Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited


Everything posted by Kharnvor

  1. It sounded to me like he wanted to do a campaign based on a conflict (which would have made George Patton happy) between the US/UK and the Soviets immediately following Germany's surrender. The US/UK and the Soviets, having destroyed Germany, taken possession of German territory, and utilizing some captured German equipment, start World War II 1/2. Soviets, maybe, want to take over all of Germany and maybe Western Europe as well, while the US/UK led or influenced by Patton, want to drive them out of Europe all together, and maybe over the Urals too while they're at it. Mcalhau, is that the type of campaign you had in mind? In the 1945/'46 range as opposed to a Cold War or WW3 scenario as lele assumed? I'm pretty sure it's possible to allow each side to use German equipment. The JSH mod has added some US equipment to the Soviet list (lend/lease), so it'll just be a matter of finding out how.
  2. Ohh... That is handled in the "backpacks" in the Mission Editor, I believe.
  3. Those look great! Too bad about some of the stretching on the textures at the shoulder and crotch. Should the bottom of the tunic in the front be transparent because the shirt tails are separated? What's with the helmet texture on the front? Is the texture just a bit off there or is it something that would require remapping it in Max?
  4. Depends on what you want to do. There's a modeling guide stickied at the top of this forum. If you want to mod maps, Webwing has a good basic guide, I think in the General TOW forum. Don't forget to read the manuals for the various editors that come with the game also. That should pretty much cover everything. Also check out cmmods.com.
  5. I just happened to be browsing the TOW Unit Modeling Guide sticky, and I came across the following: in FinnN's post, which was confirmed by Sneaksie. I'm guessing those are the collision "boxes". As to why there are two, maybe the translated guide explains it. If that's old news and you've already figured that out, sorry to bother.
  6. If I remember correctly, under the previous version, vehicles would remain in place, but would turn to face the threat if under "Don't move" orders. It is possible the game is detailed enough that those tanks which couldn't turn in place historically can't in the game, and that's what you're running into. I hope if this was changed that it wasn't intentional because that would be bad.
  7. Not so far that I've seen, up through Operation Citadel. Certainly could have used them.
  8. I realize now, since you mention some are different, that reload time is dependent not only on the size of the projectile (my basic assumption), but ammunition stowage, clearance behind the breech, the breech construction, auto- or semiauto breech, crew layout, and maybe some other factors which may have changed from version to version. Sorry I wasn't very helpful. I've been reading in a few threads now that gun performances may not be as accurate as possible, although Battlefront did audit the values using their best sources. So are the values being compared the ones actually used by the calculations, or are they encyclopedia values? If they are in-game values, did Battlefront really make the mistakes?
  9. I would surmise, since it's the exact same shell, just fired out of a shorter barrel, the reload time would be the same.
  10. Played again last night (beat it overwhelmingly!), and this is what I watched: At a given time after the mission started, 2 IL-2 showed up and strafed a Pz IV. No effect. I saw them just as they appeared on the horizon and called for my fighter. It showed up after they had strafed and were heading back, coming on from the opposite corner of the map. My fighter did not engage, then flew home. After a certain length of time, 2 IL-2 appeared again, this time one of my halftracks had been spotted so they strafed it, and killed the driver. Again, saw them as specks in the distance, called my fighter. This time it got on their tail, fired for a second, missed completely, zipped past them, and went home. That was it. I don't recall, in all the times I've played this mission, ever getting strafed more than twice. I have noticed that if my fighter by some miracle manages to shoot down one of the IL-2, the next time I get strafed they will have one group of 2 IL-2 and one lone IL-2. Seems like something in the script checks to see if any IL-2 get shot down, and spawns a new pair for the second strafing run instead of using the survivor. But the survivor is still there and strafes too. In short, AI support calls are scripted, and unlike player aircraft, shooting them down doesn't reduce the air threat. In fact, it seemed to increase it. Bummer. Time to learn scripting.
  11. I beat it last night finally! Only lost 4 infantry and one StuG III plus crew! Ouch those SU122 hurt: 1 shot and BAM StuG and crew KIA. Took it nice and slow, let them come to me, nice slow recon, and overwhelming firepower once I found someone. But man sometimes tanks can be very slow to engage. So now I see a bit more hope for being able to play and beat Strong at Heart... but not much. It'll be nice to be the one shooting with the ZiS-2 for a change. I hate those things.
  12. Yet when you play the German mission at Kursk, not a Ferdinand in sight, but over 30 T34 and Su122. That's tough with only a half-dozen German tanks! Having trouble enough with that one, this mission doesn't sound like fun!
  13. Yep, kinda disappointed that there are no Stukas in game that I've seen. I seem to remember in the manual I read that air support calls are always the same planes, you just might be able to call them more than once. If this is true, then the one time my fighter did shoot down both Sturmoviks, I shouldn't have had another pair or triplet (it varies) strafing my half tracks to bits a couple of minutes later. It occurs to me now that the Sturmoviks might be completely scripted, either at specific times or specific force concentrations, so my fighter support is pretty useless because I'll get strafed no matter what. I hope you're right K9! How many times did you get strafed before you shot them down? Where's my Ostwind or Wirbelwind darnit? :mad:
  14. I'm having trouble understanding the details of fighter support. I'm playing Operation Citadel from the German side, and I have 5 fighter calls to use. Most of the time, I can see the IL-2 as soon as they appear well before they've actually reached the playable area, so I place the call for a fighter, and right-click a spot on the map. My tanks or more often (to much more devastating effect) my half tracks get strafed, the IL-2 fly off the map, then on their return trip, my interceptor shows up, flies a circle around them, and leaves. Once in a while it will shoot down one, but not very often. So, how can I best use fighters to prevent my vehicles from getting strafed? And what should I expect from them? Thanks! [ May 28, 2007, 03:04 PM: Message edited by: Kharnvor ]
  15. Were there even PzKpfw III still in service in the West on the front lines? Personally haven't finished the German campaign yet (stuck on Operation Citadel), so I haven't played this one yet, so I was surprised to read you had PzKpfw IIIs considering I'm using IV H and Tigers now, before Falaise.
  16. I thought the Tigers in Saving Private Ryan were newly modified British IFVs. I'll have to check my "making of" materials. Or was that Band of Brothers for the StuG? Nice videos, nonetheless!
  17. From what I gathered reading that thread, the penetration values are listed, for reference purposes only, as they were given in the various sources. German guns were typically listed with penetration values vs. armor sloped at 30 degrees, where Soviet values are for unsloped armor. For the actual calculations in the game, all penetration values are coded for 0 degrees (meaning the Soviet penetrations are right on, while the German in-game behind-the-scenes values are actually higher than the player sees). The impact angle is then calculated and all that other fun stuff to arrive at the end result. Let's say the Germans and the Soviets each bought a 45mm AT gun from some neutral country which also supplied the ammunition. In the game, the penetration values listed for the gun would be, ON PAPER, lower than the Soviet values, because the Germans tested it versus 30-degree armor instead of 0 degree armor. However, when used in the game, they will both be equally powerful. That is my take on the discussion from that thread. The encyclopedia does not match the in-game stats necessarily because Battlefront did not edit the encyclopedia for accuracy like they did the game data. The game data used for penetration calculations might not match the numbers displayed because of the different ways the various countries reported their results, but the actual performance should be accurate. Of course, if your concern is not so much how they work in game, but rather the fact that the gun data is not consistently reported between various countries, then ignore all that above. That might be a very easy mod to convert the numbers displayed so both sides show penetrations at either 0 degrees or 30 degrees or some other angle you like. I don't think it's a case of nobody noticing or caring, but rather knowing that the numbers they provide are accurate according to their sources, so not needing attention. The randomly rotating AFVs is a whole other issue, however.
  18. The ranges aren't way off. Those are the maximum possible ranges that the gun can fire a projectile. Whether those are effective ranges or battlefield ranges is another question altogether.
  19. I don't see any reason why you'd install it, it's the exact same version once you download the little patch for the disk. It's nice to have a hard copy in case you do ever need to reinstall: won't have to wait for another d/l.
  20. I dunno, they still take up memory and graphics processing power alive or dead. Even if you hid the bodies, there's still a little backpack laying on the ground where they died so you can pick stuff up. But no "healing" them back to full health, just keeping them alive for a later battle. Narsil? Thought I left you hanging on my wall. When did swords learn to use the internet? Good idea tying it in with morale!
  21. But wouldn't it be great if they did something? Say it's changed so that critically wounded soldiers can't fight anymore, and will become KIA in a certain length of time unless stabilized by a medic. That would be a great role-playing addition! Reduce the occurance of instant KIA, expand the chances of critical wounds, and suddenly you have a better chance of those decorated infantry being alive for future missions if your medic can get to them.
  22. Well that stinks. Definitely need an option to withdraw and lose.
  23. I've seen shots ricochet and almost hit other units, and I've seen shots impact and do nothing or go nowhere. I think it might matter, cause if the shot ricochets into another unit, especially infantry, it could cause damage still. The fidelity of the ballistics in this game continues to impress me. I've had a Tiger fire an HE round at infantry in a trench where the shell missed just above the trench and exploded down the hill behind the trenches, but still killed the infantry because the shell itself had hit him.
  24. What about "ESC" -> "End Battle"? Haven't tried it, but wouldn't that end the scenario as a failure and get you back to the campaign?
  25. Oops, got derailed then, sorry. Hmm, which units in particular are you referring to? I've only played one battle as American Airborne, and all my squad leaders had Thompsons if I recall. Are you noticing this in Staff squads as opposed to rifle squads? It certainly is ahistoric if fighting troops of whatever rank don't have aught but a pistol.
  • Create New...