Amedeo Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Perhaps the BFC guys should open a new thread reserved to Moderators/Supervisors in which keep us informed about what they decided to change in the 1.03 patch and what they decided to leave as it is. Just to keep us informed on what's afoot (and avoid that I'll repeat my fix requested once more because I still don't know whether they didn't notice my posts or decided they are not something to care of ) Regards, Amedeo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Volker Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Im not sure, but did you guys fix the Bug that shows an image of the Panther Tank, for the 38t (Panzer I)? Down at the Armor Map, the info Box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sublime Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Well, I hope they spent more time fixing the HE bug and stuff than fixing the 'panther graphic' It doesnt matter anyways Volker, do a search, they had a thread with the correct bmp's in it to solve the problem.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 I was wondering if there was/had ever been clever programming that covered the general deterioration in gun-laying that should occur if multiple sources are firing at the same target. How do you know it's your shell that was short/left/right etc? Presumably in WW2 this would have been a problem.Is this a grog question? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob Murray Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Volker: you can get the fix for that profile pic bug here . Either that or email me & I'll send you a copy of the fix. [ April 08, 2003, 01:18 PM: Message edited by: Rob Murray ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted April 8, 2003 Author Share Posted April 8, 2003 Hardware will have no effect on the AI's behavior nor will the amount of system memory. That stuff will affect game performace but not how the AI *thinks*. As to some other things that were raised. Charles has a habit of not always documenting everything he changes in the code so just because you don't see something listed in the fix list doesn't mean it wasn't changed. Since the public beta was released Charles has already made some fixes based on what was being reported to me via email. If you guys want to just continue to post your observations to this thread instead of creating new ones, then that is fine. Madmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted April 8, 2003 Author Share Posted April 8, 2003 Originally posted by Amedeo: The IS-2 mod. 1944 lacks the rear MG! Moreover this tank has both the front upper and front lower hull plates 120mm thick. The sources I know of, list the lower hull at 100mm (and some Russian sources states that, after the change in slope to 60°, the upper hull also was 'only' 100mm thick). And, last but not least, my favourite question since the demo came out: where are the 45mm canister rounds??? Regards, Amedeo Our data on the IS-2's come from sources which by and large are more accurate and current than Zaloga's and we show that while some 1944 IS-2 still had the rear MG mount intact the majority had it removed. With only a 4 man crew there is rarely anyone to man it anyway. Madmatt [ April 08, 2003, 04:32 PM: Message edited by: Madmatt ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted April 8, 2003 Author Share Posted April 8, 2003 It doesn't really matter where you guys post your observations. In this thread or a new one, I will see it either way. We are working on the HE situation some more, more info forthcoming when I have it. By the way, I thought we did include the new PZ 38T icons already in this patch. Make sure you move the new BMPs included in the patch to your BMP folder if you installed the patch somewhere other than your CMBB directory. Madmatt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
massimorocca Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Quick test with Cemetery Hill scenario to see if the crest bug is addressed. Unfurtunately not. I target with full los the infantry units with 4 armored and one 75 inf gun. All the rounds cratered the hill just under the crest, no one fly over. And the Tacai cannot understand that the spotted unit isn't also a legitimate target so it wasted all the ammo for naught. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tracer Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Had the same problem as massimorocca,I used a QB for the test though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arax3 Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Matt: You are a good guy! Thanks and I am still praying for your return to the Good side. God loves you. A3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 No flyover while firing on a crest? Hmmm, odd. I'm getting flyovers. And my behind-crest targets have a much shorter lifespan in v1.03 than v1.02. Maybe we're measuring different things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted April 8, 2003 Author Share Posted April 8, 2003 Guys, I have just uploaded a new beta build which adds these new changes. Please continue your testing with this version. Changes since the first public beta: - further tweak to shell line of fire at unit on reverse slope - further tweak to Matilda II model - fixed a casualty count bug in KOed tanks (which was not in v1.02) I tested this build with a file someone sent me to test the reverse slope AT gun issue. Here is a screenshot that should demonstrate whats occuring now. A good deal of shells are still hitting the forward slope (off camera to the extreme left), as expected, but many are also passing over the target and a few are hitting on and about the area of the gun itself. Madmatt [ April 08, 2003, 04:25 PM: Message edited by: Madmatt ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amedeo Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Originally posted by Madmatt: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Amedeo: The IS-2 mod. 1944 lacks the rear MG! Moreover this tank has both the front upper and front lower hull plates 120mm thick. The sources I know of, list the lower hull at 100mm (and some Russian sources states that, after the change in slope to 60°, the upper hull also was 'only' 100mm thick). And, last but not least, my favourite question since the demo came out: where are the 45mm canister rounds??? Regards, Amedeo Our data on the IS-2's come from sources which by and large are more accurate and current than Valoga's and we show that while some 1944 IS-2 still had the rear MG mount intact the majority had it removed. With only a 4 man crew there is rarely anyone to man it anyway. Madmatt </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Is this a good place to break in to mention the Valentine III is smaller than the Valentine IV? I've emailed Matt a screenshot. Not quite on par with game engine issues but I do what I can. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flammenwerfer Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 [ April 08, 2003, 05:02 PM: Message edited by: Flammenwerfer ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Someone had mentioned the 'bug' of rounds being walked in a near-straight line up to a target. I don't think that's a bug. A high velocity gun with a flat trajectory would have a long narrow dispersion footprint just like that, ESPECIALLY in the days before rangefinders when the commander/gunner would have to watch the fall of the shot and correct. I recall reading stastics about the number of rounds fired per target on the Western front and the number was staggering. [ April 08, 2003, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
V Posted April 8, 2003 Share Posted April 8, 2003 Originally posted by MikeyD: Someone had mentioned the 'bug' of rounds being walked in a near-straight line up to a target. I don't think that's a bug. A high velocity gun with a flat trajectory would have a long narrow dispersion footprint just like that, ESPECIALLY in the days before rangefinders when the commander/gunner would have to watch the fall of the shot and correct. I recall reading stastics about the number of rounds fired per target on the Western front and the number was staggering. I hope you are right! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSulo Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 * Troops imported into a QB have ammo reloaded but only to the percentage set in the QB parameters. Woohoo! Thanks Steve and Charles! I did some testing (of course), and it works perfectly! It changes the ammo of units, but only if the unit's current ammo level is lower than the QB ammo level setting. It also import them "as is", so I can set the ammo for a tank or HMG in the scenario editor, and get the exact ammo loadout in the game. Beautiful! This is great for us Campaigners! I did notice one small thing... If I set the ammo loadout of a tank (Pz IVF) to say 45HE 15AP 20C 0S in the editor, and then start a QB, full ammo, and import the map, it will get more than 80 shells, for instance 45HE 28AP 20C 6S = 99 when I tried it. You should have a check so it wont go over the maximum number of shells in your "reload routine". Other than that, don't change a thing! It is close to perfection! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 Madmatt, Wow, fast response! The link at the beginning of this thread shows the same beta file as the original. You mentioned that there's a new build available. Where is it located and how (filename) is it differentiated from the original beta? Thanks, Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aka_tom_w Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 Originally posted by c3k: Madmatt, Wow, fast response! The link at the beginning of this thread shows the same beta file as the original. You mentioned that there's a new build available. Where is it located and how (filename) is it differentiated from the original beta? Thanks, Ken looks like it has the same name it just has a new creation date in the file info it was created April 8th at 3:25 pm EST its still v1.03 but it is the latest build. is that correct? -tom w Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CombinedArms Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 TEST of NEW version of 1.03 INTERESTING RESULTS! I just ran a test of the new (April 8) version of 1.03b. Using a map with 8 "tracks" that I'd been using to test tank attacks in hulldown positions, I placed 8 Russian 45mm guns with foxholes in "hulldown" positions behind a ridge with a long flatish crest, one gun for each track. The guns were faced by one Tiger each at about 350 meters. All tanks and guns were regular. I wanted guns that couldn't easily kill the tanks, so we could see what happened over time--Can the tank eventually correct fire and get the gun? As I say, the results were interesting, and suggest to me that the bug is almost--but not quite--fixed. At first, things looked very promising. On the first turn, two of the guns were KOed. The tanks that scored the KOs hit the bank at first, but then quickly corrected fire and score killing direct hits. The other tanks were still hitting the bank. On turn two, two more guns were knocked out as more tanks learned to correct their fire. At this point, I thought things looked very promising--the "hulldown" position for guns was offering real advantage, as it should, but not an insuperable one, as it shouldn't. I figured the rest of the Tigers would figure out how to raise their fire a hair and hit the guns instead of the the bank. But they never did! By turn seven, there were still four dead guns and four live guns. The other four Tigers never did learn to correct their fire. Eventually two suffered gun damage. The other two are still plowing rounds into the hill. This seems to me to present a problem, and I'm not sure what the source of the problem might be. I tried to put all the guns in the same location--"hulldown" in as protected a spot as possible while still having line of sight on the enemy tank. But it's possible that four of the guns ended up in a "magic" spot that somehow fools the TacAI and makes it unable to correct fire. Anyway, I'd be glad to send the files to Matt if he wants to see them and see if he gets a similar result and/or can solve the problem. [ April 08, 2003, 09:04 PM: Message edited by: CombinedArms ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redhead Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 It seems like the latest patch (downloaded the new one) doesn't fix the issue. I have an IS-2 at the bottom of the hill hull down to the pak on the top of the hill. I only gave the pak HE, so it wouldn't kill the tank. The tank can kill the pak, but never by directly hitting it. The PAK hits the tank with every shot. Only when DF hits the crest of the hill (which is a few meters from the gun), does the gun get knocked out. I've never seen a shot go long past the gun, but I've only run about 30 shots or so. What is the expected behavior here? Should the tank be able to hit the gun, or is by design with correctly modelled ballistics? I don't remember the other thread (unhittable gun bug) reaching a firm conclusion. And if anyone wants it, I have a screen shot of a line of craters made by the IS-2 and the kill shot exploding on the crest a few meters from the gun (running 1.3 latest patch). I can't post the pic since I'm not running a webserver. [ April 08, 2003, 11:36 PM: Message edited by: redhead ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wadepm Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 Well, in my test the results are similar to 1.01 but the gun doesn't die quite as fast. I think we are approaching that happy medium between 1.01 and 1.02. One more tweek Matt? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeeW Posted April 9, 2003 Share Posted April 9, 2003 This has been posted by someone else, but felt that it should be again. When plotting a fast move forward waypoint and then a 45 degree turn to the next waypoint 5 or so meters further on, many times the vehicle will overshoot one of the waypoints and make a 180 degree turn to go back to it. Often this leaves the rear of the vehicle facing the enemy. This is easily reproduced in the latest 1.03beta patch. I've seen this behaviour in games and it is one of those things that leaves a frustrating feeling as unrealistic. I also tested HE firing at guns behind a hill. This seems to be working in an acceptable manner now. Thanks lee Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts