TO MATRIX:Three minor suggestions for future patches

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

TO MATRIX:Three minor suggestions for future patches

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 >> TO MATRIX:Three minor suggestions for future patches

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

TO MATRIX:Three minor suggestions for future patches - 5/26/2000 11:55:00 AM

STEELER

Posts: 65
Joined: 5/13/2000
From: Philadelphia, PA
Status: offline

Yo All, Just three small suggestions for consideration when you have time: 1) When rightclicking on an enemy unit, I would prefer the bare minimum information be available, at least when more than 2 hexes away. There was much confusion on the battlefield, where stugs were mistaken for tigers(see any work by Charles MacDonald), dummy tanks were mixed into the defense(Rommel's Cardboard division), etc. Unfortunately, the player cannot be fooled by this, and I would hope a little more fog of war could be added. 2) In reading of the many different campaigns in the desert and in the east front and even in Italy, often there was terrain that COULDN'T be "improved"....any chance to make this a bit more difficult for the units to dig in? Perhaps a stronger variable in certain types of terrain. As it is, the units seem to dig in almost anywheres after sitting for a turn or two. 3) This last suggestion might be the hardest, given the game engine, but any chance you can make an option where a target pointer appears over ANY unit, not just the enemies? Perhaps increase chance player might make a friendly fire mistake? Granted this is probably very low in your priority list but I thought it might be a cool option. Otherwise, I find the game fantastic...ignore "professional" critics, because they are usually worthless when it comes to wargames. THANK YOU, MATRIX, for a FANTASTIC GAME. TO WILD BILL...I loved RED DAWN, and the guy that did that one did THE BEAST, one of my alltime favorite war movies! Check it out, if you haven't seen it already. ------------------ Best Wishes, STEELER

_____________________________

Best Wishes,
STEELER

Post #: 1

- 5/26/2000 1:56:00 PM

Lars Remmen

Posts: 357
Joined: 5/9/2000
From: Copenhagen, Denmark
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by STEELER: Yo All, Just three small suggestions for consideration when you have time: 1) When rightclicking on an enemy unit, I would prefer the bare minimum information be available, at least when more than 2 hexes away. There was much confusion on the battlefield, where stugs were mistaken for tigers(see any work by Charles MacDonald), dummy tanks were mixed into the defense(Rommel's Cardboard division), etc. Unfortunately, the player cannot be fooled by this, and I would hope a little more fog of war could be added. 2) In reading of the many different campaigns in the desert and in the east front and even in Italy, often there was terrain that COULDN'T be "improved"....any chance to make this a bit more difficult for the units to dig in? Perhaps a stronger variable in certain types of terrain. As it is, the units seem to dig in almost anywheres after sitting for a turn or two. 3) This last suggestion might be the hardest, given the game engine, but any chance you can make an option where a target pointer appears over ANY unit, not just the enemies? Perhaps increase chance player might make a friendly fire mistake? Granted this is probably very low in your priority list but I thought it might be a cool option. Otherwise, I find the game fantastic...ignore "professional" critics, because they are usually worthless when it comes to wargames. THANK YOU, MATRIX, for a FANTASTIC GAME. TO WILD BILL...I loved RED DAWN, and the guy that did that one did THE BEAST, one of my alltime favorite war movies! Check it out, if you haven't seen it already.

I must say that I agree completely on the FOW. It would be nice to have less information on the enemy. I would also love if my own units shot at each other once in a while. For instance if one of my tanks appeared from behind a hill where another of my tanks had recently engaged enemy armour. Lars

_____________________________

"Beer is proof that God loves us and wants us to be happy" - Benjamin Franklin

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 2

- 5/26/2000 10:05:00 PM

STEELER

Posts: 65
Joined: 5/13/2000
From: Philadelphia, PA
Status: offline

>I would also love if my own units shot at each other once in a while. > Hi Lars, Yes, and perhaps Opp Fire that hits friendlies is another way to do this. I realize this last suggestion is probably hardest to program, but perhaps when working on future patch or SPNAM they might take a look(Paul already suggested a frag option for SPNAM :-)_) ------------------ Best Wishes, STEELER

_____________________________

Best Wishes,
STEELER

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 3

- 5/26/2000 10:08:00 PM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

LIke Doctor said...If it gives you too much info...don't do it :-) Seriously though, when I want to play with minimum intel on the enemy (and me!) I turn off the messages and the unit numbers. Forces me to be very discplined about my platoon deployment to keep from getting the formations mixed up and I refrain for teh urge to right click on the enemy. We hope to improve FOW if not in a patch for SP:WaW, in SP:The Nam, where expanding the limited intel rules will be a key to the right atmosphere.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 4

- 5/26/2000 10:36:00 PM

Larry Holt

Posts: 1969
Joined: 3/31/2000
From: Atlanta, GA 30068
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by STEELER: [snip] 2) In reading of the many different campaigns in the desert and in the east front and even in Italy, often there was terrain that COULDN'T be "improved"....any chance to make this a bit more difficult for the units to dig in?[further snip]

I understood that "improved" means not only actually digging in (in the case of infantry with entrenching tools) but just taking the time to settle in to the ground, using small folds, etc. to your best advantage. Even in the desert, and in any terrain with tanks, where digging is not going to be usefull, one can still take advantage of this. ------------------ An old soldier but not yet a faded one.

_____________________________

Never take counsel of your fears.

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 5

- 5/27/2000 12:18:00 AM

STEELER

Posts: 65
Joined: 5/13/2000
From: Philadelphia, PA
Status: offline

quote:

>We hope to improve FOW if not in a patch for SP:WaW, in SP:The Nam, where expanding the limited intel rules will be a key to the right atmosphere.

Yo Paul, Thank you! I know that the person can just refrain from rightclicking, and usually people like you or myself or others who have been playing for awhile will refrain. I am thinking of newbies who can't tell a silhouette of a pzIII vs a StuG just by looking at the icon, and will try to figure it out by rightclicking. In that case, I think they will get TOO much info(ie. armor thickness, how many men, etc.) I am just looking for a way to limit the amount of info, at least until you are 1-2 hexes away. Just a minor request to consider. As for digging in/improving, with regards to Larry's response, yes, almost all ground can be improved somewhat, and I should have used digging in as opposed to improving. Either way, I think that digging in seems TOO easy in the current mode. But again, this is a minor complaint, and just my opinion. And I am probably spoiled somewhat by the feature in EF. I don't like EF nearly as much as I do SP(and of course SPWAW), but there were some good features in that game that would be neat to transfer over to SP. BTW, in no way are my requests to be taken as nitpicking or griping. This is a wishlist for future consideration. I LOVE THE GAME! Great job to Paul, and Mike and all the others at Matrix! Thank you!!! ------------------ Best Wishes, STEELER

_____________________________

Best Wishes,
STEELER

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 6

- 5/27/2000 12:39:00 AM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Steeler: I don't like what it is that you're wanting. I like to get some information when right-clicking the unit, particularly the armor, because it saves me the trip to the encyclopedia to see the same thing; it's much faster. If you put your cursor over the unit, without right-clicking, a window will tell you the unit and it's status. My first reaction, if I'm thinking as you seem to be, is that I don't want to know the unit's status, like whether it's retreating, but you have to remember something here, whether the units is retreating, could bear a signifigant part in whether you continue to fire on the unit, and since there's so many units and op fire, it's easy to lose track of which units went into retreat, so I welcome such things instead. I recall one of the SP versions I played, actually showed, on right-clicking, whether the target had any remaining shots, and certainly, that was too much information for serious play.

_____________________________

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 7

- 5/27/2000 12:55:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

I guess what we need is three levels of limited intel, the cureent one wher a right click gives you "perfect intel" (down to whether the MG is operational and what the truck is carrying, to a "limited Intel 1" where just teh basic unit characterists are gien, but not specific info about the particular unit, and then a "Fog of War" optin where PzIvs occasionaly come up as Tigers etc. In my old Wittmann scenario i changed the armor and weapons of some Tigers to be PzIVs so teh play who didn't right click would see a Tiger icon on teh map, but it s armor and gun were that of a Pz IV... I'd like to see more of that sort of thing!

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 8

- 5/27/2000 8:27:00 AM

STEELER

Posts: 65
Joined: 5/13/2000
From: Philadelphia, PA
Status: offline

quote:

where PzIvs occasionaly come up as Tigers etc.In my old Wittmann scenario i changed the armor and weapons of some Tigers to be PzIVs so teh play who didn't right click would see a Tiger icon

Yo Paul, That is exactly what I am trying to do for a scenario, which is why I want the fog of war. I hate the fact someone can just right click and see all the armor thickness and all that from several hexes away...1-2, ok, but not 10. And Charles, I said it should be an option. Personally I don't like the fact that you can know immediately exactly how much armor your enemies tanks have because then you have more information than you would have if you were really in command. If you are doing 60 second turns, a trip to encyclopedia would cost you time, which is good. Why do you want everything so EASY!???? :-) ------------------ Best Wishes, STEELER

_____________________________

Best Wishes,
STEELER

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 9

- 5/27/2000 12:41:00 PM

troopie

Posts: 996
Joined: 4/8/2000
From: Directly above the centre of the Earth.
Status: offline

As far as friendly fire casualties are concerned, in a created scenario a British Para squad was in the same hex as a German squad,(It had jumped on them) A second Para squad was two hexes away. It fired, two Germans and one Brit were casualties. I've never seen that in any other SP game. And of course, we've always had friendly fire losses from artillery and aircraft. troopie

_____________________________

Pamwe Chete

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 10

- 5/27/2000 1:19:00 PM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

Ah I forgot that you are right! If you are in the same hex as enemy units you can hit your own units by mistake.

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 11

- 5/27/2000 7:11:00 PM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

Steeler: You've defeated your own point. If knowing the armor thickness is a problem, then lobby for removing the encyclopedia as well. Why do you have to right-click something when you know what it'll show you? With a game as enormous as this can be, seeing something as key as armor, and not having to go to the encyclopedia every time, is a major time saver. The only way your approach makes any sense, since you're not calling for encyclopedia removal is if any of the values showed were transient, and the armor values are not. The armor doesn't have a different rating after being pounded numerous times, and even if it did, I've yet to see the right-click data reveal this. About your point about crews not knowing about armor thickness, again, the solution is total removal of the data (no encyclopedia). Also, they may not have known the top speed either, the penetration of "their own" rounds or all manner of things, but then I suspect some commanders, which is our role in the game, did, though they didn't have as firm a grip on what to fire on within a few seconds (particualrly with tanks). This isn't an "Across the Rhine" (what an awful game) simulation and even that game, I suspect, gave you stats of armor, be that with immediate pull-up windows, or in an encyclopedia. What we are playing here, is with people who know most or all of the facts about tanks, encyclopedia, right-click option, or not. I think you're wanting to recreate the lack of knowledge the common troops or commanders may have had in certain areas, fine. The only problem is that such a thing is sort of superfluous when so many of us already know all that stuff and I would argue that non-transient data on a right-click, encourages more newbies than turns them away. I agree, seeing another unit's remaining ammo load, or seeing how many shots it has for the turn is transient in nature, and certainly shouldn't be seen. I would also suggest that there were many commanders, and probably soldiers of various ranks as well, who kept stats on various developments during combat, so that they knew, over time, just what enemy tanks were inpenetrable and which weren't. I have a book here at home called "Handbook on German Military Forces" which I suspect many commanders had, which has a date of March 1, 1945 (was restricted), which shows data beyond the scope of this game, including such seemingly obscure stats such as fording depth on the German vehicles. They even have a section on German Air Force training program. The troops learned over time, and this is reflected in the experience and morale system within the game. When you have an encyclopedia, there really isn't any fog into what the other forces are made of and right-clicking to see the same data shouldn't matter. Right-clicking in this game, isn't really very natural anyway, is it? [This message has been edited by Charles22 (edited 05-27-2000).]

_____________________________

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 12

- 5/27/2000 10:34:00 PM

STEELER

Posts: 65
Joined: 5/13/2000
From: Philadelphia, PA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Charles22: Steeler: You've defeated your own point.

Charles, I didn't, as right clicking on enemy tank in front of you is different than using encyclopedia, which gives generic info on that type of tank. By right clicking, you have info on the specific tank facing you, so if designer changed some of the stats, like Paul suggested, and I have done in a few scenarios, or the tank is damaged, you have that info immediately in front of you. Anyway, Paul's posts show understanding of my opinion, so I don't wish to belabor this point. I actually like his suggestion of 3 levels of intel, perhaps based on spotting. If you still are compelled to respond, please do so by email. Thank you. ------------------ Best Wishes, STEELER [This message has been edited by STEELER (edited 05-27-2000).]

_____________________________

Best Wishes,
STEELER

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 13

- 5/27/2000 10:39:00 PM

STEELER

Posts: 65
Joined: 5/13/2000
From: Philadelphia, PA
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Paul Vebber: Ah I forgot that you are right! If you are in the same hex as enemy units you can hit your own units by mistake.

Paul, Does this apply to AFVs? I've seen it with men in same hexes, but not AFVs. Thanks. ------------------ Best Wishes, STEELER

_____________________________

Best Wishes,
STEELER

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 14

- 5/28/2000 1:39:00 AM

Paul Vebber

Posts: 11430
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Portsmouth RI
Status: offline

Its rare, but can happen...

_____________________________

http://www.matrixgames.com/images/sig-logo-02.gif

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 15

- 5/29/2000 11:41:00 AM

Dean Robb

Posts: 204
Joined: 5/25/2000
From: Va Beach, VA USA
Status: offline

Just touching on the right-click info issue: I rather like the data available. Kinda handy if you're not a big WWII grognard. I don't use the right-click to check unit weapons status (although I have looked to see how many men are left in a mortar/gun unit) but to look at armor with an eye toward "can my weapon hurt this guy?" These are things that a WWII soldier would know...but since I'm not a WWII soldier, nor a major groggie, I *don't* know. It's handy being able to find out without having to load the encylopedia.

_____________________________

Job Security: Being a Micro$oft lawyer...

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 16

- 5/29/2000 11:50:00 AM

Wild Bill

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

Hey Paul, I forgot and wiped out half a Marine squad assaulting a pillbox in the Betio scenario where the Marines were also. Satchel charge

A very grim mistake on my part. Worse, because I still did not kill the PB...ARGH! Wild Bill ------------------ Wild Bill Wilder Coordinator, Scenario Design Matrix Games

_____________________________

In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 17

- 5/29/2000 2:01:00 PM

Voriax

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

Paul's rare thing happened to me yesterday. I was playing brits vs germans and a German tank drove into same hex with my infantry squad. Then another German tank fired at that squad but hit that other tank and blew out it's suspension.

And when it was my turn I managed to assault with that same squad and kill that crippled tank. Voriax

_____________________________

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

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 18

- 5/29/2000 4:06:00 PM

Arralen

Posts: 827
Joined: 5/21/2000
Status: offline

quote:

Originally posted by Voriax: Paul's rare thing happened to me yesterday. I was playing brits vs germans and a German tank drove into same hex with my infantry squad. Then another German tank fired at that squad but hit that other tank and blew out it's suspension. Voriax

IMHO the chance for "collateral damage" (right spelling?) is way to high !! I found it easier to whipe out platoons by firing MGs at another unit in the same hex than by targetting them directly

Arralen [This message has been edited by Arralen (edited 05-29-2000).]

_____________________________

AMD FX-4300
Gigabyte 970A-DS3P
Kingston 24GB DDR3-1600 (PC3-12800)
Asus GTX 750 Ti OC 2GB GDDR5
Seagate Barracuda SATA III 1TB
Windows 8.1

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 19

- 5/29/2000 4:37:00 PM

Voriax

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

quote:

Originally posted by Arralen: IMHO the chance for "collateral damage" (right spelling?) is way to high !! I found it easier to whipe out platoons by firing MGs at another unit in the same hex than by targetting them directly

I agree with you partly. It is true that if there is infantry and a tank in same hex it is often more useful to fire mg's at the tank thus perhaps suppressing it a bit _and_ normally killing many infantry troops via ricochets. However it is very rare that a tank main gun round hits a friendly tank, so far I've noticed it only happening once. But then you can also think that you are 'hosing' with the mg, and if there are 2-3 squads on infantry in the same hex it is beginning to get little crowded, don't you think? On the whole I'd say damage is dealt more fairly or 'realistic' way in SPWAW than in other SP series games. In those I had this image about shooting at infantry: - you fire 20 or so shots at infantry, to no avail. - Grunts laugh at you in their foxholes. - You suddendly kill one grunt. - Grunts shout 'Oh my God! A casualty' and jump up from their holes and start running around, screaming. - you gun down the rest of them.

I refer to the fact that it was darn hard to get the 1st casualty but then they began to 'crop up' rapidly. Voriax

_____________________________

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

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 20

- 5/29/2000 6:30:00 PM

Charles22

Posts: 912
Joined: 5/17/2000
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline

If Steeler's point is that he would rather have degrees of intelligence on enemy units I would agree, but once you've identified the object, be that a Tiger, it's pointless not to have Tiger info. more readily available. Perhaps the object in question could have a generic tank icon to reflect that not enough intelligence has been gathered to differentiate a Tiger from a PZIV. I was once thinking along the lines that sometimes a unit dashing from one set of woods to another, would have something of a blur factor, where you know something is over there. The only problem with this is that there is more than one unit that most likely can see a scampering unit, though neither may be able to pinpoint anything more than it was a vehicle. On a side note, thanks to Steeler's objection, I have noticed some data which SHOULD NOT be shown through right-clicking. I haven't made a thorough study, but I have noticed that tanks right-clicked will UPDATE how many men are still combatants in the ENEMY tank. Now, for open units such as AT guns, this makes sense, as the program already shows us when guns lose crews, and the human player shouldn't be penalized for not having a computer mind to know just when and where all guns had loses (elsewise why display the loses in men?). On a sidenote concerning crews, the French S-35 shows a 3 man crew, however after an 88mm lights them up, suddenly the crew, on abandonment, becomes 7 men strong, and is called something like a command unit. As if the S-35's aren't tough enough, now Gerry has to worry about the reserve French armies that come out of them

Viva La France indeed.

_____________________________

(in reply to STEELER)

Post #: 21

Page: [1]

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> TO MATRIX:Three minor suggestions for future patches

Page: [1]