Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

 
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 >> Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 6/30/2001 10:32:00 PM   
Warrior


Posts: 1808
Joined: 11/2/2000
From: West Palm Beach, FL USA
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Kluckenbill: I'll keep lowering the Infantry toughness setting until the game seems playable to me. Here's what I'd like to know: Is it just me? Do you other players find this level of difficulty acceptable? Didn't this come up in play testing?
I haven't played the Stalingrad campaign, but I know that many things designed for v5.1 had the defense tweaked up a bit to compensate for easy kills. Another thing is national characteristics - Russians are almost as hard to kill as Japs. But I've found that they die just like everybody else if you melee or overrun. I've had to do a lot of those since I began v5.3. You'll take more casualties getting to them, but the Russians can be had.

_____________________________

Retreat is NOT an option.



(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 61
- 6/30/2001 10:42:00 PM   
Mumdaan

 

Posts: 23
Joined: 5/7/2001
Status: offline
Before i go any further i just want to make sure you know i'm not trying to criticise or complain... just answering the question of the thread. That said, after a few days of playing 5.03 i just can't come to grips with the new infantry model. The only way to get it playable with the existing scenarios and campaign battles (don't laugh now :) , is to set the weighted advantages to something like 130% vs 70% in my favor. Not to say the infantry toughness is wrong or inaccurate, just that it's an awkward-feeling fit. (still love the game and all you guys have done to improve it, but i'll wait til CL to try it your way with the infantry :)

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 62
- 7/1/2001 2:58:00 AM   
DELTA32

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 10/2/2000
From: Girard, Pennsylvania, USA
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: What is it about tank crews that they automatically get a yellow streak down their back...
They don't get a yellow streak down their backs....fact of the matter is they are NOT trained as infantry, NOR are they equipped to fight as infantry ! AFV crews in most armies then as now....are equipped with no more than a pistol for personal protection. Tiger crews carried 1 Pistol/man (usually 9mm), and the vehicle had ONE (1), just ONE MP 40 onboard ! Not to mention that they may have only two magazines for each pistol, and probably only one mag in the MP 40 ! After an AFV takes a catastrophic hit that brews up the track....the crew is thinking only one thing: personal survival ! Few are the AFV crews who, upon bailing out of their burning hulk, looked for and joined into combat with enemy forces OFFENSIVELY ! As for your comment about Guderian using tank crews as infantry....the 101st Airborne used cooks, bakers, and candlestick makers to help defend Bastogne during the Bulge. Could they carry a weapon...yep. But, were they infantry ? Absolutely not ! They weren't trained for it....and they were fighting as infantry in an emergency. Same as a bailed out tank crew who just barely missed going up in flames with their track. Paul....you are wrong about the ability of AFV crews to function as infantry in the scope of an SPWAW scenario. Crews are too powerful, too infantry "capable", and definately too infantry "offensive". Personally, I think they need to "cower" more and look for the fastest way back to the company or troop Assembly Area. The Infamous Delta 3-2 :D

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 63
- 7/1/2001 4:24:00 AM   
Arto

 

Posts: 100
Joined: 3/9/2001
From: Suomusjärvi, Finland
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by DELTA3-2: Paul....you are wrong about the ability of AFV crews to function as infantry in the scope of an SPWAW scenario. Crews are too powerful, too infantry "capable", and definately too infantry "offensive". Personally, I think they need to "cower" more and look for the fastest way back to the company or troop Assembly Area. The Infamous Delta 3-2 :D
Well, I´m not Paul...but I think if the crew had had any kind of battle experience they would not have been running to home after their tank had been destroyed or damaged. At least hier in Finland the crew members were well trained and they weren´t in total panic when tank got a hit and I think this is same in other countrys too. [ June 30, 2001: Message edited by: Arto ]

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 64
- 7/1/2001 4:28:00 AM   
General Mayhem

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Country of six thousand lakes and one truth
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Kluckenbill: I'm concerned that with the new infantry toughness, it will take too long to dig enemy infantry out of defensive positions, thus making it hard to atain vicory conditions in the time alloted. You can't just bypass them when they're dug in on the victory hexes!
I agree what comes to short time, but I do think infantry toughes is OK. I've been mostly playin US vs. Japanese/Germans, and I've not found (yet) infantry thoughness too bad. What I've found is that time may run out too quickly, because dealing with infantry now takes longer time.´ Also role of engineers and MG's is now more important, but I think this is realistic. I think real trick is just to get enough firepower to get them moving. Or/and have a decisive advantage in manpower which allows to have unsupressed troops that enter to melee. Third thing is to avoid attacking in terrains that allows lot of cover without clear and definite advantage in first two parts. Seems realistic to me. However, artillery is now bit too effective(or other cannon fire too ineffective) in my opinion. While I can't suppress easily troops in urban hexes with tank guns despite I destroy whole houses, it seems enough big artilery guns firing purely on guess work, succeeds in it much better. It's like houses would have no roof or diffrent levels, but bunker like a walls that don't get destroyed whatever one does.

_____________________________

----------------------------- Sex, rags and and rock'n roll! ------------------------------

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 65
- 7/1/2001 7:22:00 AM   
Paul Vebber


Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline
Here is a true story taken from http://www.tankbooks.com/youngkid/chap26.htm about a "super tank crew". I may indeed be wrong about them in general, but its a wonderful story of true heroes...who existed in all branches... Saturday, 19 January, 1946 Colonel Robert L. Bacon, Headquarters, 8th Service Command, Dallas, Texas. Dear Colonel Bacon, In compliance with your request, I submit for your information an account of the action in which I was wounded. It was on 10 July, 1944, while I was attached to the First Battalion, 359th Infantry, that I was told that the Third Battalion, 358th Infantry, was surrounded by a strong force of SS paratroopers in the Foret de Mont Castre. This information was brought to me by Lt. Harlo J. Sheppard, who was motor maintenance officer of Company C, 712th Tank Battalion. Since the First Battalion, 359th Infantry, was on its objective and I was eager to engage the paratroopers, I went immediately to Captain Leroy Pond, C.O. of the First Battalion, to ask permission to go to the assistance of the Third Battalion, 358th Infantry. He gave permission but requested that I return to his command as soon as possible. I went back to my tanks and called the tank commanders together, giving them the information I had received, and told them of my plan to reach the encircled infantry battalion. After instructing the platoon sergeant, Staff Sergeant Abraham I. Taylor, to meet me at a designated place on Hill 122, I got in a quarter-ton truck with Lieutenant Sheppard and went to the Foret de Mont Castre to make a personal reconaissance of the situation. When Staff Sergeant Taylor arrived on Hill 122 with the tanks, I called the tank commanders together to give them orders for breaking through the enemy line. Lieutenant Sheppard volunteered to command one of the tanks in the attack. I placed him in the No. 4 tank. I then got in my tank and led the assault upon the enemy position. Encountering only small arms fire, I had no difficulty in destroying the enemy and reaching the position of the Third Battalion, 358th Infantry. Upon my arrival at the Third Battalion O.P., I reported to Lieutenant Colonel Jacob W. Bealke, C.O. of the Third Battalion. Colonel Bealke and I immediately made plans for launching an attack upon the remainder of the paratroop forces in the Foret de Mont Castre. From the interrogation of eight captives, we learned that our enemy was the 15th Regiment of the Fifth SS Paratroop Division. This regiment had been in the line only two days. In the assault wave were one company of infantry and the first platoon, Company C, 712th Tank Battalion. My tanks were deployed in line, with riflemen in line between the tanks. Enemy resistance was fierce, and the thick underbrush made the infantry advance extremely hazardous and slow. My four tanks were soon almost alone in the attack. We overran many enemy machine gun positions, killing the crews. On reaching the hard surface road at the edge of the Foret de Mont Castre, which was the objective, I made a rapid estimate of the situation and saw that it was possible to continue the attack and assault the enemy positions in a hedgerow approximately 800 yards to my front. I gave the order over the radio to continue the attack and destroy the enemy. Leading my platoon across the road and into the open field, we were successful in destroying many machine gun nests and in killing large numbers of paratroopers. Enemy resistance was broken by our vicious assault. Continuing the assault to the enemy positions in the hedgerow, we quickly neutralized their firepower. During the entire action in the open field, we were subjected to terrific bombardment from artillery and mortars. Three tanks arrived at the hedgerow without casualties. The tank commanded by Lieutenant Sheppard became stuck in a marsh almost immediately after crossing the hard surface road. Lieutenant Sheppard reported this to me at once, and I told him to give supporting fire. From that position, Lieutenant Sheppard was able to support my advance by firing ahead of me. He did this despite the artillery and mortar fire falling all around him. His turret hatch covers were open all the time, as were those in the other three tanks. The purpose of open turrets was to enable the tank commanders to better observe and to fire the machine guns mounted on top of the turrets. Lieutenant Sheppard did an excellent job commanding the tank and directing its fire. The fight from the tanks at the hedgerow was devastating on the paratroopers. I did not continue the attack from this position because I didn’t have adequate infantry support, and I estimated my position to be about on line with the Third Battalion, 359th Infantry, on my right flank. I did not know exactly where the Third Battalion, 359th Infantry, was located, and I did not want to advance too far and risk getting cut off from friendly forces. All was in our favor in this position. I was waiting for Colonel Bealke to bring his infantry up to occupy the excellent positions I had taken. Then, suddenly, an anti-tank gun opened fire on me from my left front. It fired only one round at my tank, which bounced off the left sponson. Immediately, I transmitted to the other tanks to search for A.T. guns. While I was searching for the gun that had fired at me, an A.T. gun on my right flank opened fire on my tank. The first round pierced the tank through the right sponson and came through a 75-millimeter ammunition rack, igniting the powder. Because of the intense heat and fire, I gave the order to abandon tank. I assisted my gunner, Corporal Rothschadl, in getting out. I went under the 75-millimeter gun to get my loader, Pfc. Dzienis, but was unable to locate his body. The tank was a huge ball of fire, with flames leaping out the turret several feet into the air. Subconsciously, I knew that I had been hit. Not until I had crawled to the top of the turret and jumped to the ground, did I realize that my right foot was gone. My first concern was for the safety of my crew. I called for my driver, T-4 Gary. He came at once and said neither he nor the bow gunner, Pfc. Kiballa, were wounded. With assistance from Gary, I was able to get over the hedgerow to my right flank. It was necessary to get out of the field where the tank was burning because of the great danger of exploding gasoline. While my crew and I were abandoning our burning tank and getting over the hedgerow, the enemy A.T. guns destroyed the remaining tanks. Using my belt as a tourniquet around my right leg, I was able to stop the spurting of blood from the severed artery. The German paratroops seized this opportunity to attack us. Despite severe burns to my hands and face and the loss of my right foot, I was fortunately able to organize a defense among the few surviving tankmen and infantrymen. We fought the paratroops with any weapon in our possession. Tommy guns, rifles, carbines, knives and fists were used to kill them. When my own tommy gun was out of ammunition, I had to use a knife on one paratrooper who was choking a wounded infantryman. Most of my small force was killed or wounded in a short time. Realizing that Colonel Bealke couldn’t get to me in time, I ordered a withdrawal. I ordered those men not seriously wounded to assist the seriously wounded in getting back to the infantry line. In my opinion, every man who could walk and see left the field. I also requested that an aid man and three litter teams be sent to me as soon as possible. An infantryman who had been shot in both legs, my gunner, who was horribly burned, and I remained in a small field adjacent to my tanks. I can’t imagine why those SS paratroopers didn’t jump over the hedgerow and kill the three of us. The only plausible explanation in my opinion is that they thought we were already dead or would die very soon. Several hours later, a German aid man did come over and look at us. He did nothing for the infantryman. He bandaged Corporal Rothschadl’s hands. He looked at my right leg and checked the belt I was using as a tourniquet, then he bandaged my hands. That was all. I asked him to give us water, but he refused. The next day, 11 July, very early in the morning I heard men walking along the other side of the hedgerow. I thought it must be the aid man and the litter teams. I called out to them but received no reply. Sensing that it was an enemy patrol, I secured a tommy gun and two magazines which were nearby. I rolled over to the hedgerow and crawled on top of it. I saw several German soldiers walking away from me toward the American line. Becoming enraged, I emptied both magazines in their direction. I don’t know whether I killed any of them. They disappeared at once, probably thinking it was an American patrol firing at them. I didn’t see them again. Later in the morning, a German force of about one platoon came into my field and dug in. They didn’t bother the three of us who lay there wounded. They had already finished digging in when our own artillery opened fire on this field. The German artillery is good, but ours is much better. Countless numbers of shells fell in that area. At times I was deafened by the explosions and covered with dirt. The Germans were terrified in their holes, as were we three Americans on top of the ground. We were almost paralyzed with fear. Several Germans were killed and wounded in the barrage, which lasted for what seemed hours. My gunner didn’t get hit. A shell landed between the infantryman and me, which hit both of us. One shell fragment hit my left leg, knocking it off about seven inches below the knee. Other pieces of fragment hit me in both legs above the knees and in the back. I immediately tied my belt around my left leg as a tourniquet. The infantryman called to me that he had been hit. I crawled to him and saw blood spurting out of his right leg. Taking his belt, I used it as a tourniquet. Because of my burned hands and German bandages, I was unable to twist it tight enough. With his helping me turn the stick, I was able to stop the bleeding. I tore his clothes off as best I could to look for further wounds. He had been hit in several places on the right side. I had no first aid kit, therefore I was unable to do more for him except to bandage him with strips torn from his shirt and pants leg. When I had finished with him, he was apparently resting as well as could be expected. There was no excessive amount of blood lost. During the rest of that day, I maintained close watch on both our tourniquets. The artillery fired a few volleys every hour for the rest of the day. It was HELL! Sometime after noon of the next day, 12 July, the infantryman told me he was getting to die. He said that our infantry would never attack through our field and find us. I knew that if he continued to feel that way he would surely die. I assured him that our men would find us, and soon. I used every argument I could think of to persuade him to want to live. For a while I was successful. Later he said that he was dying. I tried everything again. I begged him. I bullied him. I pleaded with him. But I failed. I was holding him in my arms, praying to God to not let him die, when he took his last breath. I was heartbroken to lose him and I, too, wondered if our men would ever find us. Again I asked Him our creator to send aid. No man can know the HELL of losing both feet and wondering if his men will find him in time to save his life until he experiences the things I did in that field. About an hour after the infantryman had died, I heard small arms fire near my position. I knew that it was our men making an attack. In a few minutes, our infantry came over the hedgerow chasing the German paratroopers. The first man I saw was Lieutenant Claude H. Lovett of the 357th Infantry. I called to him, and he came to me. He gave me a canteen of water and left one man with me until a litter team came to evacuate Corporal Rothschadl and me. I knew then that we were safe again. In closing, I want to emphasize that my platoon was composed of the most courageous men on earth. They fought and died valiantly. I admired and respected each of them. Without their aid and willingness to follow me anywhere at any time, I could not have accomplished the missions which I undertook. To the enlisted men of my platoon goes all the credit for my success as a soldier. Respectfully yours, James F. Flowers

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 66
- 7/1/2001 9:16:00 AM   
DELTA32

 

Posts: 81
Joined: 10/2/2000
From: Girard, Pennsylvania, USA
Status: offline
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Arto: [QB] Well, I´m not Paul...but I think if the crew had had any kind of battle experience they would not have been running to home after their tank had been destroyed or damaged. Where would they run to ? How effective could they fight without their PRIMARY weapon...their AFV ? What kind of small arms do they have at their disposal ? What kind of radio communications do they have on themselves (nothing) ? When they bailed out....did they all make it ? When they bailed out....did anyone have a chance to even grab a canteen of water ? At least hier in Finland the crew members were well trained They are probably most certainly well trained....as Tank crewman ! Not infantry ! and they weren´t in total panic when tank got a hit and I think this is same in other countrys too. They may not be in total panic....but, their adrenalin is pumpin' and they are scared ****less ! Chances are that one of them didn't make it out alive, and even if they all made it out alive their training as tankers will not substitute for them being only an ill-equipped, wounded, frightened, poorly armed remnant of what was once a fine fighting machine....their tank ! The point here is that within SPWAW crews are depicted as way too powerful, way too offensively capable after their primary weapon has been destroyed. Are they still soldiers ? Surely they are. But, their ability to function as a well-armed, coordinated, infantry equipped TEAM doesn't exist and consequently they should NOT be as "capable" as the game depicts them. Certainly in occasional situations exceptional men will rise above the others in exceptional situations. But, these types of men are the exception, not the norm. As I wrote earlier....the game would better depict the inability of crews to function as infantry if they cowered more, and went looking for home....which is not an indicator of cowardice but, rather the crews desire to save their lives and report back to their UNIT ! ! ! ! Delta 3-2

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 67
- 7/1/2001 11:25:00 AM   
David Heath


Posts: 3274
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Staten Island NY
Status: offline
Hi Guys I guess I let it out. We are working on v5.4 and improving things. Look you don't like it don't wimp out and quit. Give us your feed back and lets see what can be done. This is the first time we really have not had 100% yea to an update. Let us hear what you got to say. Matrix has always been a company that listens and tries to give the people want they want. For the record we are not 100% happy with the v5.3 either.... so Mike Wood, Paul Vebber, Bill Wilder and myself are working on it. It will be a little while before we are done so do nag us yet.... but please play v5.3 and help us make all of us a better SPWAW game. --------------------

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 68
- 7/1/2001 11:30:00 AM   
Mark Ezra

 

Posts: 340
Joined: 12/29/2000
From: Jasmin Ranch, Acton CA
Status: offline
The limits of SPWAW should now be clearly evident: A well trained Tank crew in SPWAW IS the tank. The experince and morale exist in the crew leader and the crew members, not the tank. So when the tank is damaged out goes your super crew. With all the tricks Paul as applied the crew still is a function of their numbers. High experience and morale will punch through and develope super crews. It can't be avoided and simply must be understood in the context of the game engine. If we don't like it, get a new engine. Isn't that what CL is all about? Asking (in some cases demanding) that Matrix "fix" this is just a waste of their time. It can't really be fixed. So why don't we let Matrix get on with the work of creating a brand new game that has the potential to move past SPWAW and it's well worn engine. No matter if we discuss crews, zook teams, snipers or the last guy in the sqd...it's all about experience and morale points...fixed numbers that the engine must respond to.

_____________________________

All Hail Marx and Lennon

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 69
- 7/1/2001 12:22:00 PM   
Commander Klank

 

Posts: 226
Joined: 10/15/2000
From: Killleen, Texas
Status: offline
I've played several infantry based senrios using 5.3 and I must say I'm impressed. Once infantry get hunkered down in good cover (like a wrecked building or shell holes in a wooded area) they are very hard to dig out. I also like the new effectivness of MGs on infantry (esspesaly in the open or moving). It took three squads of German infantry three whole turns to dig a ATR team out of a smoke coverd woods hex with shell holes in it. While it was aggervating I felt it was rather realalistic at the same time. Locating two men hiding (they shot at no one) in a smoke filled 50 meter heavaly wooded area (full of craters to boot!) would be very difficult mif not impossible: esspesally if your getting shot at also! I finally had to isolate thier hex and assalt in for a melee attack (which worked). There was a Soviet squad (Of about 7 men) behind them who kept tearing up any unit that fired at or moved into the ATR's hex. I had to work on suppressing the heck out of them too! (Mortars finaly did the job). Good job Matrix crew!

_____________________________

Commander Klank


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 70
- 7/1/2001 2:14:00 PM   
RobertMc

 

Posts: 134
Joined: 5/10/2000
From: Birmingham, Alabama, USA
Status: offline
My 2 cents on 5.3. My opinion may not be worth a penny, but anyhow... I recall someone saying a long time ago on this board that the danger of making a wargame true to life was that it might become "tedious", since in reality it's very hard to kill people (generally speaking) with rifles on a chaotic battlefield at any kind of range. My own personal preference is a fast-moving game that I can play eight to ten turns in thirty minutes or so. Therefore I have stayed with 4.5 (though I bought the 5.0 CD), have made all sorts of changes in the database to speed the game up and improve things or "erode" things as I see fit in my perception of WW2 battles. This is what the editor is for and I'm as happy as a clam to stay right where I yam.

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 71
- 7/1/2001 4:07:00 PM   
Arto

 

Posts: 100
Joined: 3/9/2001
From: Suomusjärvi, Finland
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by DELTA3-2: Where would they run to ? How effective could they fight without their PRIMARY weapon...their AFV ? What kind of small arms do they have at their disposal ? What kind of radio communications do they have on themselves (nothing) ? When they bailed out....did they all make it ? When they bailed out....did anyone have a chance to even grab a canteen of water ?
They had submachineguns etc (even rifles). Infantry doesn´t need radios to fight. Some got out alive and they were able to continue fighting. Usually the tank didn´t explode right after the hit and the crew had time to get out and take their guns.
quote:

They are probably most certainly well trained....as Tank crewman ! Not infantry !
Wrong, everyone were also trained to fight as infantry in the beginning of training. And everyone can fight without training (take a gun, take cover, shoot the enemy). The crew members weren´t stupid.

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 72
- 7/1/2001 5:06:00 PM   
Coldfire

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/16/2001
From: Ripley, TN. U.S.A.
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by David Heath: Hi Guys We are hard at work with Combat Leader and we want your input on what you think of v5.3 Thanks for your time.
What I think of v5.3 is that I'm going back to v5.01. In the first battle of the MCampaign patched with v5.03, I can't count the times I've had a Brit squad out in the open with three of my engineer squads surrounding it blazing away with rifles, MG's, FLAME THROWERS, and SCharges, and NOTHING dies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Come on, three flame throwers going plus satchel charges and I barely put any suppression on it, as it's able to fire back durring it's turn into my engineers. Another thing that has got my goat is the 25lb guns in the sandbag emplacements. O.k., I can understand that when I'm shooting at the "unit" that the crew heads for cover. I can understand that is why I'm not hurting the crew. But that BIG 25lb gun ain't going no where, so the crew toddles off to the bunker, my Pz. III with the 99% to hit should be turning that 25lb gun into so much scrap metal. Does that happen. Nope. I finish my fire, end my turn, the crew of that 25lbr remans the untouched gun and turns my Pz. III into scrap metal. Hhhhmmm, what's wrong with this picture? Me thinks the the units with feet are just a little too 'strong'. V5.01 was just fine so that's what I'm sticking with. TTFN. [ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: Coldfire ] [ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: Coldfire ]

_____________________________

Coldfire "Gamey, whiny, collegiate legal butt, fancypants, pompous ass, flaming asshole, son-of-a-bitch" Appellations by Lt. Dan, 'Delta 3-2'

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 73
- 7/1/2001 5:53:00 PM   
Tortfeasor

 

Posts: 137
Joined: 9/4/2000
From: helsinki. Finland
Status: offline
I've been playing SPWaW 2-3 years now and I am VERY pleesd with 5,3. The only thing that I miss in this game is a cofee cup with a SPWaW logo :p 1: the reverse gear for tanks. 2: when you move the vehicle on the map by pressing on the mouse button, happens wery offen a irritating "run away tank" :mad: that problem can be removed. I have been thinking if it is posible to add A attribute that when you press on the tank with your mouse then there should be A observable read line that shows what way the tank are going to drive, if you forgot that you have presed on the tank icon and you miss the next icon, then happends that "run away tank" but if you se the read line then that mistake will not hapend so easy, and by only moving the mouse you can se witch way the tank are going take.

_____________________________

My opinion might have been changed, but not the fact that I am correct.

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 74
- 7/1/2001 7:03:00 PM   
Joe Osborne

 

Posts: 126
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Somewhere on a beach
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Coldfire: What I think of v5.3 is that I'm going back to v5.01. In the first battle of the MCampaign patched with v5.03, I can't count the times I've had a Brit squad out in the open with three of my engineer squads surrounding it blazing away with rifles, MG's, FLAME THROWERS, and SCharges, and NOTHING dies!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Come on, three flame throwers going plus satchel charges and I barely put any suppression on it, as it's able to fire back durring it's turn into my engineers.
Did you do this from inside the same hex or from 50 meters away?....throwing a satchel charge across as much as 100 meters (the scale of 2 hexes...if you're in one and the target is in the other)or firing a flamethrower that distance is not the most accurate method of destruction imho. The addition of melee in this game is a key element to be used to kill infantry...it was in WW@2. I would agree that MG fire should have a more devastating effect on troops in open ground. My take on 5.3? I finally have a version I love! :D Joe Osborne

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 75
- 7/1/2001 8:37:00 PM   
El Vito

 

Posts: 42
Joined: 3/25/2001
From: Ohio
Status: offline
So far so good with 5.3. I would like to see a reverse gear for tanks however. Being a former tank driver (m1A1 back in 86-87) I would NEVER expose my rear grill doors to the enemy. Maybe Italian tanks could have 3 or 4 reverse gears muhahaha, Just kidding folks.

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 76
- 7/1/2001 11:30:00 PM   
steel

 

Posts: 167
Joined: 6/9/2000
From: Finland, Helsinki
Status: offline
I want to see reverse gear in tank too and possibility choose what kind ammunition i use to enemy ! Steel :D

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 77
- 7/1/2001 11:43:00 PM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Yea her's another Vote for reverse gear and Ammunition choosing. I really would like to see the ability to drive backwards(even if I won't need it :D ).

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 78
- 7/1/2001 11:58:00 PM   
Del

 

Posts: 123
Joined: 4/22/2001
From: Central USA
Status: offline
quote:

Did you do this from inside the same hex or from 50 meters away?....throwing a satchel charge across as much as 100 meters (the scale of 2 hexes...if you're in one and the target is in the other)or firing a flamethrower that distance is not the most accurate method of destruction imho. The addition of melee in this game is a key element to be used to kill infantry...it was in WW@2. I would agree that MG fire should have a more devastating effect on troops in open ground.
Targeting the hex you occupy with a satchel charge or flamethrower ?!?!?! :eek: Are you mad? ;) Try it and see what happens. You will not be happy.

_____________________________

Yea though I walk through the Valley of Death I shall fear NO evil for Thou art with me.

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 79
- 7/2/2001 12:26:00 AM   
Coldfire

 

Posts: 5
Joined: 1/16/2001
From: Ripley, TN. U.S.A.
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Del: Targeting the hex you occupy with a satchel charge or flamethrower ?!?!?! :eek: Are you mad? ;) Try it and see what happens. You will not be happy.
I have, and in v5.03 not much happenes. I had a Brit crew enter the same hex as a German Engineer squad and then pop off it's little Webley and killed one engineer. The engineers cut loose with everything including the flame thrower and the satchel charge. The result, the crew shot me again for my insolence killing another engineer. I want to play 'Steel Panthers' not 'Iron Infantry', so I'm going to stay with v5.01. [ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: Coldfire ]

_____________________________

Coldfire "Gamey, whiny, collegiate legal butt, fancypants, pompous ass, flaming asshole, son-of-a-bitch" Appellations by Lt. Dan, 'Delta 3-2'

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 80
- 7/2/2001 12:37:00 AM   
General Mayhem

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 6/13/2001
From: Country of six thousand lakes and one truth
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by BigDuke66: Yea her's another Vote for reverse gear and Ammunition choosing. I really would like to see the ability to drive backwards(even if I won't need it :D ).
I agree totally, it would some time that instead of crack shooting skills, those crews would be teached how to drive backwards. Heh, I guess that's why they are so tough as a infantry! :D ------------------------------------ Scene from a training of tanker crews: Training Sergeant: That's all, any questions? Training Sergeant: Yes, private Simple? Private Simple: Sir, looking the training manual, I noticed tanks have no reverse gear???? Training Sergeant: Quite right! In this unit we don't need to retreat, so you don't need a reverse gear. If you retreat, then you're ready to join infantry! Because you propably will anyway, we've simplified training program to make you as a crack infantry units too, just in case somebody shots your tanks from behind to pieces. But remember, no retreat! DO I MAKE MYSELF ABSOLUTELY CLEAR? All trainees in union: YES, SIR!!!! :D :D :D

_____________________________

----------------------------- Sex, rags and and rock'n roll! ------------------------------

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 81
- 7/2/2001 3:04:00 AM   
Joe Osborne

 

Posts: 126
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Somewhere on a beach
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Del: Targeting the hex you occupy with a satchel charge or flamethrower ?!?!?! :eek: Are you mad? ;) Try it and see what happens. You will not be happy.
Not using the Z key but targeting a unit. On reflection I can see what would happen with a Satchel charge.. ;)...I suppose you receive damage as well....but you should be able to target a flamethrower...I'll try it.... Joe

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 82
- 7/2/2001 4:00:00 AM   
Wild Bill

 

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline
We're working on it guys. Wait for 5.4. The small unit issue is being dealt with. Wild Bill

_____________________________


In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 83
- 7/2/2001 6:01:00 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 2013
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
Here are some thoughts about Cover. Things like Walls or Trenches etc. should provide cover only to fire from certain directions and not from all. I had a Russian Infantry squad pinned at a wall and shot them from on side and then from the opposite direction but every shot was useless. This would be OK for Cover like Buildings, Foxholes etc that covers me almost total but not for Walls, abandon Vehicles, Trench etc, cross fire should be deadly if your are behind such cover. Must have looked funny to see russans jumping from one side to the other and back again :D .

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 84
- 7/2/2001 8:57:00 AM   
KG Erwin


Posts: 8981
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline
My initial impression is that 5.3 should be the Last Word. With tank overruns and melees and improved infantry survivability in cover, I can see realistic close combat in WWII coming as close as its ever going to get within the limitations of this game engine. The sounds, the music, the uncertainty of what lies around the corner or in the next building, the thrill of ambushing an unsuspecting enemy, all add to the overall game experience and are just renewing my admiration for what you've done. Sure, there may be room for more tweaking, but all of that is just icing on the cake. Job well done, guys. [ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: KG Erwin ]

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 85
- 7/2/2001 6:56:00 PM   
panda124c

 

Posts: 1692
Joined: 5/23/2000
From: Houston, TX, USA
Status: offline
The more I play the more I like. I hate/love ATRs (depends who's side they are on) they are deadly against Lt tanks, ACs, and APCs. The deadlist thing in the game is those MG armed tanks they chew up infantry like a meat grinder. :D :D :D :D :D Oh yea one thing I have noticed, the AI's habit of moving it's infantry back to the last victory hex cluster when both sides have an Advance, is now a very logical move (with the changes in the infantry routine) that make it tough to take those last victory hexes. [ July 02, 2001: Message edited by: pbear ]

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 86
- 7/2/2001 8:00:00 PM   
Larry Holt

 

Posts: 1969
Joined: 3/31/2000
From: Atlanta, GA 30068
Status: offline
I have found that when an infantry platoon leader is out of contact with its higher HQ, it can't get to the artillery fire mission screen (using the "B" key). OK, it can't call in artillery but this also means that it can't fire its own organic platoon mortars (those 50 & 60mm ones) even if its stacked with them!! Can this be looked at? Thanks

_____________________________

Never take counsel of your fears.

(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 87
- 7/3/2001 2:10:00 AM   
Joe Osborne

 

Posts: 126
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Somewhere on a beach
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Joe Osborne: Not using the Z key but targeting a unit. On reflection I can see what would happen with a Satchel charge.. ;)...I suppose you receive damage as well....but you should be able to target a flamethrower...I'll try it.... Joe
I just tested this out and not only can you target a flamethrower on a unit in a hex in a hex but you can use a satchel charge as well! I thought I'd get blown to smithereens, but didn't (of course I understand at another time I probably could... :)) The thing I did notice is my suppression increased about 10-15 points. This was a German engineer unit assaulting a Soviet Guards infantry unit. Btw, I took out 4 Sovs. Interesting...... Joe Osborne

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 88
- 7/3/2001 10:10:00 AM   
IKerensky

 

Posts: 374
Joined: 6/7/2001
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: What is it about tank crews that they automatically get a yellow streak down their back...Guderian talks of dismounting tankers to fight as infantry when he had to... 50 m is a big area, if 2 guys have a good spot, and the 10 enemy are spead out and uncoordinated they might get lucky, though to win the 10 would have fail two morale checks and teh crew pass two, then get VERY lucky rolling... Remember melee is not necessarily 10 guys making a ring around 2 guys and playing Mortal Kombat...its a mini-firefight inside the hex, all 10 men in a squad will not be able to come to bear on the defenders. crew taking out a squad is fairly common in ASL (well you need like a 2 or 3 and teh squad rolling 10 or more - assuming a 1 against a 4...its a lot more rare in here...
Yep but Paul tell me if I am wrong but weren't the crew supposed to be just exiting a burning wreck ? did this supposed to be a good defensive area ? Especially if you deal that the one that destroy the vehicule is the infantry unit or tank that also target the crew. I have no more real experience than WWIIONline but believe me , when I blow a PzIII and some crewmen dismount and try to crawl or run their way to safety they are just dead meat for a MG fire or my next HE round... obviously not at more than 250 meters...

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 89
- 7/3/2001 10:34:00 AM   
IKerensky

 

Posts: 374
Joined: 6/7/2001
Status: offline
Ilove the 5.3 but please can you do something for the A0 AI unit ? I will 99.99% of time be situated alone near the last obj zone, siometimes with 1 AA platoon sometimes really alone the result is that I cant resist blowing it in the 3-4 first turn with some art fire or 1 or 2 infiltrated squad ( ok those not in sthe 3 to 4 turn ).

_____________________________


(in reply to David Heath)
Post #: 90
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>
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

0.779