Matrix Games Forums

To End All Wars Releasing on Steam! Slitherine is recruiting: Programmers requiredPandora: Eclipse of Nashira gets release dateCommunity impressions of To End All WarsAgeod's To End All Wars is now availableTo End All Wars is now available!Deal of the Week: Field of GloryTo End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!Ageod's To End All Wars: Video, AAR and Interview!To End All Wars: Artillery
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   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
- 7/1/2001 8:06:00 PM   
Panzer Captain


Posts: 265
Joined: 11/24/2000
From: Bedford, NH, USA
Status: offline
Perhaps i am missing the significance of the issues here, but from a tactical point of view, why would anyone committ 3 squads and a tank crew to eliminate a 3-troop contingency when there are far more important objectives to attain in the oveall scheme of things? Panzer Captain

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 31
- 7/1/2001 8:40:00 PM   
ruxius

 

Posts: 907
Joined: 5/5/2000
From: ITALY
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Panzer Captain: why would anyone committ 3 squads and a tank crew to eliminate a 3-troop contingency when there are far more important objectives to attain in the oveall scheme of things?
IMO The answer of your question seats in the fact that this invincible crews , snipers etc.. are acting an active role sometimes better than other more specific units , and this happens beyond the fact they still can stay unspotted... If difficulty to eliminate them means they are providing a superb cover for themselves this would also mean they can't destroy tanks ecc.ecc. except for rare odds.. It seems not to be so in ver.5.3 While crews are looking for their cover, we should remember that hunting-for-them infantries are not masses of blind soldiers unable to locate where fire arrives from ! I agree that an hex may offer good chances for hiding..but they can't appear and then doing (while not receiving) damage.. if crews were not harmful players will easily not care about them.. Three inf squads should not loose their 'credit' compared to a crew.. On the other hand I would defend the idea that brought us a version 5.3 : it's good that a crew sometimes can add more fun to SPWAW but no super-powers... Now I think it's only a question of balancing things better.. I raise my favor again for the point of MallusDei and I would also add that powering up infantry should not lower down a tank authority in the battlefield,unless the tank put itself in a dangerous way... [ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: ruxius ]

_____________________________

Italian Soldier,German Discipline!

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 32
- 7/1/2001 9:09:00 PM   
General Mayhem

 

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

Originally posted by ruxius: ... Now I think it's only a question of balancing things better.. I raise my favor again for the point of MallusDei and I would also add that powering up infantry should not lower down a tank authority in the battlefield,unless the tank put itself in a dangerous way... [ July 01, 2001: Message edited by: ruxius ]
Far as I've understood, only very brief time tanks offered clear advantage over other forms of arms in II world war. Mainly early campaigns Germans had 39-41. More war went on, I've understood tanks became more to support infantry against other tanks and also support them against other infantry. What came propably overstates is that every and each squad can assault with hand grenades alone easily. Which makes me bit wonder why develop AT weapons at all? I don't know, but I bit suspect each and every trooper didn't try in II world war climb top of tank while it motion, and then being able to open the hatch dropping grenade the inside the tank. :confused: Propably problem with game engine.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 33
- 7/1/2001 9:21:00 PM   
TheChin


Posts: 88
Joined: 4/20/2001
From: Cleveland,OH,USA
Status: offline
There is a simple solution: Alt-O and Alt-M I just played a scen under 5.3. I started the big campaign but decided to start with Japanese cuz it doesn't seem to be very popular and I wanted something different. I cranked the clock back to 39 and started in East Asia. My first battle was against the Sovs and in 39, it was a HUGE infantry battle. At first I was making no headway, doing the exact tactics mentioned elsewhere, surround squads/crews/snipers with tanks and infantry and fire away. All I got was suppression and a few casualities, but the enemy was pinned and not a factor. So I started running into the hexes with them after suppression and using the overrun/melee and I started mopping them in nothing flat. I know it was japanese and they have good melee (Banzai! Banzai! Banzai!) but it really shouldn't be that different for others. It's another case of people unwilling to change their tactics to suit their enemy. I for one, would not want any of these people giving up on 5.3 to be Generals in my countries army. The first curve ball the enemy would throw at them and they would quit. Alt-O,Alt-F...Use It, Live by It, Win by It... at least where infantry is concerned. One thing I love about 5.3 is that tanks have assumed their real role, Infantry support. They aren't WWI biplanes out duelling other tanks in some kind of romanticized dance. They are there to provide hardened gun support so that the infantry can take ground and hold it.

_____________________________

"Conan, what is best in life?"
"To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women!"

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 34
- 7/1/2001 9:25:00 PM   
m10bob


Posts: 7143
Joined: 11/3/2002
From: Dismal Seepage Indiana
Status: offline
i like ver 5.3 but nothing is perfect..at Malmedy,the survivers did survive because they literally jumped up and ran,with perhaps a hundred "witnesses",many firing with smg's,lmg's,and rifles..i'm pretty sure that's not an isolated incident..i do feel however that once a unit (or depleted unit) has been "spotted",by the next game turn anyway,it SHOULD be much easier to either hit or cause to "meld into the woodwork"..perhaps the frustrations we feel at unloading "turn after turn" are the same as the grunts after missing a "flagrant target",i just don't feel it would be a "miss" after too many rounds...every g.i. i know had to "qualify" before he (or she) got out of basic...the orig SP was too abstract..if a unit even "looked" at an enemy it got 5 or 6 kills,(which might be good for an ambush,but sure not typical)..if it can just be tweaked to a typical "drop" of 1 or 2 every time a full squad fires,(target in the open)i feel it would be more credible of historic fact..i already got in trouble a few months ago when i said arty killed way more than the small rounds,but then again,the infantry wasn't just boiled cabbage either....I THANK MY LUCKY STARS FOR THE CREW AT MATRIX AND WILL NEVER DESERT THEM FOR DISAGREEING WITH ME,and sure as hell want take my ball home,but as much as i want this to be a reflection of real history,it's a game folks,and these good people have kept a game alive that might have fallen by the wayside already!!!!KEEP IT UP MATRIX AND CONTINUED SUCCESS!!!! :cool:

_____________________________




(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 35
- 7/1/2001 9:26:00 PM   
Big Bill

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 3/24/2001
From: LI. NY. , USA
Status: offline
Did I miss something??? I would think a good reason to completly eliminate a unit would be to score a kill. Isn't this how you build up expereance ratings for your troops in a campaigne game?? I also agree that it should be harder to spot smaller units but the tremondious amount of fire power and time on target you have to expend to eleminate a sniper just isn't realistic...so I'll be waiting for the patch while still playing the best war game out there!!

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 36
- 7/1/2001 9:27:00 PM   
krull

 

Posts: 513
Joined: 5/8/2000
From: USA
Status: offline
I going off the fact 50 ms is alot ground whenye ron foot. AS for these remarks if ya can see it ay can kill it. Thats it YOU the player might see it. But your troops?. How many of yall been in real firefights. You usualy dont know if its 1 guy or 50 if its nosiy from friendly fire and enemy fire. MOST troops tend to spray an area. the above post on if he sees it he could kill it is wrong. I have 9 purple hearts bud. And it took over 1000 rounds to get me in buildings jumngle and rocks. Thats from Several groups of men all firing. My brothes went thru WW 2 while i was to young. My older brother died in korea. he had 24 Armored vehicle kills in WW 2 and 12 in korea as a bazooka man. He lost alot loaders but that didnt stop them. On the way home for Chosen. We got shot up surrounded Artillaryed bombs tank rushed infabtry charged. And Alot times we had to be on open sloops and roads. SO please tell me why people think ANY man on foot should be weak? Youd be surprised how tough men bailying out of trucks tanks jeeps kitchens hospital beds can be when in combat and afraid of dieing. Most men dont just flee. Some will some wont but if they dont think they can make it a 102 pound punk can tur into one of the most Vicious killers people have every seen. crews need some toning down but its not unusual to have whole battalions hunting down a small grou of men behind lines. Use nam and Korea as An example. As well as WW 2. It happened quit alot.

_____________________________

Krull

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 37
- 7/1/2001 9:36:00 PM   
TheChin


Posts: 88
Joined: 4/20/2001
From: Cleveland,OH,USA
Status: offline
y'know, I'm more upset about this original post then I thouight. How can anyone "regret" buying the MC when they haven't gotten it yet? It's ridiculous! Especially because it is 5.01! And who said 5.3 was the final version? I've never seen that posted anywhere. It's a work in progress and will continue to improve until Combat Leader at least. I'm starting to get a "temper tantrum" vibe from that post. Maybe such emotional outbursts worked well with Zel's mommy, but we're all adults here.

_____________________________

"Conan, what is best in life?"
"To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women!"

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 38
- 7/1/2001 9:39:00 PM   
Big Bill

 

Posts: 177
Joined: 3/24/2001
From: LI. NY. , USA
Status: offline
To Thechin I was playing USMC vs. Japan and had snipers and SNLF units compleatly supressed, surronded, overrun, and melee turn after turn with very little success, I like infintry battles but this just got so tedious that it wasn't enjoyable anymore, maybe I shouldn't say this out loud but...........I do like to get some FUN and ENJOYMENT out of playing war games. I recentlly had my first PBEM game and even though I got my clock cleaned by AmmoSgt the game was FUN!

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 39
- 7/1/2001 9:45:00 PM   
sven


Posts: 10293
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: brickyard
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by TheChin: y'know, I'm more upset about this original post then I thouight. How can anyone "regret" buying the MC when they haven't gotten it yet? It's ridiculous! Especially because it is 5.01! And who said 5.3 was the final version? I've never seen that posted anywhere. It's a work in progress and will continue to improve until Combat Leader at least. I'm starting to get a "temper tantrum" vibe from that post. Maybe such emotional outbursts worked well with Zel's mommy, but we're all adults here.
Chin that is the thing... David Heath has said that 5.3 is NOT the final. He says that 5.4 is being worked on as we type. Matrix is doing their best to finish and perfect a 'free' game. I think that the first post in this thread was a temper tantrum from a guy that thinks that 'Tanks Rule!'. Hey I love tanks, but they are just a PART of a combined arms team. I fear too many people want the Blitzkrieg that was in the Battle of France. Well that was not reality. Blitzkrieg works only when your enemy is dumb enough to let it. Blitzkrieg was also at its heart a different slant on combined arms. Ivan stepped on Fritz's throat at Kursk because he decided to not be dumb. Defense in depth and killing the Tank kills the blitz. The German forces never recovered after Kursk. regards, sven

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 40
- 7/1/2001 9:46:00 PM   
TheChin


Posts: 88
Joined: 4/20/2001
From: Cleveland,OH,USA
Status: offline
To BigBill: Hmmm, well maybe the infantry toughening had the unexpected effect of making already tough infantry practically invincible. I'm not saying a little tweaking isn't in order, but this is the best version yet in my eyes. I guess when you make a tweak on one thing like infantry, it's hard to predict how it will effect every facet of the game. In any case, I'm sure they'll do the right thing. Though I have to tell you, the Russians were wiping up my SNLF squads. They were my hardest hit. Those friggin' Maxims are nasty!

_____________________________

"Conan, what is best in life?"
"To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women!"

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 41
- 7/1/2001 9:56:00 PM   
sven


Posts: 10293
Joined: 3/28/2000
From: brickyard
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by TheChin: To BigBill: Hmmm, well maybe the infantry toughening had the unexpected effect of making already tough infantry practically invincible. I'm not saying a little tweaking isn't in order, but this is the best version yet in my eyes. I guess when you make a tweak on one thing like infantry, it's hard to predict how it will effect every facet of the game. In any case, I'm sure they'll do the right thing. Though I have to tell you, the Russians were wiping up my SNLF squads. They were my hardest hit. Those friggin' Maxims are nasty!
Hey chin the US and Canada are doing fine against the Japanese. The secret is you opfire them when the enemy Infantry is on the move. You then hit them with some arty or mortar fire. The longest a pinned enemy has held on for me with this is 6 rounds. I really like to advance some mounted infantry if the battlefield allows. You drop down to melee, and then hit them with your apcs for the old overrun. Poor guys never know what hit them. If it were as easy to kill Infantry as some think I guess World War 1 was over in a few months right? I mean they didn't have tanks at first. No tank no super weapon, but the rifle was just as lethal according to some.

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 42
- 7/1/2001 10:05:00 PM   
TheChin


Posts: 88
Joined: 4/20/2001
From: Cleveland,OH,USA
Status: offline
To Sven: I know what you mean by mounted Infantry. I love having halftracks as support. I've never played the Japanese before and at least in 39, they have no mounted infantry. I guess it makes sense if most of their combat is in a jungle environment. With rarity on you can't even get enough trucks to shuttle 'em around. One hex at a time movement is tedious!

_____________________________

"Conan, what is best in life?"
"To crush your enemies, to see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentation of their women!"

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 43
- 7/1/2001 10:43:00 PM   
Alby


Posts: 4789
Joined: 4/29/2000
From: Whiteland, Indiana
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by Panzer Captain: Perhaps i am missing the significance of the issues here, but from a tactical point of view, why would anyone committ 3 squads and a tank crew to eliminate a 3-troop contingency when there are far more important objectives to attain in the oveall scheme of things? Panzer Captain
Because the little Buggers SPOT EVERYTHING you do heheh ;)

_____________________________




(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 44
- 7/1/2001 11:05:00 PM   
Joe Osborne

 

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

Originally posted by TheChin: It's another case of people unwilling to change their tactics to suit their enemy. I for one, would not want any of these people giving up on 5.3 to be Generals in my countries army. The first curve ball the enemy would throw at them and they would quit. Alt-O,Alt-F...Use It, Live by It, Win by It... at least where infantry is concerned. One thing I love about 5.3 is that tanks have assumed their real role, Infantry support. They aren't WWI biplanes out duelling other tanks in some kind of romanticized dance. They are there to provide hardened gun support so that the infantry can take ground and hold it.
YES,YES,YES,!!!!!!! I couldn't agree more....There are 3 basic ways to use armor....a coup de main where you drive it through a hole in the defense and grab objectives behind enemy lines, a flanking attack against enemy armor, combined arms attack in support of infantry. When you think of it the role of armor in WW2 was not too much different than good sound cavalry tactics from Jeb Stuart and Phil Sheridan in the Civil War. Joe Osborne

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 45
- 7/1/2001 11:20:00 PM   
Wild Bill

 

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline
Some very intelligent, rational points of view have been brought forth here. Nice to deal with problems in that kind of environment. Success against smaller units seems to be the major, perhaps the only issue here. I think that can be fixed...and will be. We are working on it. Realism demands a price. Sometimes that price is "frustration." As veterans have attested and history confirms, war is not only "hell" but very "frustrating." Wild Bill

_____________________________


In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 46
- 7/2/2001 12:22:00 AM   
Charles_22


Posts: 3993
Joined: 3/12/2001
From: Dallas, Texas, USA
Status: offline
A Tactical Suggestion: I won't say 5.3 is great or that it's a flop as I haven't played enough to really know. From what I've played it's mostly infantry in the open. I fight 95% with my AFVs, at least for the 9/39 fighting I'm so familiar with. This is a suggestion I've started using on 5.3, which never came to me before this version. What I will try to do is concentrate fire on two or three infantry units, usually the ones who are ringing up the highest percentages of to-hit. Fighting the way I do, and under these circumstances, I would've thought somebody was kidding if they said infantry was too tough, but again, I admit I play perhaps a bit oddly. Anyway, when you concentrate on the unit with very high to-hit, you can often wipe him out in one turn, and then it's on to the next unit. Often by the time the first unit has succumbed to maybe 6 or 7 units fire (tanks and MGs in my case), the unit that was so difficult moves to a spot where he can be annihilated (when they're the aggressor). In any case, imagine you're fighting a platoon at a time. If you find one in a stone building while the others are nothing special, go for the nothing special and MOVE them. Naturally you would prefer to wipe them out, but you achieve a considerable victory in moving them while toughie boy stays behind. Since every unit can rally toughie boy, it's important to isolate him from his friendlies. Even if he's in a bunch of units, moving out 5 easy to move units is 5 less units that can rally him when you decide to concentrate on him. From the way I figure it, no infantry unit, suppression-wise, can stay in the tough spot if it's cut from friedlies if you have 6 or 7 units firing on it. In that situation, toughie boy hangs tough 3 turns tops, and probably is done after two. Do remember one thing also, it is possible to "over-suppress" the enemy. In other words, try to imagine how much fire, from what size of weapons generates what amount of suppression on a given unit, so that you don't commit too much fire when trying to cause suppression. 6 or 7 units is usually excessive to get them to 99 in one turn, particularly if you manage a kill or two in the bargain. If you don't know what kind of weapons cause what kind of suppression, you can get some decent guesstimates by observing your own troops taking fire. Different nationalities will suppress differently, and although I don't know the formula offhand the generally poorer quality nations will suppress all the easier. Now question time: Is it possible for a very experienced unit to have a 99 rally rating?

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 47
- 7/2/2001 3:41:00 AM   
Peptis

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 7/1/2001
Status: offline
AFAIK infantry is either considered 'in cover' or not. However this when you are in cover you are generally only covered from fire from some directions. If another group of men flank you then you should be vulnerable to their fire. Making this 'fix' should make the game more realistic and stop all these problems associated with mopping up small groups since you can just attack them from multiple sides.

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 48
- 7/2/2001 5:51:00 AM   
BigDuke66


Posts: 1579
Joined: 2/1/2001
From: Terra
Status: offline
To all the guys that stated their Opinion or Suggestions about 5.3 here, please do this in the designated Thread from David Heath so we can be sure nothing will slip thruh.

_____________________________

JOIN The Blitz Wargaming Club

"Spread word to every slave, that even the mighty republic bleeds when struck!"

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 49
- 7/2/2001 9:08:00 AM   
MalleusDei

 

Posts: 56
Joined: 4/27/2001
From: Baton Rouge
Status: offline
Krull: I confess: I didn't do 42 tears; I do have fewer purple hearts than you do; I only had the divisional 4 day scout/sniper course (and you may have even taught it), and the only guy I know who came back from the Chosin Reservoir was our colonel. But, on the other hand, give me a competent squad (or even a good fire team) and an LOS to a spotted infantry target and that target is going down.

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 50
- 7/2/2001 1:02:00 PM   
Flashfyre

 

Posts: 330
Joined: 10/6/2000
From: Waynesboro, PA, USA
Status: offline
First of all, let me say that the initial post in this thread was NOT in keeping with the atmosphere the guys at Matrix and us fans have engendered here in the forums. If you want to raise hell about the game and how it's no longer "fun", go somewhere else. I don't need to read the vitriol that has been spewed out by someone who wants an arcade game, where they get to be the winner every time. This is war. War means killing. Kiling means dying. This game has, at this time, reached a point of realism that no other game that I am aware of has reached. And I've been a wargamer since the early '70s. This step has been long in coming....and I, for one, am glad of it. I used to get bored, watching my troops slaughter the opposing forces...my losses were less than 1/100th of the opposition. Not realistic. How many turns does it take to kill over 1000 men and tanks? Not many, in the days of 5.0 and earlier. Well, sir, take your toys and go home. Find a nice quiet corner, and sulk. The rest of us will continue the war, and you won't be missed. I guess some people just don't have the moxie to face up to a real opponent.

_____________________________

The Motor Pool http://www.geocities.com/aurion_eq/index.html?976419304550 [email]kmcferren@onemain.com[/email]

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 51
- 7/3/2001 7:59:00 AM   
KERENSKY

 

Posts: 371
Joined: 6/7/2001
Status: offline
OK about sdpotting and firnig different. I tend to like the less people in unit harder to kill ,bbut only because it tend to save the life of my tank crew. But just overrun them and they are gone. I quite never melee simply because it tend to hurt me as much as the ennemies. Paul I had a question, I know the new FD bonus give more effeciency when you hit a *bunch* of ennemies, causing massive casualies. Did you check how this applyed to ennemy 1 to 3 squad ? Perhaps this is the pb such as rendering them impervious to a successfull FD check because they numer less than the amount of casualties caused.

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 52
- 7/3/2001 8:41:00 AM   
Nikademus


Posts: 25305
Joined: 5/27/2000
From: Alien spacecraft
Status: offline
hmmm, 5.2/3 sounds intriguing. I'll have to load it tonight and give it a whirl. Heh, it's funny. On the one hand i've always been in the camp that's commented on the tendancy for the SP engine WAW is based on to allow single kills a little too much, even in cover terrain so in that sense the new infantry rules sounds like a definate step in the right direction. On the same token though i'd hate to see WAW's infantry model turn into another SP:WWII where the infantry, even in clear terrain was ridiculously resilliant....even against elite troops armed with flamethrowers!!! Tweaking though, is a good thing, so i know i'm not quitting. I'm enlisted for the duration too. :-) (and my Mega-campaign finally arrived too!! whoo hoo) [ July 02, 2001: Message edited by: Nikademus ]

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 53
- 7/3/2001 8:56:00 AM   
Wild Bill

 

Posts: 6821
Joined: 4/7/2000
From: Smyrna, Ga, 30080
Status: offline
5.4 will be the best yet. Hard to find anything wrong with this one!Look for it soon. Wild Bill

_____________________________


In Arduis Fidelis
Wild Bill Wilder
Independent Game Consultant

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 54
- 7/3/2001 9:24:00 AM   
Tombstone

 

Posts: 766
Joined: 6/1/2000
From: Los Angeles, California
Status: offline
Wow. What a thread. TheZel didn't know what he was starting. The post may have been a bit rash. I certainly don't agree with him, I like the response tho. Spwaw gamers are pretty dedicated. I just have to say that I've had no difficulties with 5.3. My feelings are now that I actually use anti-infantry tactics, and sometimes I don't have adequate anti-infantry resources on hand and have to pass up some bad guys. It's just fantastic. Infantry aren't hard to kill, it just takes time and costs friendly casualties to do it. Tomo

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 55
- 7/3/2001 11:07:00 AM   
KERENSKY

 

Posts: 371
Joined: 6/7/2001
Status: offline
a suggestion for fighting infantery since 5.1 : Only shoot at the numered ones :p

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 56
- 7/3/2001 12:56:00 PM   
David Heath


Posts: 3358
Joined: 3/29/2000
From: Staten Island NY
Status: offline
If you have not had a second please read about the topic of SPWaW v6.0

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 57
- 7/3/2001 7:02:00 PM   
jambo1

 

Posts: 52
Joined: 3/19/2001
From: Ottawa, Canada
Status: offline
I don't see what the problem really is!? This is a great game and these guys are doing a great job. If you don't like the how your weapons/troops are killing, I've found that in the past if I thought a weapon was too good or bad you can change it's strenght in the OOB editor, tell me of another game which you can do that!!!! v 6.0 sounds like it will fix some things which I've fixed that way and infantry will finally be as close to perfect as you will get at this scale. BZ to the Wild Bill and his Raiders yet again :)

_____________________________

Ya only live til ya die!

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 58
- 7/3/2001 9:22:00 PM   
Kluckenbill

 

Posts: 278
Joined: 6/7/2000
From: Lancaster, PA, USA
Status: offline
I too was thoroughly disgusted with my first attempt to play 5.3. However, after reading all the positive posts I figured that I must be missing something so I'm sticking with it for now anyway. I've listed some of my own experiences on another thread,http://www.matrixgames.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=005885&p=2 where I fired at one Russian squad 45 times, 13 times from the same hex with little efect. I'm fully aware of the need for combined arms but I'm left with two real problems: 1. Its just no fun to keep shooting at the same unit again and again! 2. Absent an enormous amount of indirect fire artillery, its not possible to maneuver about the board and capture 4 or 5 different victory areas when a competent infantry opponent is dug in near each of those areas. It just takes too long and I run out of time. I'm hanging in there, hoping that 6.0 fixes these problems.

_____________________________

Target, Cease Fire !

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 59
- 7/4/2001 2:16:00 AM   
Gavris Narcis

 

Posts: 311
Joined: 8/19/2000
Status: offline
quote:

Originally posted by General Mayhem: True, but I'd add artillery with infantry. First time I feel infantry is right way vulnerable and same time real pain in the ass. It's really vulnerable if in move, but if fortified hard to get to move, tieng lot of resources.
You're right. That was and still is the reality of war. Especially of WWII. In my opinion the 5.2+ is a major upgrade of the game. Good work make this Matrix team. Leo.

(in reply to TheZel66)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3   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

0.136