Jump to content

SlapHappy

Members
  • Posts

    1,576
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by SlapHappy

  1. For any future modded or designer created campaigns, it would be more effective, IMO, to scale back to several battles recreating a smaller time scale than was used for the main campaigns.

    For instance, instead of trying to encompass all German engagements from 39-45 with a dozen or so battles, create campaigns that just cover Hurtgen Forest or maybe even a smaller segment of that action.

    Also more battles with a much more limited access to armor and very heavy on infantry. The current balance in m ost battles still seems tank-heavy.

    It would be great to see one of those russian infantry charges against german trenchlines at 4-1 or better odds. I can see the smoke rolling off the processor and vid-card, now! smile.gif

  2. Moon or Soan

    Just wanted to clarify, if a tank, for instance is firing on an enemy infantryman and is moving towards him because of a targeting order, he will break off movement if the target becomes unspottable? That seems to be my experience. The only way to re-initialize movement in that direction is with an actual move order, correct?

  3. Actually, Wolfseven is correct. It is a minefield. If you look carefully around that area, you will see some small black signs that say "minen".

    I saw them before heading into that territory and ignored them, thinking they were battlefield debris. After the tank exploded, I took a closer look by zooming in....Doh! There's also a patch of them on the opposite side of the map.

    Normal Dude may have been taken out by the AT guns, though. My tank definitely was not because they were all deceased.

  4. Confirmed. Increased "territory" variable to double normal size in battle editor in Last Chance scenario. I was able to cruise all over the map and attack the AT guns from the left side.

    Still got my clock cleaned! I wasn't really trying, though, just testing smile.gif

  5. You can still engage those off-playable map elements, though. As long as they are in LOS. You just can't physically move your units into those areas, right?

    That only means you can't use the non-playable areas to make big sweeping maneuvers, which I guess is a pretty important limitation.

  6. Madmatt

    Incidently, the thingy about using the affinity switch from Windows task manager may have been prescient.

    When I ran the game normally using TOWsetup configured for one processor, the later launching of Windows task manager still indicated both cores checked. So perhaps that was the problem all along?

    Either way, it would still be nice to be able to run the game in dual-core AMD setting to help with performance issues.

  7. SirReal

    If you have the game saved prior to the point where this incident occured, you might try replaying it again from that point to see if perhaps you just had bad luck the first go round with penetrations.

    Or are you already doing that and getting the same result over and over?

    I agree that asuch a minimal range even the "75 stubby" should be able to at least get a spalling effect that would injure or kill crew members. (If that is modeled in the game, of course).

  8. I think leadership definitely affects morale. I once tried to sneak a MGer with a high marksmanship level up to plink a guy standing behind a halftrack MG gun shield. He had run out of ammo and was just standing there stupidly. The halftrack was demobilized and the driver's just sitting there staring out through the vision slot. I was trying to get close enough to not waste a bunch of ammo to dispatch this guy. Problem was my guy got weak in the knees before he could get close enough. Even though there was absolutely no danger, the halftrack caused him to panic and start crawling back towards the rest of the soldiers I had brought up.

    I sent him back with an officer with a high leadership and the "shakes" went away and he wasted the gunner AND the driver at very close range. The morale must function off the threat faced even if that threat is now harmless and non-resisting.

  9. This is a relatively minor point, but things like this often affect gameplay.

    In Last Chance, part of the counterattacking German force is comprised of some PZ-38(t) tanks. My 75mm French guns had no luck against their frontal armor. On checking the armor rating, I found that the 38(t) in the game has 50mm frontal armor. Even at closest range listed, the 75 couldn't penetrate more than about 48mm of armor.

    Here's the problem....only the E-G variants had 50mm armor. A-D variants only had about 25mm. The E variant was not produced until after November 1940. The war for France was well over when this upgrade was made - probably in response to performance issues against some of the heavier French guns.

  10. Could someone answer from the development or Battlefront? In the forces roster you can select units up to your spend limit or the roster limit. Is the roster limit fixed? Even if I increase the spending limit, I will still be limited by the number of available slots. Is the number of available "slots" finite or can it be altered (say in the editor). In other words, how much can you increase the scale of the game units-wise? I fully realize that a high number of units will dramatically decrease the engine performance. I was just curious to understand the hypothetical limits of the game.

  11. BillyBob read Rune's post in this thread. I agree the encyclopedia should've beeen synced with the in-game physics model. The fortunate thing is that the accurate models got into the actual game. I will take his word that it was thoroughly researched.

  12. Apparently this "scout" value thingy has too wide a variable range. Perhaps the devs could scale it back so that soldiers with low values don't perform actions that even a low-grade mongoloid idiot wouldn't pull.

    Just a thought. For now perhaps you could simply raise all the minimum values to at least 50 or something like that with the editor. BTW, if the "scout" value keeps the AI from performing stupid actions, then what the hell does "intelligence" dictate in the game?

  13. I agree with about half of these complaints. Trying to hide a Tiger tank will require more than just a few scattered trees.

    However, the problem with infantry being so easily spotted (especially by tanks) is silly especially when you consider they would be (should be) actively trying not to be seen. Also, the different spotting capabilities of open-top halftracks and tanks should be highly disparate, especially against infantry. From what I have seen, this is not the case.

    In one case I had a lone infantryman crawling behind some buildings at least 400 meters behind some tanks. The tank dutifully turned and snipered the guy as if the crewmen were comprised of Peter Parkers and their Spidey-sense was tingling. Yes, some of the combat results are just ludicrous. BTW, my infantryman was not firing on the tanks. He was actively trying to hide from them. Just not believable.

  14. Just speculating. I still think, as ubiquitous as they were, mortars should be represented on-map....Especially with the much larger map-sizes than typical in this game.

    Let's hope they make a return in a future update.

  15. I think infantry should have more of a chance versus artillery...especially AT guns. Those damned AT guns seem more like sniper rifles.

    Close assaulting anything is almost impossible.

×
×
  • Create New...