Open Beta for 2.0.11.X is Live

[CapnDarwin]

If you are interested in testing out and reporting back on the latest Red Storm Update that is in the pipeline you can down load the zip file with the EXE and Documentation (Installation, reporting, and fixes/known issues - READ IT PLEASE!! ) from the OTS website here:

Red Storm 2.0.11.1 Open Beta

These Open Beta files will be posting to Matrix via the Members Club and also via Steam Beta access in the next few days as well.

Please post any reports in the thread in the Tech Support sub forum. Thanks!

[Erik Rutins]

Please note the 2.0.11.1 Public Beta is now available in our Members Club as well.

If you have registered your copy of the game and are logged in, you can download it here.

This comes as an installer which updates all versions of Red Storm to the latest beta version. If you encounter any issues, when reporting them please note that you are playing this beta version.

Regards,

- Erik

[Ginetto]

Cap'n. I downloaded and installed 2.0.11.1 on both my Windows XP and Windows 10 PCs and played on both a couple of scenarios, but no PBEM. I'm happy to report that the download, installation and play went without a hitch. In both machines the game runs smoothly and, with respect to earlier versions, realism has been clearly improved.
As far as I'm concerned, it's good to go.
Well done! [:D]

[CapnDarwin]

Thanks for the report Gino. We have a few minor bugs to take out and we are still working on PBEM validation. We are looking at at a 11.2 release after the weekend if all goes well.

[JohnOsb]

I noticed an issue with memory leaks? How would I know if there was one on my computer?

[Stimpak]

Quick question I want to throw out with regards to accuracy.

What's the relationship between a base accuracy value and basic chance to hit the target? Ie. does a value of 18 equal a basic accuracy of 90%?
I notice that infantry still seem ineffective against armor; an RPG-18 from a fresh, veteran (8/10) platoon still only had 28% chance to hit an Abrams at point-blank range. The sheer effectiveness of tanks at very close ranges is somewhat off-putting, considering the tendency in history (See: Grozny) and other wargames for tanks to suffer in very close encounters with infantry.

EDIT: Wrong thread, whoops.

[CaptCarnage]

EDIT: added this to the other thread


Hi,

I just did the scenario Head-on twice with the Beta, and so far I observed:
- Russian helos hardly do anything
- my AD doesn't shoot at the helos (to compensate the first point? )
- in Head On, the enemy comes in 2 columns, one south and a bigger one north usually. When I put my NATO tanks on a ridge north to turn the north highway into a killzone when they ride over it, my tanks always have a huge preference for Recce kills. Even though there is a lot more dangerous hardware visible and moving up, my boys want to take out the harmless recces first.

[cbelva]

We are looking at the helo problem now. I have seen this myself in other scenarios and Rob is investigating the issue.
We have been testing AD and our test have turned up no problem to date. AD are engaging and shooting down both helos and fixed wing. If you have a saved game demonstrating this please post it or send it to us to look at.
Recce is a priority unit type. They are the eyes of the enemy and are better at spotting. There have been complaints from players wanting more control over target priority. We cannot add that to Red Storm but plan on adding for Southern Storm. Just realize-Recce is not as harmless as you think. If the enemy can't see you they can't kill you.

[clodhellmer]

Well, I had a couple of situations were my tanks engaged a BRDM unit but ignored a tank unit one or two hexes away. While killing the BRDMs the tanks killed my tanks and my tanks keep on engaging the BRDMs. This is an unfortunate situation. Hopefully Southern Storm will implement some kind of fire controll or a SOP feature.

[cbelva]

That is our plan

[Stimpak]

Any word on 2.0.11.2?

[CapnDarwin]

We are trying to knock down two issues that are very much not wanting to clear up and also been short on time with real life events.

[Stimpak]

Turns out that trying to revert back to 2.0.10bs breaks a few things.
Oh well, I suppose I'll wait until 2.0.11.2, I'm not very fond of playing Iraqi Army Simulator every time I'm the Soviets. [:(]

[CapnDarwin]

What issue are you having as the Soviets?

[Stimpak]

Seems that units within the beta are just a lot... squishier than they used to be. It seems that moving units take plenty more casualties than they used to, resulting in any attack having a much greater chance of failure. And since the Soviets are doing most of the attacking...

I have quite a few examples. One is the Thor's Hammer game I played awhile ago (An AAR of which is within the Subforum) saw my one Tank Regiment (II), despite being stacked (Infact, it was one hex per Squadron) and under very heavy artillery fires, managed to wipe out a Regiment of Soviet T-80BVs while suffering hardly any casualties at all. This occurred at all ranges, from their entry at ~2500 meters to near-contact at ~500.

Another test example provided in this post should be testament, where a battle between a screening American tank company (M1A1s), and a screening Soviet tank battalion (T-80BVs), both at their default values (Training, Morale, etc.), changed dramatically between versions. In 2.0.10bs, the Soviets won decisively as they were in optimum engagement parameters (<1500 meters, enemy outnumbered, clear lines of engagement).

However in 2.0.11.1, the Americans almost always won decisively, usually they would wipe out half the Soviet battalion before it started shooting back. Don't get me wrong, the M1A1 is an amazing tank, but I don't think it's THAT good.

[Ginetto]

I noticed a little extra squishiness too with respect to earlier versions but it depended on the circumstances and it wasn't only with the attackers.
Attackers using deliberate movement were roughly as vulnerable as before. Those using hasty movement have become slightly more vulnerable. I can't complain, though, because this more or less reflects real life.
I also noticed that defenders with HOLD orders who haven't moved for few turns are less vulnerable than those who have just received such an order, especially those given HOLD after hasty movement. Also this, I think, reflects reality (a unit has time to dig in, hide behind hedgerows or whatever).
Units with a SCREEN order are marginally more vulnerable than those with HOLD.
No doubt, also, the degree of experience of a unit is a factor, especially when given SCREEN orders.
Anyway, the game is a lot of fun and very accurate and realistic. Well done guys!

[CapnDarwin]

Just a quick update that after a very busy weekend of code work and testing and recoding and testing and then recoding stuff again, we may have taking out the last two major blocking bugs from getting 2.0.11.2 Beta up and running and hopefully a big step closer to a 2.0.11 official update after some testing over the next few weeks.