SlapHappy
-
Posts
1,576 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by SlapHappy
-
-
BTW, don't confuse the RPG-43 with the RPG-40. The RPG-40 is an oversized HE grenade, while the RPG-43 is an actual HEAT device.
The RPG-40 is pretty much useless against anything heavier than the PZKW-IV, which it is capable of destroying with one round, although usually I had to have 3 or more on target to finish the job. Only certain sections of the IV are susceptible to the RPG-40. Against the heavier Panther, the best result I ever achieved was disabling the main gun. Never got a tracked vehicle result even with over a dozen attempts.
-
In some tests I did with AT infantry groups, I found it was possible to either track this vehicle or destroy the crew using the bazooka or the RPG-43 AT grenades. However, I'm not sure the mission gives your soldiers any of these weapons. Anyhow, in my previous post "Impossible to stalk Tanks" I witnessed a security zone around the tank which seems to make it respond to Infantry AT threats within a certain range irrespective of which side you are approaching the vehicle.
Since then, I have found this isn't entirely accurate. If you can approach the vehicle from a series of LOS blocks (like bushes) it is possible to at least get into range with say, a bazooka before the vehicle turns around and starts blasting at you with MG and Gun rounds. Still, you better have an accurate soldier as you won't get many rounds off before being blasted. Of course, I cheated by adding in an American soldier because the Russian troops do not have the bazooka in it's loadouts, although apparently it was historically issued to Soviet troops. To what extent I don't know.
That leaves the RPG-43. These will kill the Elephant, especially when used en masse. However, getting close enough with even multiple tank-hunters is difficult. It is much easier to counter-assault an Elephant from entrenched infantry positions. However, if the beast is content to sit back at more than 30 meters and blast away, you are probably still pretty screwed.
So my best suggestion is to maybe tweak the mission with some RPG-43 AT grenades for your infantry and try to micromanage some "Elephant Kills". Don't think of it as cheating. It is historically accurate and the difficulty required is still pretty daunting. IOW, good luck........
-
Sure. But it's not as funny if you have to explain it out. 'nades or nades is a contraction for "grenades". I accidentally typed nads which is slang for "gonads". Something entirely differently don't you think?
Probably a lot more effective to throw your grenades at a tank rather than your gonads.
Probably a lot less painful too.
-
Nope
Area coordinates greater than the playable map area are ignored. I tried 3600 x 3600 area. It allows the input, but you cannot traverse off the playable map.
-
nonickch
In theory, but the rect called "territory" can only be expanded to cover the entire playable area of the map not the non-playable (non-traversable?) part.
At least I think that's true, I'll check it out.
-
Right you are. Sorry for planting that image in your brain.
-
If it is an object collision issue, I don't know how they'd get around it. This is where non-abstracted 3-d games get complicated. The only way I could see it working is if tanks did not destroy infantry by movement....equally unrealistic. If there were some way to isolate the forward part of the tank as a lethal collision item...perhaps. If a tank were to turn into a position I was standing in, I'd simply jump or climb onto the tank itself....something this engine can't simulate.
-
During my "sneak up on the tank" experiments, I heavily damaged a Panther by ringing it with AT 'naders in the setup and sent the crew into a panic. They started reversing out of there with one of my guys in hot pursuit, literally backing the tank off the map. I had a target command on the Panther as it continued to move backwards. Eventually it reached the edge of the map and continued to retreat from the playable to the non-playable areas. My guy just kept chasing him. I couldn't issue a move command anywhere in that area, but he continued to chase the tank as long as it was targeted. Eventually the tank seemed to halt at the edge of the non-playable map and my guy tossed his 2 grenades (the tank survived). As a test I clicked on the playable area of the map and the guy returned back into the main map area.
So apparently, you can pursue an enemy from the map using a target command? It would appear so based on what I witnessed.
-
Well, buttoned and unbuttoned is not simulated in the game TOW as it is in Combat Mission. It would seem from the graphic indications that tanks are always buttoned without an officer in the cupola. If the tank commander were present in the cupola, I could see him spotting a stealthy enemy soldier...at least if he were looking in the right direction.
-
Thanks Madmatt
I just tried again with FOUR supersoldiers with anti-tank nads. Same result. Even with multiple targets the tank gunned them down and let out a hearty yawn. I'm hopeful that the Moscow test proves out that it was fixed in the patch. There seems to be some "alert zone" which tanks respond to which is just outside the grenades range. The tank pivot occurs at almost exactly the same relative range every time. I'm also glad the "order change freeze-up" is being addressed. Soldiers just seem to stand there confused when I tried to assault the tank as well.
-
Artificially created test mission. One Panther tank with "regular" grade crew. Soviet Superhero with 100 Leadership, Accuracy and Scout skill. And two RPG-40 grenades. Set to crawl mode, our Soviet hero made a circuitous route to the back of the Panther without being spotted. Had his grenade in hand, so I knew the attack range. He got to within about 20 feet of minimum attack range. The Panther pivoted on a dime, one burst of MG fire, over. This needs to be fixed. You have to give the infantry some chance in the anti-tank role. These super-sensitive tank crews need to have their "spidey-sense" toned down quite a bit.
-
There are some downloadable (free) Advanced Squad Leader scenarios at this publisher site:
http://www.multimanpublishing.com/downloads.php
They are in .pdf format. Might be an inspiration for some possible new missions. Infantry requirements for some are kind of high and some vehicles/weapon systems are, of course, not modeled in the game....but.....generally speaking I think many of these could be simulated in the TOW engine. More so especially when the Map Editor becomes available.
-
I agree, but I think it's the lack of certain anti-tank weapons that is more suspect. For example magnetic mines are not in the game. However this is problematic as any infantry near a tank will be squished if the tank is moving around. This seems to be a product of the collision area minimums used in the game. You'd have the same problem with the teller mine scenario. Although from some videos I 've seen, it was the case that Teller mines were chucked at very short range to hopefully land on the deck of an enemy tank. Of course, this is probably less effective than actually placing the mine there.
-
Now see, that's interesting Glide. I have the same processor as you do but it's the older (non-AM2) package. I only have 1 GB of RAM. Same Windows. 7600GS vid card (substantially less powerful than yours). I can run the game in 1280 x 1024@60 with one core only and get at least, if not better frame rate averages than you are getting on that mission. My quality settings are pretty much identical to yours as well.
-
Madmatt
It's good to hear these problems are being addressed. I have looked at all of the crash/freeze issues and possible resolutions and determined that while I can minimize crashes and freezes I still have not been able to rid myself of them entirely. Hopefully the compiler updates will help with getting rid of them entirely in the (somewhat) near future.
That being said, I am curious about simply improving the overall performance of the game up to and including additional hardware upgrades if necessary. However, sometimes it is frustrating to determine exactly what upgrades would be most effective. For instance, I could run out and buy the most costly vid card out there, only to find that perhaps upgrading from 1 GB of memory to 2 GB would have been a more helpful solution. Do you or the developers have any comments about memory availability and it's impact on this particular game engine? Also CPU? I'd also suspect that the actual bus speed of the memory may play at least a marginal role in achieved FPS. While I'm not doubting the influence of the video card on any 3d game engine, I'm curious about these issues. Especially upon inspecting the rather large resource footprint that TOW seems to have once the game gets rolling.
-
I think it's a memory limitation. I'm not sure there is a theoretical limit to the number of units allowed in the game. In CC there definitely was.
-
Lack of or incorrect type of "placeholder". Check it out in the editor...you will find there is no appropriate placeholder for that tank.
Why the program strands them out in the middle of nowhere....I have no idea....but that is your problem.
-
Mammory Leak! Brrrttt! Brrttt! Brrrtrt!
-
How steep is the decline? I've seen tanks negotiate certain inclines in a non-linear fashion. Otherwise, I can't imagine why it should turn with a retreat command.
-
Sure you didn't choose Kamikaze on the 'ol Support Editor box?
-
Says in there that maps will be increased to 4 km square playable as well. Interesting.
-
Agreed. That's just the name the object was given, I guess.
-
Some possibilities here. This is what it sounds like - an ammo container. Right now there is only one possibility. You have to set the nationality of the object to "Any". Any other setting gives you no options for the backpack set.
Under "unit" type you can choose "ammopacksmall" as the only option. This gives you "10xPanzerfaust_30" in the "Backpackset" option.
Additional fleshing out of other options would allow more ammo to be placed on the battlefield separate from the soldier units. Of course, it is not clear whether or not soldiers can take possession of larger ammo types like tank shells. Right now it appears they cannot. It also appears there is no way for "human" units to transfer these ammo types into the inventories of vehicles.
-
"Yes, but how doest it work if he was not K.I.A.?
The Mg-42 run out of ammo and my 2. gunner have a few belts ammo but he doesnt reload the Mg, same with infantryman for panzeschreck."
Once out of ammo you would have to manually tell the rifle/assistant to drop the ammo and then the MGer to pick it up. I see no other way to do it without micromanagement.
May 22nd Update on Game Patch
in Theatre of War
Posted
I've been on the back side of slopes and gotten the bright red "spotting" icon for a vehicle that appeared below the top of the slope. So if I can "spot" the vehicle, why does it not appear on the screen? And yes, I understand the difference between LOS and LOF, but I was under the impression the bright red icon meant your unit had adequate LOF.
Therefore, I've kinda come to the conclusion that using the "enter" view is not necessarily any better than not, if I have to rely on the red unit icons for real LOS indication.