex groups gets an automatic 3 to 1 advantage , and places themselves in a position to take victory hexes up or down the map with a massed force against some poor guy ( who moved first) now trying to hold every hex on the board with spread out forces. So tactics really can cure that false advantage.
As to US/Soviet 50 cals being an unfair advantage , LOL that is like saying German Tiger tanks are an unfair advantage for the Germans ..
The game should reflect the fact that speed kills , the guy going fast. Armor unsuported by infantry should die easily from hidden AT guns and other horrible things in ambush if there is anything blocking line of sight within 150 yards , night fog sandstorm trees buildings hills smoke rain snow all force vehicles to slow down drastically ...
Take you family car , SUV, even a 4X4 that can do 80 even 100 mph on a paved road , and take it off road , not a dirt road , Off Road, an open field a foot high in weeds , that you are not familiar with , even if it hasn't rained in 3 days , a vehicle that you and your family depend on , for everyday survival , and see how fast you drive, see if you wouldn't want to go about the speed of a ground guide, in real iffy places , see if unexpected bumps and ditches don't really work on your mind about slowing down, way down , and this is without worrying about somebody jumping up and blowing you up. Thats actually a pretty fair comparison to WW2 era tracked suspension , oh wait to make it truely fair make sure your trunk is full of something and you have as many folks as possible cramed in so it is operating at about gross max tonage , like fully loaded halftracks and tanks would be, to say nothing of WW2 era wheeled vehicles. If you think about it a 1/4 ton 4x4 jeep is designed suspension wise to carry 500 lbs cross country , thats maxed out with maybe 3 soldiers and gear and fuel ,no MG no tow , sure on a paved road you can double that and not break a spring. I think thats where the problem lies , assuming a 30 mph tank can make 15 mph cross country. when in truth maybe 5-8 mph is closer to the truth may 2-5 in heavy woods off road , and even then stoping and looking real hard at any obstical over 2 foor high or two foot deep , before going over it without a ground guide.

_____________________________

"For Americans war is almost all of the time a nuisance, and military skill is a luxury like Mah-jongg. But when the issue is brought home to them, war becomes as important, for the necessary periods, as business or sport. And it is hard to decide which

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 32
- 1/16/2003 10:11:15 AM   
VikingNo2


Posts: 2918
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline
AmmoSgt

"owever as to the intial complaint that to fast movement conveys some special advantage in siezeing the victory hexes to the player that moves first , I will say for the 100th Time , trying to sieze all the center hexes on the first move just spreads out the guy who moves first.. anybody moving second that masses thier forces and attacks just one of the outside/ edge victory hex groups gets an automatic 3 to 1 advantage , and places themselves in a position to take victory hexes up or down the map with a massed force against some poor guy ( who moved first) now trying to hold every hex on the board with spread out forces. So tactics really can cure that false advantage. "

Learned that the Hard(Painful) way from AmmoSgt

Currently my record against Ammo is 0-37-1 ( and I worked damm hard for that draw)

On the speed issue, those fast vehicals seem to breakdown, much more frequently(insist on playing with breakdowns on), and are lightly armored, most of them can be taken out by 37mm, .50 and 12.7mm guns quite easily, or even AT rifles

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 33
Re: Artillery R.O.F. - 1/16/2003 6:57:28 PM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Capt. Pixel
[B]I would like to see the artillery ROF reduced back to the 7.1 values.

The ammo reload capability was severely modified by this change. I understand that this was an effort to reduce the overwhelming effect of artillery in the game, but other methods could be used to compensate for the supposed imbalance. Reducing initial ammo loadouts night be one way to solve the problem. Alternatively, reducing the ROF to slightly less than the 7.1 values might also help.

Someone also suggested that Artillery Effectivity be reduced to ~60%, but I haven't see the results of that suggestion yet.

Another item I'd like considered is the US .50 cal HMG. This weapon, IMHO, provides the US forces with an unfair advantage. Having a HMG with penetration capability, that fires everytime the main gun fires, just give the US forces too much advantage. The same could be said for the SO 12.7 HMG.

It's one of the reasons that I don't care to play with or against US forces. :rolleyes: [/B][/QUOTE]

The artillery will stay as is in H2H. A reduction of effectivity results in poor performence and leaves the arty pretty toothless...and unrealistic. To reduce ammo loads and the ROF isn't an option aswell...it would increase the use of onboard pieces over offboard because of the ability to reload them...due to the low ROF less ammo carriers will be needed...

It is the first time I hear someone asking to take away the only usefull weapon from the US, the .50 cal :D
Before tons of comments fly in here...it was a joke, the US had at least two or three usefull pieces of equipement ;)
I think I modeled the .50 cal pretty realistic and as this is the main criteria for H2H, I see no reason to take it away...except for making some folks very angry ;)

AmmoSgt pointed out, that the whole movement thing is actually something pretty complex in reality, modeled in the game by a more or less simple and classic movement points system...
Next to the limits this simple system sets, one should also consider, that like many other combat results the turn base forces us to abstract a lot of things...
A tank driving at full speed and firing at the end is NOT firing while moving !
It is simply a tank stopping at the end of a high speed run, aquiring target and shooting at it while not moving an inch.
There were tanks, that were faster then others in doing this, because of a good suspension, making a tank stop without much shaking, fast turrets to bring the gun in position and guns easier to stabilize then others, combined with a crew able to do that faster then others...
A Pz III in '41 meets almost every point mentioned and is excellent at this, a T-34 in '41 has problems with the one or other and is pretty poor in this discipline...
WWII tanks were not able to engage targets of the size of an armored vehicle while on the move at any realistic combat range...

If SPWW2 does not allow movement and firing shots after that, it models the turn less abstract, but IMHO also less realistic...a turn is a fluid time period were multiple statuses must be allowed for a vehicle, or other unit type.
That means, it must be possible to move, stop and fire and move again...why should the shots on the stop be so much less accurate compared to stationary shots (less accurate yes, but reasonable and not an almost exclusion of hitting).

The same with infantry assaults after moving in a HT or Jeep...if you moved that close to the tank, there must be two things given, to let that happen:
1. the tank was in whatever way suppressed, as it didn't shot the transport or disembarking troops
2. it was not covered by friendly and unsuppressed troops
I know it looks a bit odd in the VCR replay, if a HT just drives by and your tank explodes, but is it really that unrealistic ?
What is so difficult for a Jeep to approach a tank, that is buttoned down, has to deal with a StuG firing at it next to 20 men making a lot of noise in your tank with small arms hits ? A Bazooka troop drives by, using some cover or is simply very quick, jumps out, takes aim and done !
Why should it almost be impossible to get off a Jeep and engage a target ? What's the difference between sitting in a hole and firing or being a passenger, halting and take a shot ? Not much I think and the amount it matters, should be modeled in the game.
It's the same multiple statuses I mentioned before...

Whether this is realistic or not is a point of view...maybe it can be modeled better, but I have troubles to find how...the reduction of speed seems to be no answer...the assaults stay the same, just a bit less frequent, because you cannot take everything on the map to reach your target...but that's all...C&C on helps a bit again, as often you have to redirect tranports to conduct these assaults, making you pay orders...also the high amount of OPFire counters these attacks...

The main aspects of movement as it is:

- No vehicle is any close to it's max performence in a period of 2-5 min, therefore has time left
- every unit in the game is considered to be able to engage a target after other tasks done in a turn (loading, moving, whatever)

I think if we look at the turn and the movement this way, it doesn't look that unrealistic anymore...

One change in the patch for H2H might help a bit on the assault issue...searching is much harder...it is very tough to really notice every enemy unit around, sometimes even if close by...this will cause much more casualties for the careless speed rushers...the invisible guy covering your tank is the best insurance against HT close assault I can offer...everything else has too much negative effects and reduces realism on other corners...

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 34
- 1/17/2003 12:24:52 AM   
Warhorse


Posts: 5712
Joined: 5/12/2000
From: Birdsboro, PA, USA
Status: offline
I gotta step in, with a quick word about the new patch. I'm helping Panzer Leo test this new patch, and must say that I'm very impressed with the new behaviour of the infantry, indeed much harder to see, even when shooting, if my squad is at all suppresed, MG fire is also hidden nicely, but not invisible either, jump a good order squad up after enemy MG has unleashed, and there he is!! Two thumbs up!!!:D

_____________________________

Mike Amos

Meine Ehre heißt Treue
www.cslegion.com

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 35
what about tanks? - 1/17/2003 2:29:42 AM   
Gallo Rojo


Posts: 731
Joined: 10/26/2000
From: Argentina
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Warhorse
[B]I gotta step in, with a quick word about the new patch. I'm helping Panzer Leo test this new patch, and must say that I'm very impressed with the new behaviour of the infantry, indeed much harder to see, even when shooting, if my squad is at all suppresed, MG fire is also hidden nicely, but not invisible either, jump a good order squad up after enemy MG has unleashed, and there he is!! Two thumbs up!!!:D [/B][/QUOTE]

Great to read this!
What about tanks hidden capacity?
Are they harder to spot when move slow or when they stay stationary even after had being moved?

_____________________________

The bayonet is a weapon with a worker on each end

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 36
- 1/17/2003 2:47:45 AM   
Tombstone

 

Posts: 764
Joined: 6/1/2000
From: Los Angeles, California
Status: offline
Who cares if there is realism in behavior unless it creates realistic challenges for the player within the mechanics of the game engine? Looking at behaviors and testing them against subjective reality measures doesn't get us much further than discussion. The questions should be, 'Does it play right?', 'Am I doing preposterous things when I play because it's effective?', 'Is that even a problem?', and most importantly 'Am I having a good time?' (which I'm sure we all are). However, it's very likely that it could be better.

Realism at the level of the individual unit is cool, but realism at the level of the battle would be awesome. Is attack vs. defense in the game balanced appropriately for our assumptions on history? Think about the results of playing a game, not the elements that go into playing it. What results are out of whack? Then go back and try to figure out ways to fix...

Tomo

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 37
Whatever you do - 1/17/2003 4:54:01 AM   
chief


Posts: 1660
Joined: 9/28/2000
From: Haines City FL, USA
Status: offline
Let me get my two bits, 2 cents don't make it these days, in.

At my age I pay this game for intertainment, as 'Tombstone" says are we having fun ?

I found Panzer Leos H2H to be FUN, now if he modifys it, I will update and continue to have fun. Whether its exactly perfect or not will make no difference to me.

Now if someone can do what he did (P Leo) with H2h, I will also try that version. My little knowledge of this computer gaming is a drawback, but there are limitations to this game engine.

Panzer Leo you change it, and I'll use it, I plan on having fun.

I also enjoy all the comments posted in this thread, keep'em coming.
:) :cool:

_____________________________

"God Bless America and All the Young men and women who give their all to protect Her"....chief

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 38
Re: what about tanks? - 1/17/2003 6:53:39 AM   
Panzer Leo

 

Posts: 526
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Braunschweig/Germany
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Gallo Rojo
[B]Great to read this!
What about tanks hidden capacity?
Are they harder to spot when move slow or when they stay stationary even after had being moved? [/B][/QUOTE]

Yes, they are...in the battle with my second tester, Ironfist, he called for a platoon of StuGs to reinforce his dug in infantry in defense...the StuGs managed to get in cover in a few rounds before my Russians came into reach...I approached with troops on foot and didn't see them from a distance of around 250-400m...next I brought up slow moving T-34s and was only able to locate the StuGs after they fired some shots and two of my vehicles were on fire...felt not good in the game, but looked pretty realistic - I think you'll like it ;)

Like some comments noted here, it's always the thin line between realism and fun that should be the goal...realism was and is always the driving factors behind changes I make, but I do not forget the fun :)
The patch will have some nice features for "what-if" fans and rare or weird equipement...the OOBs will be set the way, that it is possible to play '46-'49 battles assuming the war lasted that long...be prepared for Kingtigers with night vision and German assault troops going at Patton tanks with the Panzerfaust 150 :cool:

_____________________________

[URL=http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/spwaw_h2h_modrework.php] [IMG]http://www.theblitz.org/member_sites/panzer_leo_spw@w/PzLeos-H2H-Title-1.jpg[/IMG] [/URL]

Mir nach, ich folge euch !

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 39
- 1/17/2003 6:54:06 AM   
Warhorse


Posts: 5712
Joined: 5/12/2000
From: Birdsboro, PA, USA
Status: offline
You BET I'm having fun, even if PL is kicking my tail in the one scenario!!:D

_____________________________

Mike Amos

Meine Ehre heißt Treue
www.cslegion.com

(in reply to Svennemir)
Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Re: Artillery R.O.F. 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

1.265