Matrix Games Forums

Deal of the Week Command: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTYCommand: Modern Air/Naval Operations WOTY is now available!Frontline : The Longest Day Announced and in Beta!Command gets Wargame of the Year EditionDeal of the Week: Pandora SeriesPandora: Eclipse of Nashira is now availableDistant Worlds Gets another updateHell is Approaching Deal of the Week Battle Academy Battle Academy 2 Out now!
Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/20/2004 2:18:27 PM   
Rune Iversen


Posts: 3630
Joined: 7/20/2001
From: Copenhagen. Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

My, my, my, the groaners and complainers are out in force tonight. Not one of you have even seen any of the changed OOBs, have you? Not a single one of you.
On what do you base your criticisms, then? Ideas that have been bandied about by players? My comments? My comments are based on preliminary experiments, which are not necessarily representative of the final product.


Why don´t you make it public and open to critisicm BEFORE making it official?

That way we should be able to get an even better result.

< Message edited by Rune Iversen -- 2/20/2004 12:27:01 PM >


_____________________________

Ignoring the wulfir
Fighting the EUnuchs from within

(in reply to KG Erwin)
Post #: 121
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/20/2004 4:29:55 PM   
VicKevlar

 

Posts: 881
Joined: 1/4/2001
From: Minneapolis, MN
Status: offline
As I stated in "The Rules" thread.......there will be no editing or deleting of user's posts unless it is in regard to porn. Users who break the stated Matrix Forum policy will follow the normal course policing to include but not limited to warnings, thread being locked and given a reason as to why or in worst/last case scenarios...banning. The Matrix Forum policy applies to all users in all forums. Here it is for those who need a refresher...

All messages express the views of the author, and neither the owners of Matrix Games Forums or ASP Playground (developers of the forum software) will be held responsible for the content of any message.

Although the administrators and moderators of the Matrix Games Forums will attempt to keep all objectionable messages off this forum, it is impossible for us to review all messages. Please use the report button, IM, PM or email the admins to bring it to attention. The forum policies apply to ALL of the Matrix forums and all forum users. There is to be no spamming, trolling, personal insults, vulgarity, bigotry, profanity or porn. Inappropriate language or conduct can lead to a short vacation or outright dismissal from Matrix. All topics and behavior that is deemed unsuitable or improper will be locked with an explanation given as to why.


_____________________________

The infantry doesn't change. We're the only arm of the military where the weapon is the man himself.

C. T. Shortis


(in reply to Rune Iversen)
Post #: 122
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 1:34:31 AM   
Major Destruction


Posts: 879
Joined: 8/10/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

quote:

ORIGINAL: BruceAZ

The OOB is showing July 41 for the 76mm AT gun and this is a change from 7.0. Also the availability date for the 75mmLG40 RCL was May 1941. These dates don't look correct.

Recon
Semper Fi


Well, who would have guessed


I certainly would not have guessed!
This unit has had a start date of July 1941 ever since version 2.

If you have data that supports a different start date, then present it.

_____________________________

They struggled with a ferocity that was to be expected of brave men fighting with forlorn hope against an enemy who had the advantage of position......knowing that courage was the one thing that would save them.

Julius Caesar, 57 BC

(in reply to Rune Iversen)
Post #: 123
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 1:36:30 AM   
Major Destruction


Posts: 879
Joined: 8/10/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen


Which is why the germans started deploying the 76.2mm from the winter/spring 42 onwards, when they had had a chance to set up a production line for ammuntion and/or rechamber/bore the guns. And of course also to mount them on various gunchassis (The Marder types of vehicles primarily)


So is it Winter 1942 or Spring 1942?

_____________________________

They struggled with a ferocity that was to be expected of brave men fighting with forlorn hope against an enemy who had the advantage of position......knowing that courage was the one thing that would save them.

Julius Caesar, 57 BC

(in reply to Rune Iversen)
Post #: 124
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 1:50:10 AM   
Major Destruction


Posts: 879
Joined: 8/10/2000
From: Canada
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: VicKevlar



There is to be no spamming, trolling, personal insults, vulgarity, bigotry, profanity or porn. Inappropriate language or conduct can lead to a short vacation or outright dismissal from Matrix. All topics and behavior that is deemed unsuitable or improper will be locked with an explanation given as to why.



Thank you.

now this thread contains 4 pages of spam. Delete it so those of us who are trying to get some work done can do it without having to wade through all this nonsense.

_____________________________

They struggled with a ferocity that was to be expected of brave men fighting with forlorn hope against an enemy who had the advantage of position......knowing that courage was the one thing that would save them.

Julius Caesar, 57 BC

(in reply to VicKevlar)
Post #: 125
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 1:51:24 AM   
Rune Iversen


Posts: 3630
Joined: 7/20/2001
From: Copenhagen. Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen


Which is why the germans started deploying the 76.2mm from the winter/spring 42 onwards, when they had had a chance to set up a production line for ammuntion and/or rechamber/bore the guns. And of course also to mount them on various gunchassis (The Marder types of vehicles primarily)


So is it Winter 1942 or Spring 1942?


There are contradicting sources as regards this question, but the earliest sources I have seen has the first of the rechambered guns shipped to the east in late january/early february with more to follow.

With the introduction of the Marder series of SPATGs the profiferation of this gun of course rose.

But let me reiterate. Why is these guns available upon capture for the germans, while captured german armor in the russian OOB is much later despite evidence to the contrary.

But perhaps you can explain to me why this gun, available from 7/41 has the better german ammuntion (AP Pen 133) available upon capture (The eqivalent soviet gun is AP Pen 84)

< Message edited by Rune Iversen -- 2/21/2004 12:00:13 AM >


_____________________________

Ignoring the wulfir
Fighting the EUnuchs from within

(in reply to Major Destruction)
Post #: 126
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 1:58:29 AM   
BryanMelvin

 

Posts: 1551
Joined: 7/28/2000
From: Colorado, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: harlekwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Bryan will be addressing the changes we made very soon. The team exchanged a voluminous amount of research & test material, and we're close to submitting the final results to Matrix.
There is much more involved in the 8.2 patch, but I'm not at liberty to discuss that at present.
However, despite all the criticisms, justified or not, the suggestions, which we listened to, and the database errors, which we corrected, I will give a kudos to every member of the team. For long-time and new fans of SPWaW, this will indeed be the best OOB set ever offered, naysayers be damned. We will stand by our work, and will respond to your comments once they are publically released.


Okay. I have been quiet for some time now. Please do an experiment. Take the 7.1 or 7.11 oobs and compare AP pen rates with 8.1 oobs or even the 8.0 oobs. You will discover an odd fact, approx 96 % of the Pen rates for all guns used in new oobs are the same as 7.11 oobs.

Here is another little quip - do not jump the gun and pass judgment without knowing the facts.

Yes, there was bug inside the Mech/exe and not the oobs that caused the MGs to disable a tank in 8.0 oobs. It does not matter what number you use inside the HE and or AP rates - this will happen -it is a Mech.exe bug and it will happen even in a 7.1 build. I sent out an oob fix for this with two purposes in mind: One - to fix this and Two - to gain your help in fixing the oobs as this was part of a larger plan to involve players to have a voice in this project.

Just because you are all part of test crew does not mean that everything you want will be in upcoming oobs. Somethings will not work and others will. Here are some examples: We cannot add new units to Germany oob because all the slots are used up. To do so would ruin every Campaign designed that used this oob. We cannot drastically adjust unit cost as that would alter every Campaign designed with certian core force purchase point. Some unit’s cost can be adjusted without negative effects to other people's spwaw work regarding campaigns etc.. but this may affect pbem games - what is the lesser of two evils? Assigning purchase points amounts for either side use could fix this for pbem but that is up to you - the players to decide before you begin a game.

Next, we are working under the confines of existing spwaw scenarios, campaigns, Mega Campaigns and the hard coded data that crosses over from one oob to a new one that a scenario contains. This is not an easy task. Somethings foreseen were fixed while others - unforeseen were not and have been discover by you. That is why I offered to hear gamer’s views and findings and data. We are diligently fixing what we can. Hindsight is always better than foresight and it is far easier to gripe and complain with hindsight behind you than help out with foresight. Why, because no one can with any certainties can predict the future.

I apologies for the MG bug.

The reason for attempting to place a Pen rate for HMGs was to help the AAA MGs shoot down Aircraft and to have these match the data found in numerous sources regarding HMG pen rates vs armor and to name one - PanzerTroopen, Jentz, Vol 2 Appendix D page 296. MG34 using smk ammo could penetrate 3mm of armor at 500 meters at 30 degrees and 8 mm at 100 meters. Please email Thomas L. Jentz with your comments regarding this and not me. Thank you. When there is bug in the Main exe one has to consider from a business standpoint - is it worth to fix or not? Fixing the main exe is not my decision to make. Any major code adjustments made inside the main exe file causes long term testing and other things unforeseen.

As I stated before, the majority of Gun pen data rates were not adjusted and remain the same as 7.11 and 7.1 oobs. The ones that were adjusted had minor number problems such as the wrong settings or someone forgot to add a digit and had a gun read a HE pen rate of 1 instead of the intended 18 or some were set to read at 500 yards from the first hex. They’re not many of these. I went over every gun used in the game and recalculated the effective armor rate formula and the majority of guns never needed an adjustment and remain the same. I apologize for making it sound like I changed every penetration rate but with all the verbal hate tossed at me - I backed off and let the S--T fly till things cooled down. That is, if it will ever.

In the 8.1 patch, I sent a fix for several pen rate issues but not all and even these may need an adjustment in the final release based on you comments and not biased predetermined complaints as there is a difference between the two.

As stated before, we need your help as no one person can do everything. There are not enough hours in a day for this but if everyone helps out, it can get done. I am not being paid for this, nor is anyone else working on oobs. We have real jobs and families to support. The time we spend on this project is all volunteer. If you are of the class of person who hates 8.0 era changes then please go back and play using the 7.11 oobs and mech.exe as you have already pre-determined that this project is a failure and no amount of improvements to 8.0 would deter your wrath. You have that right to do so. Remember:

Hindsight is always better than foresight and it is far easier to gripe and complain with hindsight behind you than help out with foresight.

_____________________________

MarauderMel

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

(in reply to harlekwin)
Post #: 127
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:08:11 AM   
harlekwin


Posts: 5863
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: arkham asylum
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen


Which is why the germans started deploying the 76.2mm from the winter/spring 42 onwards, when they had had a chance to set up a production line for ammuntion and/or rechamber/bore the guns. And of course also to mount them on various gunchassis (The Marder types of vehicles primarily)


So is it Winter 1942 or Spring 1942?




It is currently July '41 for Germans to have already improved ammo as compared to the Soviet model. Yes during the initial run up to Barbarossa those wacky Germans took ammo with them because they had pre-knowledge that the soviets had batch problems with their ammo. It is a good thing that sometime between 1939 and 1943 the German crystal ball broke yes otherwise they might still have exhibited such prescience.


Also the keebler elves must have been the German frontline field expedient gunsmith fairies because the German OOB 76.2 has an acc of 13 while the Soviet one has an acc of 9. THIS is what led me to ask what exactly captures are modeling. This is why I lament the fact that the stats for cross OOB gear are not standardized and that a good focus on proofing is the main thrust.

regards,
sven

< Message edited by harlekwin -- 2/20/2004 7:16:17 PM >


_____________________________

$ociali$m-from those who will to those who won't.....

(in reply to Major Destruction)
Post #: 128
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:30:28 AM   
Keke


Posts: 3515
Joined: 3/12/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: BryanMelvin

Please do an experiment. Take the 7.1 or 7.11 oobs and compare AP pen rates with 8.1 oobs or even the 8.0 oobs. You will discover an odd fact, approx 96 % of the Pen rates for all guns used in new oobs are the same as 7.11 oobs.


But that is what makes it so odd. Now if there was a 10% increase of AP Pen rates of all the guns, and the team would have explained that it is because the values have to be set with face-hardened armor in mind, that would have made some sense. Now we have odd increse of penetration there, accuracy here etc. which doesn't make any sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: BryanMelvin
Here is another little quip - do not jump the gun and pass judgment without knowing the facts.


Is "World War II Ballistics: Armor and Gunnery" good enough source for you?


quote:

ORIGINAL: BryanMelvin
The reason for attempting to place a Pen rate for HMGs was to help the AAA MGs shoot down Aircraft and to have these match the data found in numerous sources regarding HMG pen rates vs armor and to name one - PanzerTroopen, Jentz, Vol 2 Appendix D page 296. MG34 using smk ammo could penetrate 3mm of armor at 500 meters at 30 degrees and 8 mm at 100 meters. Please email Thomas L. Jentz with your comments regarding this and not me. Thank you. When there is bug in the Main exe one has to consider from a business standpoint - is it worth to fix or not? Fixing the main exe is not my decision to make. Any major code adjustments made inside the main exe file causes long term testing and other things unforeseen.


Finally some reasoned explanations, thanks.


quote:

ORIGINAL: BryanMelvin
As I stated before, the majority of Gun pen data rates were not adjusted and remain the same as 7.11 and 7.1 oobs. The ones that were adjusted had minor number problems such as the wrong settings or someone forgot to add a digit and had a gun read a HE pen rate of 1 instead of the intended 18 or some were set to read at 500 yards from the first hex. They’re not many of these. I went over every gun used in the game and recalculated the effective armor rate formula and the majority of guns never needed an adjustment and remain the same.


This doesn't explain FE now irrational PE- and Accuracy values of 88 L/56 nor F-34 (both versions)...The latter case is explained to be an experiment...which doesn't sound very good.

_____________________________

Jyri

The eternal privilege of those who never act themselves: to interrogate, be dissatisfied, find fault.

- A. Solzhenitsyn


(in reply to BryanMelvin)
Post #: 129
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:30:50 AM   
KG Erwin


Posts: 8913
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline
That was better, harlekwin, but I think the Germans employed "Krupp" elves.
"Hammer of the Mods"


quote:

ORIGINAL: harlekwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen


Which is why the germans started deploying the 76.2mm from the winter/spring 42 onwards, when they had had a chance to set up a production line for ammuntion and/or rechamber/bore the guns. And of course also to mount them on various gunchassis (The Marder types of vehicles primarily)


So is it Winter 1942 or Spring 1942?




It is currently July '41 for Germans to have already improved ammo as compared to the Soviet model. Yes during the initial run up to Barbarossa those wacky Germans took ammo with them because they had pre-knowledge that the soviets had batch problems with their ammo. It is a good thing that sometime between 1939 and 1943 the German crystal ball broke yes otherwise they might still have exhibited such prescience.


Also the keebler elves must have been the German frontline field expedient gunsmith fairies because the German OOB 76.2 has an acc of 13 while the Soviet one has an acc of 9. THIS is what led me to ask what exactly captures are modeling. This is why I lament the fact that the stats for cross OOB gear are not standardized and that a good focus on proofing is the main thrust.

regards,
sven


_____________________________


(in reply to harlekwin)
Post #: 130
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:31:03 AM   
harlekwin


Posts: 5863
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: arkham asylum
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

quote:

ORIGINAL: VicKevlar



There is to be no spamming, trolling, personal insults, vulgarity, bigotry, profanity or porn. Inappropriate language or conduct can lead to a short vacation or outright dismissal from Matrix. All topics and behavior that is deemed unsuitable or improper will be locked with an explanation given as to why.



Thank you.

now this thread contains 4 pages of spam. Delete it so those of us who are trying to get some work done can do it without having to wade through all this nonsense.



Nice blanket dismissal guy.

It is me Sven. Remember the fun and games the Tiger team was put through. Just answer my question on what the universal standards are and I'll go away.

What are captures representing?

Expedient or Integrated dates?

_____________________________

$ociali$m-from those who will to those who won't.....

(in reply to Major Destruction)
Post #: 131
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:33:34 AM   
harlekwin


Posts: 5863
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: arkham asylum
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

That was better, harlekwin, but I think the Germans employed "Krupp" elves.
"Hammer of the Mods"


quote:

ORIGINAL: harlekwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen


Which is why the germans started deploying the 76.2mm from the winter/spring 42 onwards, when they had had a chance to set up a production line for ammuntion and/or rechamber/bore the guns. And of course also to mount them on various gunchassis (The Marder types of vehicles primarily)


So is it Winter 1942 or Spring 1942?




It is currently July '41 for Germans to have already improved ammo as compared to the Soviet model. Yes during the initial run up to Barbarossa those wacky Germans took ammo with them because they had pre-knowledge that the soviets had batch problems with their ammo. It is a good thing that sometime between 1939 and 1943 the German crystal ball broke yes otherwise they might still have exhibited such prescience.


Also the keebler elves must have been the German frontline field expedient gunsmith fairies because the German OOB 76.2 has an acc of 13 while the Soviet one has an acc of 9. THIS is what led me to ask what exactly captures are modeling. This is why I lament the fact that the stats for cross OOB gear are not standardized and that a good focus on proofing is the main thrust.

regards,
sven




You are saying the Germans had Krupp field reps on sight for expedient mods?

Look erwin it is my assertion and always has been that the Germans are getting the product improved soviet gun of early '42 in july '41.

What is the universal standard on what captures are modeling?

_____________________________

$ociali$m-from those who will to those who won't.....

(in reply to KG Erwin)
Post #: 132
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:34:41 AM   
Rune Iversen


Posts: 3630
Joined: 7/20/2001
From: Copenhagen. Denmark
Status: offline
Indeed. But if you would be so kind as to explain the discrepancy between the two values. And why the soviet 76.2 mm Field Gun available from Jan 42 has an ACC of 14, yet the german gun (7/41) has an ACC of 13 to the equivalent soviet guns (76.2mm ATG) 9?

Did the german have timemachines available?

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

That was better, harlekwin, but I think the Germans employed "Krupp" elves.
"Hammer of the Mods"


quote:

ORIGINAL: harlekwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen


Which is why the germans started deploying the 76.2mm from the winter/spring 42 onwards, when they had had a chance to set up a production line for ammuntion and/or rechamber/bore the guns. And of course also to mount them on various gunchassis (The Marder types of vehicles primarily)


So is it Winter 1942 or Spring 1942?




It is currently July '41 for Germans to have already improved ammo as compared to the Soviet model. Yes during the initial run up to Barbarossa those wacky Germans took ammo with them because they had pre-knowledge that the soviets had batch problems with their ammo. It is a good thing that sometime between 1939 and 1943 the German crystal ball broke yes otherwise they might still have exhibited such prescience.


Also the keebler elves must have been the German frontline field expedient gunsmith fairies because the German OOB 76.2 has an acc of 13 while the Soviet one has an acc of 9. THIS is what led me to ask what exactly captures are modeling. This is why I lament the fact that the stats for cross OOB gear are not standardized and that a good focus on proofing is the main thrust.

regards,
sven



< Message edited by Rune Iversen -- 2/21/2004 12:37:08 AM >


_____________________________

Ignoring the wulfir
Fighting the EUnuchs from within

(in reply to KG Erwin)
Post #: 133
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:37:46 AM   
harlekwin


Posts: 5863
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: arkham asylum
Status: offline
Well it seems to me that maybe Sgt. Hans was deployed with superior optics and ammo in his gunny sack so he could utilize equivalent dated soviet gear better than the soviets from a material not training point of view.

Then after he secured the improved soviet piece the keebler elves standardized them......

maybe that is just me though.....



quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

Indeed. But if you would be so kind as to explain the discrepancy between the two values. And why the soviet 76.2 mm Field Gun available from Jan 42 has an ACC of 14, yet the german gun (7/41) has an ACC of 13
to the equivalent soviet guns (76.2mm ATG) 9?

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

That was better, harlekwin, but I think the Germans employed "Krupp" elves.
"Hammer of the Mods"


quote:

ORIGINAL: harlekwin

quote:

ORIGINAL: Major Destruction

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen


Which is why the germans started deploying the 76.2mm from the winter/spring 42 onwards, when they had had a chance to set up a production line for ammuntion and/or rechamber/bore the guns. And of course also to mount them on various gunchassis (The Marder types of vehicles primarily)


So is it Winter 1942 or Spring 1942?




It is currently July '41 for Germans to have already improved ammo as compared to the Soviet model. Yes during the initial run up to Barbarossa those wacky Germans took ammo with them because they had pre-knowledge that the soviets had batch problems with their ammo. It is a good thing that sometime between 1939 and 1943 the German crystal ball broke yes otherwise they might still have exhibited such prescience.


Also the keebler elves must have been the German frontline field expedient gunsmith fairies because the German OOB 76.2 has an acc of 13 while the Soviet one has an acc of 9. THIS is what led me to ask what exactly captures are modeling. This is why I lament the fact that the stats for cross OOB gear are not standardized and that a good focus on proofing is the main thrust.

regards,
sven




_____________________________

$ociali$m-from those who will to those who won't.....

(in reply to Rune Iversen)
Post #: 134
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:42:59 AM   
Keke


Posts: 3515
Joined: 3/12/2002
From: Finland
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Keke
Now we have odd increse of penetration there, accuracy here etc. which doesn't make any sense.


And with odd increase I mean like 23% more AP Pen and 52% more accuracy...

_____________________________

Jyri

The eternal privilege of those who never act themselves: to interrogate, be dissatisfied, find fault.

- A. Solzhenitsyn


(in reply to Keke)
Post #: 135
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:47:01 AM   
KG Erwin


Posts: 8913
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline
I think OOB 70 unit 123 (the 76 ATG) has a simple typo in the availability date. Would everyone agree that a beginning date of July 1942 would be more appropriate?

_____________________________


(in reply to harlekwin)
Post #: 136
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 2:52:08 AM   
Rune Iversen


Posts: 3630
Joined: 7/20/2001
From: Copenhagen. Denmark
Status: offline
(Deleted an inappropriate comment)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

I think OOB 70 unit 123 (the 76 ATG) has a simple typo in the availability date. Would everyone agree that a beginning date of July 1942 would be more appropriate?


Then why is this SAME gun available from january 42 on one vehicle and from april on a lot of other SPATGs?

< Message edited by Rune Iversen -- 2/21/2004 2:10:25 AM >


_____________________________

Ignoring the wulfir
Fighting the EUnuchs from within

(in reply to KG Erwin)
Post #: 137
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 3:50:33 AM   
Skotty702

 

Posts: 14
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: Vegas
Status: offline
Is the aircraft gun issue still an issue?
P-39: 10 37mm guns
P-38J: 15 20mm guns
P-51B: 10 .50cal guns
P-51D: 10 .50cal guns
F-80: 10 .50cal guns
P-51H: 10 .50cal guns
P-38F: 15 20mm guns
P-38L: 15 20mm guns
B-25H: TEN 75mm cannons!!!!!!!!!!!

This is just the US OOB. I know there are more OOB's that have funky
gun counts. Is this an error or part of the aircraft "improvement" idea.

Thanks
Scott

(in reply to Rune Iversen)
Post #: 138
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 4:01:27 AM   
Rune Iversen


Posts: 3630
Joined: 7/20/2001
From: Copenhagen. Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Skotty702

Is the aircraft gun issue still an issue?
P-39: 10 37mm guns
P-38J: 15 20mm guns
P-51B: 10 .50cal guns
P-51D: 10 .50cal guns
F-80: 10 .50cal guns
P-51H: 10 .50cal guns
P-38F: 15 20mm guns
P-38L: 15 20mm guns
B-25H: TEN 75mm cannons!!!!!!!!!!!

This is just the US OOB. I know there are more OOB's that have funky
gun counts. Is this an error or part of the aircraft "improvement" idea.

Thanks
Scott


I think those are the rounds of ammo available pr. weapon guv´.

_____________________________

Ignoring the wulfir
Fighting the EUnuchs from within

(in reply to Skotty702)
Post #: 139
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 4:08:03 AM   
Rune Iversen


Posts: 3630
Joined: 7/20/2001
From: Copenhagen. Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen
(Deleted an inappropriate comment)

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

I think OOB 70 unit 123 (the 76 ATG) has a simple typo in the availability date. Would everyone agree that a beginning date of July 1942 would be more appropriate?


Then why is this SAME gun available from january 42 on one vehicle and from april on a lot of other SPATGs?


Since my posts are obviously subject to random modifications, I would hereby formally request to know just who has the final word and oversight on the 8.2 OOBs?

< Message edited by Rune Iversen -- 2/21/2004 2:11:53 AM >


_____________________________

Ignoring the wulfir
Fighting the EUnuchs from within

(in reply to Rune Iversen)
Post #: 140
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/21/2004 5:40:49 AM   
VikingNo2


Posts: 2917
Joined: 1/26/2002
From: NC
Status: offline
Hi , was the US 75mm TD halftrack changed its pen was 25 I believe, just wondering. I know your all working hard on the 8.2 but did you have a time estimate when it might be done. Thanks

(in reply to Rune Iversen)
Post #: 141
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/22/2004 7:48:15 AM   
harlekwin


Posts: 5863
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: arkham asylum
Status: offline
Why are all of saturday's posts suddenly gone from this and the "what is happening to this forum" thread?

_____________________________

$ociali$m-from those who will to those who won't.....

(in reply to VikingNo2)
Post #: 142
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/22/2004 8:01:59 AM   
harlekwin


Posts: 5863
Joined: 2/3/2003
From: arkham asylum
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: harlekwin

Why are all of saturday's posts suddenly gone from this and the "what is happening to this forum" thread?




wow, gee whaddya know 2 days worth of PMs gone too....

*golly*

_____________________________

$ociali$m-from those who will to those who won't.....

(in reply to harlekwin)
Post #: 143
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/22/2004 9:52:08 AM   
KG Erwin


Posts: 8913
Joined: 7/25/2000
From: Cross Lanes WV USA
Status: offline
No one has informed me of what happened. This doesn't "feel right" at all.

_____________________________


(in reply to harlekwin)
Post #: 144
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/22/2004 11:37:16 AM   
Igor

 

Posts: 184
Joined: 12/11/2000
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

I think OOB 70 unit 123 (the 76 ATG) has a simple typo in the availability date. Would everyone agree that a beginning date of July 1942 would be more appropriate?


Why not have two guns? One available in August of 1941; with the same values for accuracy and penetration as the Soviet 76.2 field gun, a rarity of one, and a mediocre ammo supply. The second available in July 1942; with a rarity of zero, better accuracy and penetration, and a decent ammo load (for more purchase points, of course). This way the captured crash-booms pressed into service against the T-34s are there (sometimes) if you want them; but the sights and better ammo don't show up until they more reasonably should.

(in reply to KG Erwin)
Post #: 145
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/22/2004 12:53:13 PM   
Frank W.

 

Posts: 1958
Joined: 10/18/2001
From: Siegen + Essen / W. Germany
Status: offline
i think the german OOB is quite full to add much more units.

(in reply to Igor)
Post #: 146
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/22/2004 12:55:39 PM   
Rune Iversen


Posts: 3630
Joined: 7/20/2001
From: Copenhagen. Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Igor

quote:

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

I think OOB 70 unit 123 (the 76 ATG) has a simple typo in the availability date. Would everyone agree that a beginning date of July 1942 would be more appropriate?


Why not have two guns? One available in August of 1941; with the same values for accuracy and penetration as the Soviet 76.2 field gun, a rarity of one, and a mediocre ammo supply. The second available in July 1942; with a rarity of zero, better accuracy and penetration, and a decent ammo load (for more purchase points, of course). This way the captured crash-booms pressed into service against the T-34s are there (sometimes) if you want them; but the sights and better ammo don't show up until they more reasonably should.


Precisely.

_____________________________

Ignoring the wulfir
Fighting the EUnuchs from within

(in reply to Igor)
Post #: 147
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/22/2004 12:56:14 PM   
Rune Iversen


Posts: 3630
Joined: 7/20/2001
From: Copenhagen. Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank W.

i think the german OOB is quite full to add much more units.


Then it is possible to export some of the esoteric units to other OOBs

_____________________________

Ignoring the wulfir
Fighting the EUnuchs from within

(in reply to Frank W.)
Post #: 148
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/22/2004 3:22:16 PM   
Alby


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

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank W.

i think the german OOB is quite full to add much more units.


Then it is possible to export some of the esoteric units to other OOBs


I suggest eliminating some of the 3 or 4 different types of wagon teams to free up some room

_____________________________




(in reply to Rune Iversen)
Post #: 149
RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions - 2/22/2004 5:12:01 PM   
Rune Iversen


Posts: 3630
Joined: 7/20/2001
From: Copenhagen. Denmark
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Alby

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rune Iversen

quote:

ORIGINAL: Frank W.

i think the german OOB is quite full to add much more units.


Then it is possible to export some of the esoteric units to other OOBs


I suggest eliminating some of the 3 or 4 different types of wagon teams to free up some room


For instance. Or deport the Sturmtiger (to the screams of KatFans everywhere )

_____________________________

Ignoring the wulfir
Fighting the EUnuchs from within

(in reply to Alby)
Post #: 150
Page:   <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Steel Panthers World At War & Mega Campaigns >> RE: 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions Page: <<   < prev  3 4 [5] 6 7   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

0.195