Re: Re: Great news, Bryan!

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: Re: Great news, Bryan!

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: Re: Great news, Bryan!

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Re: Re: Great news, Bryan! - 4/14/2003 2:17:05 AM

BryanMelvin

Posts: 1555
Joined: 7/28/2000
From: Colorado, USA
Status: offline

The OOBs will be out soon as well as a few other goodies - it is the goodies that are holding things up a little at the moment but well worth the wait!

_____________________________

MarauderMel

http://www.wargamer.com/hosted/Steelpanthers/index.asp

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 61

More German suggestions - 4/25/2003 8:31:17 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

Bryan, in looking over various KStNs, I noticed that the Motorcycle MG combos in MC Companies should be two, and the Motorcycle MGs should be equipped with type 004 MMGs. For accuracy, the MC Kp should also include 3 50mm mortars. At this late date, I can't see the changes being included in the "final OOb", but here they are.

_____________________________

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 62

One more comment about the "Final OOBs" - 4/26/2003 7:27:11 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

In working with the SPWaW engine, some compromises have to be made with those guys who play against the AI. Some fudging will have to be allowed to give the computer a balanced force in a given scenario or campaign scenario. I play with rarity "off", and the AI seems to be appropriately balanced with its force selections. The new "final " OObs need to take this into account, so as not to unbalance single-payer games.

_____________________________

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 63

- 6/6/2003 11:15:32 PM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Overlord
[B]Did the HE Kill for the .50cal/12.7's get adjusted down any?

How about the HE Pen for the 20mm AA guns, did it get any?

Thanks [/B][/QUOTE]

Was there any info on this? Will the 20mm's be able to kill now?

Thanks

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 64

- 6/7/2003 6:57:14 AM

BryanMelvin

Posts: 1555
Joined: 7/28/2000
From: Colorado, USA
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Overlord
[B]Was there any info on this? Will the 20mm's be able to kill now?

Thanks [/B][/QUOTE]

Answer is YES to both :D

_____________________________

MarauderMel

http://www.wargamer.com/hosted/Steelpanthers/index.asp

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 65

- 6/7/2003 9:32:55 AM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

Mwuaaahaa haaaaa haaa! thanks!

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 66

- 6/10/2003 7:34:48 PM

vahauser

Posts: 1644
Joined: 10/1/2002
From: Texas
Status: offline

I thought this was going to be an OOB change and not a "weapons effectiveness" change. Oh well.

But what I really want to know is when the new OOBs are going to be available. I'm waiting on the new OOBs to start my next campaign.

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 67

- 6/10/2003 10:13:17 PM

BryanMelvin

Posts: 1555
Joined: 7/28/2000
From: Colorado, USA
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by vahauser
[B]I thought this was going to be an OOB change and not a "weapons effectiveness" change. Oh well.

But what I really want to know is when the new OOBs are going to be available. I'm waiting on the new OOBs to start my next campaign. [/B][/QUOTE]

I hope within two weeks from now - 6-10-03 - after they are approved ;D

We have new shp files from Tracer and Rockin Harry, new LBM files, one new wav file which triggers many of the missing sounds in game (not all but many). I am doing last minute checks on oobs as well as writing the Readme text and other documents right now.

This should answer the oob question:cool:

_____________________________

MarauderMel

http://www.wargamer.com/hosted/Steelpanthers/index.asp

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 68

Thanks Bryan - 6/11/2003 2:15:06 AM

Akmatov

Posts: 495
Joined: 7/26/2000
From: Tucson, AZ, USA
Status: offline

for the ETA. I too am waiting around before starting a new campaign. Know you guys are very busy with this, and real life too I hope :D . Just having an idea of about when is a big help!

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 69

OOB and Other Issues - 6/11/2003 12:31:29 PM

BruceAZ

Posts: 608
Joined: 10/9/2000
From: California
Status: offline

Hello Everyone:

It is not often that I comment or request new or improved things with SPWAW as I have felt the product is the best available and acknowlege there are many limitations or obstacles that prevent further enhancement. However, in light of recent talk of a new release and/or OOB�s by Matrix managent, I would like to make some suggestions only from a designer�s point of view.

These little things will, in my humble opinion, enhance the game to a new level, and help when we update many of the old campaigns and scenarios, or design new ones. Of course some may not be practical or too time consuming to consider but I thought it wouldn�t hurt to voice my views..

1. I would recommend a new �unit�, if empty slots were available, for all countries: a medium truck with a white circle and Red Cross emblem on the top to signify an ambulance.

2. A new HQ icon that looks more like a real headquarters. A cluster of tents with maybe some communication gear and a trench or bunker.

3. A new railroad bridge icon that looks like a real trestle track. Our current one looks like a temporary one on pontoons.

4. A new bridge for paved roads that looks more like a covered bridge and maybe simple towers at each end that were commonly seen in Europe.

5. A real pontoon bridge that was common for many countries or seen in many movies.

6. If possible, a �rope� bridge for that can be used by infantry (only) for use on streams or river hexes.

7. Allow some of the experimental icons or pieces that Mike or others have designed to be added were applicable. For example, he designed a German experimental Heavy Tank icon that was actually used in Norway in 1940. These guys are really gifted and we should take advantage of their exceptional work.

8. If possible make it simple or easy to change the elevation of hills/mountains without using a complicated editor.

9. We have designed and developed some new units or icons that were used in many of the Mega campaigns. Since Matrix has no plans on adding new campaigns in the future, allow these to be added. For example, in MCWT, we had a Japanese transport ship that looked like an old Liberty Ship from the top or we had various non-flying aircraft (American and Japanese) that we could add to airfields to make them more realistic. We even had a working explosion icon that made the aircraft look like it was shot down.

10. I would like to see a real trench icon that is similar to our fortification hex but looks more like a typical infantry trench that was used quite frequently in WW2.

I sure there are others that designers have �wished� for or would like to see added. Please feel free to add upon my list if you have other ideas. Maybe if we are lucky, the Matrix staff will give it serious consideration even acknowledging the game�s limitations.

My last suggestion is rather a simple one. Many folks, including Bill Wilder, and myself have designed new campaigns and scenarios for SPWAW. I would like to see these added to the new SPWAW (8.0?) CD under the campaigns or scenario sections. I am sure they would like to have them and many would make an excellent addition.

Anyway, thanks for letting me express my thoughts. Good gaming!

Recon
Semper Fi

_____________________________

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 70

Outstanding! - 6/12/2003 2:20:48 AM

Vathailos

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/13/2003
From: In a van, down by the river.
Status: offline

I tell you what, I've only recently found this forum, and it's been addictive reading.

Like so many of you, I think this game is one of the best things ever produced. I was incredibly surprised when I found this out as a download on the net, after so many years with the old CD-version.

I'd like to take the opportunity with one of my first posts here to sincerely thank all at Matrix who've produced SPWaW, as well as all those fine folks who put in their time with the OOBs and H2H upgrades.

Hat's off to you all.

Airborne!

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 71

- 6/22/2003 10:28:01 AM

TheOriginalOverlord

Posts: 440
Joined: 6/20/2000
From: The Marines
Status: offline

Hey guys,
Sorry to come in so late in the OOB overhaul but I have another (I feel) legit question.

What calculations are you using to determine unit/vehicle size?

A jeep is a "2" but a Puma is a "2" as well. I don't understand how a large 8-wheel recon vehicle is the same size as a tiny jeep.

Do you use cubic footage to determine size? If you look at the German vehicles like the Maus and Jagdpanther/tigers you will see some discrepancies.

Does that make sense or am I imagining it?

_____________________________

Semper Fi!

Jeremy

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 72

- 6/22/2003 9:48:11 PM

BryanMelvin

Posts: 1555
Joined: 7/28/2000
From: Colorado, USA
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Overlord
[B]Hey guys,
Sorry to come in so late in the OOB overhaul but I have another (I feel) legit question.

What calculations are you using to determine unit/vehicle size?

A jeep is a "2" but a Puma is a "2" as well. I don't understand how a large 8-wheel recon vehicle is the same size as a tiny jeep.

Do you use cubic footage to determine size? If you look at the German vehicles like the Maus and Jagdpanther/tigers you will see some discrepancies.

Does that make sense or am I imagining it? [/B][/QUOTE]

Size is also based on the class of unit too. A scout or utility vehicle size 2 is not the same size as an Armor Car sized as a 2.
The numbers are part of the coding system.

_____________________________

MarauderMel

http://www.wargamer.com/hosted/Steelpanthers/index.asp

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 73

- 7/1/2003 11:46:06 PM

Bernie

Posts: 1779
Joined: 3/15/2002
From: Depot HQ - Virginia
Status: offline

I'm in the middle of the second battle of a WWII campaign as the Japanese and came across something that needs to be adressed. There are no Japanese landing craft or barges that can carry a gun team. They are part of my core force and right now they're swimming off-shore in a beach assault. I don't know how much longer they can tread water though. :)

_____________________________

What, me worry?

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 74

- 7/2/2003 1:29:10 AM

Wild Bill

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline

There is a way around that for the designer but I'm assuming you are playing a SPWAW manufactored campaign. Can't help you there...WB

_____________________________

In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 75

A little late in the game for this but... - 7/3/2003 2:21:25 AM

Vathailos

Posts: 346
Joined: 5/13/2003
From: In a van, down by the river.
Status: offline

I think there's a bug in 7.1.

I think the pictures in the encyclopedia/vehicle information pop-up of the Pz IVd and Pz IVe are transposed.

The "tan" one should be the e model shouldn't it? And the gray one should be the d if I'm not mistaken. Which I could be.

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 76

Re: A little late in the game for this but... - 7/3/2003 1:19:27 PM

Losqualo

Posts: 511
Joined: 5/23/2003
From: Stuttgart, Germany
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Vathailos
[B]I think there's a bug in 7.1.

I think the pictures in the encyclopedia/vehicle information pop-up of the Pz IVd and Pz IVe are transposed.

The "tan" one should be the e model shouldn't it? And the gray one should be the d if I'm not mistaken. Which I could be. [/B][/QUOTE]

You're absolutely right. Hmmm, I changed many of the ingame graphics, but didn't look at those pictures.
But that is not so much of a bug, you can change that by yourself in the OOB editor. Just switch the entries for the lbm's. Pz IV D should have lbm 9 and Pz Iv E should have lbm 129.

_____________________________

Losqualo's Homepage

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 77

oob - 7/8/2003 2:38:00 AM

88mmshock

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/14/2002
Status: offline

Have the new oob's mentioned here been released yet?

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 78

Re: oob - 7/8/2003 2:55:17 AM

Voriax

Posts: 1719
Joined: 5/20/2000
From: Finland
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by mfr
[B]Have the new oob's mentioned here been released yet? [/B][/QUOTE]

Nope

Voriax

_____________________________

Oh God give Me strength to accept those things I cannot change with a firearm!

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 79

- 7/8/2003 2:55:59 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

The 7.2 OOBs will be released to the public soon, along with some other "goodies", but I'm not sure of the exact date.

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 80

- 7/8/2003 7:19:37 AM

88mmshock

Posts: 67
Joined: 2/14/2002
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by KG Erwin
[B]The 7.2 OOBs will be released to the public soon, along with some other "goodies", but I'm not sure of the exact date. [/B][/QUOTE]

Is there a 7.2 vers of SPWAW? I currently have 7.1.

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 81

- 7/8/2003 8:25:55 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

As I understand it, 7.2 is the final official revision to the SPWaW OOBs, and there will be some new terrain icons for scenario designers. The game engine itself, as far as I know, will not be changed. This will be a game patch, but its total size, unless there's some other stuff I haven't heard about, will not be a monster. Many of the OOBs have undergone major revisions, but I'm only privy to the USMC, which I have seen and it will be correct to as near historical accuracy as the SPWaW engine will allow. I'm happy with the results, so if you want to design a new Bougainville or Guam scenario, the tools will be there. I'm thinking of revamping the older Pacific scenarios to match the new research, but that's down the road. The original scenario designers, most notably Bill Wilder, will have final say on these revisions. I'm serving only as a research assistant. The patch will be made available to you guys soon. That's all I know.

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 82

USMC Terminators (aka AMTRAKS) - 7/8/2003 8:37:50 AM

BruceAZ

Posts: 608
Joined: 10/9/2000
From: California
Status: offline

One more item for the OOB team.

I know this was supposedly fixed in version 6.0 or 7.0 but I think we did a temp repair rather than a true fix. :(

The issue is USMC Amtrak�s. The mechanized heart and soul of any Marine BLT are its Amtrak�s! :rolleyes:

The original problem was they would run into buildings and become immobilized thus driving everybody crazy. The fix was to eliminate the problem of immobilization but the Amtrak�s still drive through building after building. I call them my �Terminators� except one keeps asking for my vote. I think it was from California but not quite sure? My last campaign against the IJA was a score of 1228 with 28 AFV�s destroyed plus 3 Nells and 27 stone buildings. :eek:

Anyway, can you stop them from smashing every village in sight? I know Wild Bill likes it but he just likes to blow up buildings! :D

Thanks.

Recon
Semper Fi

_____________________________

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 83

BruceAZ - 7/8/2003 9:37:26 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

These are now now classified as type 33--Amphib. I haven't tested them, but they shouldn't be demolitions vehicles now. The availability for all the USMC armor has been altered to match historical reality, which one exception. The Scotts have been left in until the older scenarios can be reworked. I KNOW they were never there, BUT the 7.2 OOBs were designed to be retrofitting to play older scenarios. You should be pleased with the other changes regarding the D, E and F- series units, but again some compromises had to be made. Now, breaking down the D-series Weapons Company allows for each squad in a battalion to have a 30 cal M1919A4 or 30 cal M1917A1 at its disposal, which corresponds to real -life usage . You should also be pleased with the revamping of the Raider units, but I'll save those until the official 7.2 release. Wild Bill and Marauder Mel did a wonderful job with the USMC, with some input by yours truly, and I think the final version should be regarded as the definitive OOB83.

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 84

Re: BruceAZ - 7/8/2003 9:55:10 AM

BruceAZ

Posts: 608
Joined: 10/9/2000
From: California
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by KG Erwin
[B]Wild Bill and Marauder Mel did a wonderful job with the USMC, with some input by yours truly, and I think the final version should be regarded as the definitive OOB83. [/B][/QUOTE]

Thanks. I know we can never really solve the Marine MG issue so they must be separte units rather than assiged to the individual squad (as in not enough slots). Your solution should work well.

To Bill, KG and Mel: Thanks for the fixes. It will help when I update my scenarios and campaigns.

Recon
Semper Fi

_____________________________

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 85

One more thing about the LVTs - 7/8/2003 9:55:52 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

They were meant as protected troop carriers for the beach landings only. I don't think it was intended for them to become amphibious APCs for inland advance. The AMTRACS aren't Bradleys---they were originally intended to be ammo and supply humpers, so don't try to project the future onto these fragile vehicles. Simply put, if you're under fire, dismount your passengers and head for safety. There WAS an experimental attempt to mount flamethrowers on some LVTA4s at Peleliu, but I don't have any info on how successful they were. In the absence of many flamethrowing tanks, this seems to have been a desperate expedient.

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 86

Re: One more thing about the LVTs - 7/8/2003 1:15:45 PM

BruceAZ

Posts: 608
Joined: 10/9/2000
From: California
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by KG Erwin
[B]They were meant as protected troop carriers for the beach landings only. I don't think it was intended for them to become amphibious APCs for inland advance. The AMTRACS aren't Bradleys---they were originally intended to be ammo and supply humpers, so don't try to project the future onto these fragile vehicles. Simply put, if you're under fire, dismount your passengers and head for safety. There WAS an experimental attempt to mount flamethrowers on some LVTA4s at Peleliu, but I don't have any info on how successful they were. In the absence of many flamethrowing tanks, this seems to have been a desperate expedient. [/B][/QUOTE]

Quite true historically but while playing SPWAW, I enjoy the ability to move my Marines inland, in the protection of tanks, to gain a bigger foothold before disembarking. Their 50 cals sometimes come in very handy and the mobility of the track does have its advantages. Thanks for the info.

Recon
Semper Fi

_____________________________

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 87

Tank costs - 7/8/2003 11:13:34 PM

Alby

Posts: 4855
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Greenwood, Indiana
Status: offline

Dont know if prices have been looked at or not.
here is a quote from an opponent of mine,

"Geez ,......nothing stops those IS4's and my British tanks
cost more !!!"

_____________________________

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 88

German Spec Ops Squads - 7/12/2003 5:08:57 AM

KG Erwin

Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline

This was pointed out in another thread. Weapon 2 for unit 164 should be 003. I know the newest revisions have already been submitted, so rather than hold up the release any further, further changes should be sticky posted and let the gamers make the changes using the OOB editor. Otherwise, 7.2 could be held up indefinitely. The quest for perfection does have its limits, doesn't it?

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 89

Re: German Spec Ops Squads - 7/13/2003 9:53:24 PM

BryanMelvin

Posts: 1555
Joined: 7/28/2000
From: Colorado, USA
Status: offline

[QUOTE]Originally posted by KG Erwin
[B]This was pointed out in another thread. Weapon 2 for unit 164 should be 003. I know the newest revisions have already been submitted, so rather than hold up the release any further, further changes should be sticky posted and let the gamers make the changes using the OOB editor. Otherwise, 7.2 could be held up indefinitely. The quest for perfection does have its limits, doesn't it? [/B][/QUOTE]

One of the main problems with the SP series is that you only have 249 slots in oobs to make units. The German OOB uses all of these. There was simply no room to add new units to German oobs. Best thing to do is to add the LMG weapon using the editors!

:D

_____________________________

MarauderMel

http://www.wargamer.com/hosted/Steelpanthers/index.asp

(in reply to bchapman)

Post #: 90