From: Haymarket, Virginia, USA
[QUOTE=Wild Bill]Your artwork is spectacular, David. I wish I knew how to tell you to do this but html and internet stuff is not my forte.
Maybe now I'll have some time for this old dog to learn some new tricks ;)
Someone give old DB a hand with this. I know there are some folks out here who have the knack.
The Civil War material is really beautiful and David has worked long and hard on it.
One major thing that I could use help with is for someone to clue me in on how to change the decades (30's and 40's) to 50's and 60's. I had no problem changing 1900 to 1800, but the decade thing is a little more tricky to find! Perhaps one of your team members who is an expert code guy could provide feedback on that one!
I have a question that I hope that you might answer either here or by private email. I'm currently researching Civil War artillery in preparation for creating the icons and stats for the artillery. I hope that you might shed some light on how I can model the ability for an artillery piece to fire several different types of ammunition (different than that already modeled in SPWAW, but maybe enough alike that the Civil War ammo can possibly replace the WWII ammunition). Many of the types of pieces could fire solid shot, explosive shell, case shot (hollow shell with balls inside) and cannister (often mistakenly called "grape", which had fewer and larger balls, and was really a naval ammunition). The way the original SPCW team dealt with this was to basically make each artillery piece a unit with four different weapons, each with their own ranges, etc. (example: weapon1: 12 pound Napolean HE 50 AP 50 weapon2: 12lb case weapon3: 12lb cannister weapon4: 12 lb Grape (incorrect, but that's what is there) weapons2-4=no rounds??). I'm not sold on this approach, but don't know the background behind the decision to do artillery this way. Nevertheless, I prefer to assume that it is not the way to go until someone who knows the ins-and-outs of artillery and ammunition types comes along and says, "That's the way to do it.", or, "This is the way it should be done, instead.".
Would it be possible to treat any existing ordinance types as the previously mentioned types of shells? (Of course HE models shell and case, but AP won't act like shot, will it? And I guess that the increased killing power of HE could somewhat model Cannister?)
The thing is that most artillery crews could ideally fire two rounds per minute ( so let's assume ROF 2). How would an ROF of 2 either create an accurate modeling of the above unit, or create an unrealistic mix of ordinance and number of rounds fired for a given range? (considering the fact that shot/shell had a greater range than cannister, and the likelihood that, at short ranges, a crew would probably not be mixing different types of ammo, because of the differing degrees of effectiveness of different ammunition at short range, and because it slows down the loading process.)
I hope that all makes sense! I eagerly await your thoughts!