M Hofbauer
-
Posts
1,792 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by M Hofbauer
-
-
Everyones awfully quiet about this post. Doesnt anyone else think that this proves a certain point (to a degree at least) and torpedoes the objections we have heard over the years? </font>Originally posted by Jussi Köhler:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Peterk:
Not meaning to issue a big challenge to anyone who amay or may not be the owner or moderator of the board...but...
This came up on the ASL discussion boards a while ago and I found the following document while checking it out myself. It's a good read. The Russians seemed to love smoke.
A Red Army document on the use of smoke in WWII
http://www.redarmystudies.net/smhj/1987/1987_05.pdf
On page 27, description of a Russian breakthrough in which 4076 smoke grenades were used in Jan 1944 on the Ukrainian front. Rifle troops making smoke mentionned for the first time!
On page 31, description of assault groups in cities setting small frontage 50m-200m smoke screens to cover advances.
-
who says both players will have the same "money" allotment?
you wanna play with less money in MP against others???? I dont!
///I usually only play with/against friends. if the equipment pricing isnt right, or other circumstances (like terrain favoring one side) demand it, I am very fine with asymmetrical budget warfare.
there wont be a map editor with the game.
says who?
///me.
why would it be any different? you do ask funny questions *g*
its not funny because if you can setup games for historic years it could be unbalanced, have you ever played Combat Mission 2 online in a 1941 Scenario as German? If not get the game and i show u what i mean!
///sorry, I havent played CM2 yet since I do not own such a game (yet).
however, a situation similar to the one you describe frequently occurs in CMBB. The scenario/problem you describe is exactly the spice of the game, the challenge that translates into entertainment for some (like me).
What platform did you decide for the Game to meet up for MP Games? Gamespy or something like that?"
seems to me Gayspy is not to worry for you becaus of no answer
/// you're right indeed I am neither worried about nor interested in Gayspy
Seems to me dude you have not played many other RTS Games in the last couple of years. SP is not intersting its no challange to play against KI or some scripts with using the pause button or quick save to reveal your decission after it.
///it would seem to me that somebody who plays single play in the manner you describe cheats himself out of the enjoyment of the game. who would be stupid enough to do that? It would be neither very entertaining nor the "victory" any rewarding if one did that.
GS_Marcks is not a memeber anymore. GS_Grass never heard of him.
///I see.
Well who told you to answer in the first case. You are not a developer or anything like that with TOW so you take your crumbs only from the depth on the internet but nothing concrete.
In this case i would welcome if someone with more knowledge about the game would answer.
Thanks in advance but your answers were not really meaningfully.
///again sorry for trying to help.
Indeed my answers were unsolicited, you made it clear you wanted an answer from Megakill or other officials.
My replies furthermore were unauthoritative and in some aspects w/r/t some questions indeed I could not help you at all, mainly because I lack in expertise playing multi-MP RTS games lately and hence lack the natural desire for a well-balanced portrayal of WW II.
sorry, won't happen again.
I hope Megakill will arrive shortly to give you the answers you are looking for.
until then have a nice day anyway.
now, why do images of the turtle in Finding Nemo keep popping up in my head ?!? :confused:
-
you probably know this already,Originally posted by John Kettler:Sammy_Davis_Jnr,
Had been through the site, but I guess I hit just the main topics. The "other" category is full of treasures. Spanish Civil War SM-79--in color!
Many pictures directly usable by TOW devs or modders.
Regards,
John Kettler
be careful when judging the authentic coloring from old color photographs.
-
who are you?
are you by any chance THE sabot ?
(excuse the unintended pun but the question is for real)
-
Why don't you do a SEARCH??!Originally posted by Rollstoy:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by M Hofbauer:
Didnt I have that last week at the Thai restaurant?
Best regards,
Thomm </font>
-
are you saying that was fixed eventually?Originally posted by Vergeltungswaffe:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by M Hofbauer:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by thewood:
Actually, IIRC, IL2 AI could see right through clouds until one of the later patches. This was for the very same reason as described above.
damn, maybe I should have gotten those final patches... </font>
-
GS_Wünsche,Originally posted by GS_Wünsche:Hofbauer i would be pleased if Megakill would answer those question instead of some jolk like you who is apearently not asaigned to!!!!
Funny that you even couldn´t understand most of those questions, means english is not your first language and you missed lessons in school or the questions are to complecated to follow.
well a splendid day to you, too !
I deliberately ignored some of your yodaesque phrasing and intentionally did not jump the opportunity for some cheap shots that presented themselves only too well.
nor did I say anything about your SS-revering sig.
I think thats already quite a bit of self-restraint on my part.
say, is GS_Marcks still with your gang? GS was an almost respectable clan back in CC days, some almost groggish people there. Tell GS_Marcks a hello from me and express my condolences that GS has come all the way down to the level displayed.
btw: do you have a GS_Grass in your clan?
-
Sammy Davis and all others,
dont you see your well-meant words are ill applied?
quote:
GS-Wünsche wants no help or info from lowly other fans, only the word from megakill himself or company representatives will suffice for his highness.Originally posted by GS_Wünsche:Hofbauer i would be pleased if Megakill would answer those question instead of some jolk like you who is apearently not asaigned to!!!!
we are but the unworthy.
forgive us oh GS_Wünsche that we dared to try to answer your questions.
-
Yuk...Originally posted by Jussi Köhler:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by M Hofbauer:
"ong bak" ?
:confused:
didnt I have that last week at the Thai restaurant?
You mean the massage parlor..? </font>
-
that depth of thought, those insights...Stransky, is that you? GAZ? Rob/1 ?Originally posted by Sammy_Davis_Jnr:Maybe you not use to RTS games and yes i do concede it can be arcadish (if thats a word) but i think turn based games are not realistic either.
war happens in real time or simultaneously.
...
At the End of the day this is a game and it will be gamey because its not real. In other words game will always be a game.
man, Sammy Davies Junior, you really sometimes give me a chill with your posts...
-
"ong bak" ?Originally posted by Rollstoy:Why not?
There is nothing bad about slow-motion!
Popular examples: "The Matrix", "Max Paine", "Ong Bak", ...
Best regards,
Thomm
:confused:
didnt I have that last week at the Thai restaurant?
-
are you saying that was fixed eventually?Originally posted by thewood:Actually, IIRC, IL2 AI could see right through clouds until one of the later patches. This was for the very same reason as described above.
damn, maybe I should have gotten those final patches...
-
w/r/t your initial statement, you havent been following too closely, eh? because it seems you make some failed assumptions about the character of the game...judging from some of the questions you ask...
"My first question is:
What made you to decide to put up armor penetration from 500 to 4800m?"
what a funny question. shouldnt the question rather be "why did you mess with the RL data in the first place?"
so what made them decide to change it to reflect real world data...hmmm maybe because after years of a flock of flashbangers following the enterprise along, this was the first time anybody seriously inquired and complained about the skewed ranges and ballistics? :confused:
"My second question:
I´ve seen a couple of screens acording with the amount of money there is to spent for each particular vehicle/unit. So the Tiger I costs 600 points a T34/43 costs 300. That means an only outcome 2:1. In adition to the ranges and penetrations a Tiger I will not have a problem with 2 T34´s on a distance 1000-2000m. So how will that be in multiplayer balanced?"
who says both players will have the same "money" allotment?
seriously, those "prices" are not final methinks. oh, and maps are 2x2 km, and apparently there wont be too many open FOF with longer ranges on those maps. hardly 2km, it seems.
oh, and take a look at the screenshots in the AARs so far. it seems most tank engagements will take place at distances below barrel length *g*
"Third question:
How many points will each player have at most in Multiplayer?"
:confused:
"Forth question:
Is it possible to play in Multiplayer in historic War Years? I mean when i do setup a game for 1940 than it should be only Units from that period available."
why would it be any different? you do ask funny questions *g*
it kinda defeats the purpose of setting up a game for 1940 when the equipment is not limited to 1940... what else would there be which is specific to 1940?
the grass mods of 1940 ?
"Fifth question:
Will it be possible to asign troops to other players? "
:confused:
what?!?
...see multiplayer explained in the other multiple threads on that subject.
"Six question:
In order to make custom maps with a mapeditor wich will be hopefully with the game will there be InGame Mapdownload or do have to download the Map from other source and then to place it in the right folder?"
there wont be a map editor with the game.
"Seventh question:
So far i´ve read that it will be not possible to mod the actual game like changing ranges, values, etc. Why is that if i´m right?"
do you want to change max. range back to 500m ?!? :eek:
"Eight question:
Will there be any timelimit during MP Games like for example 1 or 2 hours or is it like until the end of the world playing when the enemy surrenders/quits ?"
from the AARs it seems there is a time frame to complete the mission.
I dont see why it should be different for MP.
"Nineth question:
What platform did you decide for the Game to meet up for MP Games? Gamespy or something like that?"
"Last question:
Will it be possible to drop out laaging players from the game by vote? And will there units pass to ohter players from their team?"
ok, this seems to be the weirdest question of all, like I suspectzed initially, you do seem to have a wrong impression about the character of the game. this isnt massive-multiplayer or FPS-like multi-player gaming.
there wont be a lot of voting going on, as you are up against another player head to head, or maximum 4 players.
hope that the above clears up some of your questions. but I do suspect you need to take a second look at ToW as a game in general, anyhow.
cheers
-
why slow it down... why on earth not just pause it if you feel pace-challenged ?Originally posted by longbore:Would it be possible to have a slider on the interface so that we could slow the game down and speed it back up to normal time while making command decisions instead of pausing?
If not now... In the first patch?
:confused:
-
time slider menlets...
now there's an idea.
-
MorgTzu.
interesting description of Askren Manors, *g*, you sound like a "victim" of those predators
havent really been there after '93.
still, shows again how small the world is...
take care,
M.H.
-
rune,Originally posted by rune:Sammy,
Last response on this, it is because of an economy of scale. Why put in 2 weeks of coding for a minor detail for one army? You are the commander already and call artillery in, what is the use of a medic on the map or a radio operator when it does not enhance gameplay and the coding time can be spent elsewhere on something else? It is a combat game, not a medic game. Add something to gameplay that affects all sides, like vehicle smoke.
beg to disagree re. your above statement as far as it regards medics.
I know I know, but IMO medics, better: buddy aid and casualty management, fit your criteria above of enhancing gameplay (casualty management adds a whole new layer for you as the commander, requires different tactics etc.; puls it fits in very very well with ToW and its RPG element re. the individual soldiers...), and it is something that affects all sides.
I do concede that casualty management might not be very convenient for the typical gung-ho players who want to press on regardless of consequences, it is much more gratifying to rush your tanks forward instead of having to care for all the mess of even a few casualties.
Hence I concede it might not fit into a fast-paced tank rushfest.
I do not mean this derogatory but as a factual characterization w/r/t micromanagement in the sense of casualty management, or even automated casualty management that would via buddy aid interfere with the combativeness of your non-injured healthy soldiers.
Thats why I am not pressing for this issue, but I did want to remark the above.
cheers
M.H.
-
von Paulus/Sirocco/SgtKelly,
Sirocco,Originally posted by Sirocco:I'd expect infantrymen to be more likely to attempt to crew and AT gun than a tank, and as far as gunnery is concerned I'd expect them to take longer to fire each round and to be much less accurate, especially over longer ranges and against moving targets.
I fully agree with your above assertion.
I also agree with von Paulus that in any event they are most likely to just hop onto a vehicle to use its flex/AA MG since they are a bit familiar with that, and not bother reloading even that but instead rather hit the ground again and fight as an infantryman like they are trained to and familar with (I, too, envisioned Audie Murphy... and wasnt that a MaDeuce from atop an M10 TD? IOW, rather "familiar" own equipment...)
you are right that some menlets using on occasion captured enemy or abandoned friendly, yet unfamiliar equimpent , would not reach the effectiveness of the crew that are trained on that abandoned equipment, both in reload times and overall operation. plus they are rather likely to break it in prolonged use since they do not know all the do's and don'ts of said equipment (say, if they were to try to move around with a tank).
And of course Sgt Kelly is right that this "feature" has hardly any grounding in reality, it is a game fun element.
But even then, taking all the above into account, wouldnt you agree on my reasoning
that there should be a difference between the time it takes for the first "shot" (operating/moving) and all subsequent ones,
and that a fuzzy logic or certain chance probability that they would be unable to operate the equipment *at all* when they first try to operate it,
and a big chance that they would break it (cc4 and cc5 had a slightly increased weapon jam probability for operating scavenged small arms)
would make this aspect of the game a bit more, uh, acceptable, and even more fun?
-
lets get back to
keep going, you're actually getting quite good at this.Originally posted by M Hofbauer:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sammy_Davis_Jnr:
E.G Germans Actually had better tanks at the start of the war
</font> -
Megakill,
edit: clarification: the following applies to the use of captured enemy gun pieces and vehicles, NOT small arms. I am fine with the use of captured small arms.
what about the learning curve? The first shot, first time the equipment is operated (fired, moved, hauled) should take very long to get into action. All subsequent actions should go considerably faster.
I imagine that once you find yourself operating an enemy gun or tank, you would for the first minutes or so try to figure out which knob, wheel and lever does what. In an enemy tank that is damaged I guess it is also very dark, with only a little light from the hatch illuminating the exotic equipment. Maybe you would never really find out how it works and give up.
But once you grasp the basics and manage to fire and reload it ONCE, all subsequent acts do not have that initial lag again. You already know that this wheel traverses the gun, this thing are the sights and so on. You dont have to completely learn anew.
to cut a long explanation short, the first shot should take very long or fail completely, the second shot and all later shots should go considerably, a big leap faster. Same goes for managing to execute a drive command etc.
[ August 30, 2006, 09:32 AM: Message edited by: M Hofbauer ]
-
Oh I can very well see Juniors idea, how he wants little radiomenlets, infantry with a PRC strapped to their back. It makes a lot of sense, also gamewise:Originally posted by RMC:Ok, just for ****s and giggles....
Let's say they add "radiomen" into the game. What do they do? What effect do they have on how the game is played?
The radioman gets shot, you lose your artillery and air strike buttons. No more fire support for you, unless somebody else picks the radio up (if its undamanged).
Maybe you could only isse artillery fire missions and air support that close if the radioman has LOS to where you want to place your fire mission. Makes a lot of sense.
BUT ONLY IF WE'RE TALKING VIETNAM '68, or COMBAT MISSION SHMOK FORCE.
not for WW II,
because simply, for most of the war and most theaters of operations, you would be hard pressed to find any radiomenlets, let alone have such an effective, reliable radio-connection setup with artillery and air force waiting at hand just to support your company of people.
WW II is more than just GI JOE in France and encompasses more than the timeframe from mid-1944 to spring 1945.
radios were no secret. I suspect all armies at the outbreak of WW II had them - BUT ONLY IN THEORY.
I am still waiting for examples where frontline regular infantry platoons or companies used radiomenlets in POLAND 1939 or RUSSIA 1941+.
It is not a rhetorical question. I would be interested in hearing about it. Maybe it did happen. Though I doubt strongly there will be any number of such reports around -
BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A RARE EXCEPTION and NOT REPRESENTATIVE for the style of tactical combat communications of WW II in general.
Now, his idea about medics - thats a wholly different story. But his idea on how radios were used in WW II and what role they played is just so off, I can only repeat myself here and I put it mildly when I said that is is
"a skewed perception of the role and character of radio use in "WW II" "
Tarquelne,Originally posted by Tarquelne:OTOH, I believe you're mistaken about the relevance of individual radiomen to a game such as ToW (or CMx1). They were essential and important in RL, but you seem to be arguing that importance would translate rather directly into importance in the game.
OTOH, I believe you're mistaken about the relevance of individual radiomen to a game such as ToW (or CMx1). They were essential and important in RL,
I beg to disagree strongly. You are only giving Junior wrong ideas. Keep in mind he is still learning.
THEY WERE NOT ESSENTIAL AND IMPORTANT IN RL.
Not in that GENERALITY. Only under certain special circumstances did radiomen on a platoon level play any role at all, and only under very special exceptional cirumstances were they essential and important.
The only circumstances under which they play any role at all would be LATE WW 2 for the US and UK/Commonwealth Armies.
For the main part of WW II, the early war in Poland and France, the deciding HUGE war on the eastern front, platoon or company-level radiomenlets simply WERE NOT A FACTOR of any relevance or ubiquity.n What dop you think all the radio vehicles were for? Reliable radio with useful distances and quality could not be put into a small PRC just like that.
Apart from that I agree with the rest of your post, but I had to make this clear or else Junior will only be reinforced in his skewed perception.
-
unbelievable, Schweinfurt, eh?Originally posted by MorgTzu:I was in 10th ENG BN at Schweinfurt (sp?), conn barracks '93-'95..12B in support of 3/15 INF and sometimes 1/64.. I also was assigned to 3/7 CAV for a time when I made it on the Gold Team for the Boeslaeger Cup (kinda of a militery olympics thing with NATO), did the Macedonia/Serbian border thing and of course the Graf./Hoenfels silliness. Coming from the 82nd and OP "Just Cuz" amongst other stuff, it was kind of like going in reverse, but overall it was fun..just never got a taste for the hefeveisen (sp?).
I wasnt around on Conn too much, Ledward was more interesting anyhow, and I wasnt around a lot after 1993.
Does Askren Manors ring a bell? Kessler Field? Yorktown Village, the Bowling Center?
of course coming from 82nd and Deployment to Just Cause then being in SFT/Conn is quite an antishow, hehe.
oh btw wasnt it the 1/4 Cav on Conn? maybe my memory serves me wrong, you should know better.
btw Hefeweizen is overrated. hate it myself
-
you have no idea just how funny that remark really is.Originally posted by Sammy_Davis_Jnr:LOL Hofbauer
Well i can say this Hofbauer you make a better script writer then historian.
...
Please Hofbauer dont ever consider being a prosecuter or a historian, leave that to the smart people.
alas, its all too late now, maybe you should have given me that advice when I was your age.
-
Megakill,
au contraire !Originally posted by Megakill:Guys we post a lot of screens with tanks cause most of the people LIKE tanks. ...
Whatever we do - it is never enough.
it is more than enough - too much !
videlicet, too much tanks! :eek:
remember how you referenced the love for CC as the inspiration for this game?
well, you must have meant CC2, CC3, CC4 or CC5 - because in the original CC tanks were not very prominent, it was first and foremost an infantry game with occasional armor support.
IL-2 certainly is/was not "all wrong", yet it *did* have some serious issues. But in the country of the blind, the one-eyed is king.We had millions comments that IL-2 is all wrong, planes are not flying like they should, etc.
And IL2 IMO even had one and a half eye!
Compared to "Faces of War"......?
in Theatre of War
Posted