I'm glad the Moscow missions are free....

[wokelly]

because the missions are terrible. Seriously there is something that is absolutely frustrating about dealing with waves upon waves of German tanks and Infantry with less tanks and less infantry and often little artillery support, plus you tanks are often worse then the german tanks because just about anything can rape the BT-7s and T-24s yet you barely get T-34s.

I mean there are really no tactics, its just mass waves (Germans) attacking smaller forces (You) for about 6 of the maps. I dont think I ever once recieved reinforcements in a battle, at least not the ones I lost. Could not even fulfill the first objective half the time.

At least there are more maps for custom campaigns to use.

[Elmar Bijlsma]

God forbid you should be challenged by a game. It's do-able.

[wokelly]

Dude I beat that freaking Strong at Heart mission, the one where you have 4-5 T-34s vs tigers and elephants. I know its doable if you put time into it. But hell this game has gotta be more then just massed numbers. Even in the original campaigns you always faced more enemy tanks and infnatry then you had and if you played from the other side you never got to use the numbers you faced.

For example St.lo mission when playing germans you face dozens of tanks, yet when you play as the americans the germans have tanks you never had the ability to select.

Most of these missions are zerging with historically accurate units.

[whaco]

I agree. It's a bit of a joke. I love a challenge but would also like to use some tactics to win. Maybe patch #4 will fix the LOS issue. For the love of god, when a tank is surrounded by trees why the hell is it getting picked off from 600 meters away and my screen tells me I do not have clear LOS on that same unit. I give up.

[K9crump]

Exactly! And also, is it me, or are the tank/at gunners terrible shots... I am having such a hard time with this new camaign that I had to load one of the recently created single player maps(tanks seelow) and test how the patch reacted on that. Well, the tanks and the aiming was good and the patch worked well so far, so I guess it was just these scenarios of the Moscow Campaign. I have lost the first 4 in a row. Not good for moral...lol. I lost a few games here and there with the other original campaigns, but I beat alot of the hard ones and these are just stupid! Maybe some of you guys that are gifted can created some good scenarios. Thanks for listening, and I am grateful for the patch...

Mike

[wokelly]

Yeah dont get me wrong, the patch was fantastic, fixed many issues, but the missions...

[FinnN]

I think the problem is that unexperienced gunners have skills that are too rubbish, which is why you tend to have difficulties in campaigns and not single missions. Of course having poor skills means they're less likely to survive, which means they get less experience, etc - it's a vicious circle. I think this is something that can be modded globally (looking at the relevant files briefly it seems that they haven't changed in the patch at first glance), or someone can edit the missions to give all the men more experience.

I've not played the patch campaign yet, but certainly the original campaigns had that meat-grinder problem. Historically, given the odds you usually face and the level of experience your men have, the result of most of the battles would be an overrun or Victoria Crosses all round - and in a weird sort of way it's good that that's a typical outcome. Historically not all battles consisted of green troops being attacked at odds of 3 to 5:1 by crack divisions (or even worse doing the attacking). I like a challenge, but I'd rather have a more realistic, balanced and immersive campaign.

Have fun

Finn

[K9crump]

Well put Finn. I am glad for the patch, but this campaign they designed sucked. I really like this game, but it needs the kinda thought out and well organized/realistic types of scenarios. Like I said, I hope that the people that have the know how with the map editor will make us some decent/realistic scenarios. Which will keep us going till the next installment/addon of the game.

Mike

[Cornfleek]

I was hoping gameplay would improve with the patch, but this "very little experienced vs. loads of experience enemies" type of missions is not my cup of tea. Apparently AI can't handle even matches, everything needs to be loads vs. very little. Pity. Didn't like it first time around, don't like it second time around. I'll wait for a second patch (if any) and user made campaigns that are actually interesting and challenging to play (not in the quick save quick load way).

Oh well, CMSF is almost there...

[SlapHappy]

I think the point people are missing here is that even if you feel that the game has many un balanced issues here and there (and I tend to agree) there is at least the capability within the game design to set it straight. Or at least make it the way you prefer it.

In most games, the combat/damage models are based on absolute nonsense and there's not a damn thing you can do about it except put it on E-bay and try again. Luckily, that is not the case with TOW. I think some forward thinking will transform it nicely in the relatively near future. Of course this will all take time. I think the spread out campaigns timeline doesn't work well with this particular game. When good designers come up with some better ideas on a more focused timeline, I think we will see some improvements.

If you haven't checked out Oudy's Yanovo scenario yet, you should. He implements a nice withdrawal option for the Germans based on casualty rates and it feels just right. If you can force the Jerries to retreat, you win. It's a nice feature to have in the game to balance out the odds a little. This is just one example of what is possible with creative thinking.

[FinnN]

Here's the relevant table from :

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">{Shooter}

// Novice Regular Veteran Elite

Leadership 0 10 10 40 40 70 70 90

Driver 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Gunlayer 1 19 20 49 50 79 80 95

Scout 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Accuracy 0 5 5 10 10 20 20 30

Intelligence 5 100 15 100 25 100 35 100</pre>

[Dennis50]

The question is ...why is it like the balance is from another planet out of the box ?? "The foundation is there" ..for the customers to try and make it enjoyable or playable ...with mission and map makers that are only usable if you have some programming skills ? I'm sorry ..but if I had known this ahead of time, I probably would not have bought it. Russian games are starting to leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Regards,

Gunz

[BFCElvis]

Regarding the campaign. The guys who don't like it did you get past the first 4 (or was it 5) battles?

SPOILER ALERT.........................

Because those first few can be fun and have some subtle differences but are essentially defending against attacking enemy units. The ones after that get much more complex and have some really neat aspects to them (in my opinion). The attack then counter attack one...stuff like that.

[ June 30, 2007, 06:46 PM: Message edited by: Elvis ]

[Oudy]

FinnN,

I think that the way the chart works is that the game picks a random number within that range. For a novice gunlayer the game randomly picks a number between 1-19. Generally I've found it tends to be toward the higher range. This can be tested easily by making a novice crew and checking the ability for each crewman.

Oudy

[SlapHappy]

I've found that gunners especially below a 40 rating have a hard time hitting anything without expending quite a bit of ammo. Of course, this is compounded by weapons that lack inherent accuracy.

However, I've also noticed that, especially with tank guns, the numbers appear to be "gamed" to produce the desired effect. For instance the 75L24 gun has a lower dispersion characteristic than the 75L48 when firing HE shells? In fact, almost as good as the 75L70 gun on the Panther.

Country Ger

Name 75mm_KwK_37_L24

[Ger\75mm_SprGr_34_(HE_FRAG)]

Ammo Ger\75mm_SprGr_34_(HE_FRAG)

Speed 420

aimMinDist 10

aimMaxDist 2000

HistMaxDist 7680

Dispersion 1000 0.45

Country Ger

Name 75mm_KwK_40_L48

[Ger\75mm_SprGr_34_(HE_FRAG)]

Ammo Ger\75mm_SprGr_34_(HE_FRAG)

Speed 548

aimMinDist 10

aimMaxDist 2000

HistMaxDist 7680

Dispersion 1000 0.62

Country Ger

Name 75mm_KwK_42_L70

[Ger\75mm_SprGr_Patr_42_(HE_FRAG)]

Ammo Ger\75mm_SprGr_Patr_42_(HE_FRAG)

Speed 700

aimMinDist 10

aimMaxDist 2000

HistMaxDist 7700

Dispersion 1000 0.43

Why would the longer gun with a higher shell velocity have a higher dispersion factor at 1000 meters?

[Mastiff]

Originally posted by GunzAbeam:

The question is ...why is it like the balance is from another planet out of the box ?? "The foundation is there" ..for the customers to try and make it enjoyable or playable ...with mission and map makers that are only usable if you have some programming skills ? I'm sorry ..but if I had known this ahead of time, I probably would not have bought it. Russian games are starting to leave a bad taste in my mouth.

Regards,

Gunz

Becuase russia is another planet.

[FinnN]

Originally posted by Oudy:

FinnN,

I think that the way the chart works is that the game picks a random number within that range. For a novice gunlayer the game randomly picks a number between 1-19. Generally I've found it tends to be toward the higher range. This can be tested easily by making a novice crew and checking the ability for each crewman.

Oudy

Ah, I see. Even so, an infantryman after one mission can get enough points to get in the range of a regular crewman. Personally I think the novice range needs replacing with the regular one (or maybe even bumped up a little) and the other ranges adjusted too. Also the minimum skill level to operate a gun needs pushing up (this is also in an ini file somewhere) so that it's harder to build up an unrealistic force mix of potential crew, the offset to this being that all your 'real' crew are much more competent. There are a number of inter-related sections and files so it needs to be done carefully, but I think it would be a move forward.

Have fun

Finn

[Oudy]

FinnN

I agree fully. There is a lot of tweaking that can be done to make the game more realistic. I've found a number of inconsistencies in the gun and armor data that are just crying out for adjustment. One example is in the 50mm_kwk_38_l42.ini file. It has the same penetration rating as the long barreled gun.

I'm just waiting till someone tackles the AI scripts. Here's an example...good luck.

</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> // ****************

// HUMAN SCRIPT AI

// ****************

//#include <car.sce>

#include <tank.sce>

#include <artillery.sce>

#include <construction.sce>

Activities

{

// Basis activities

ActAggressiveForwardMoving { Task SetFlag Navigation TARGET

Task NavSetAggressive AGGRESSIVE

Task NavSetDir FORWARD

Task SetFlag Movement ABSENCE

Task SetFlag TankCrew EXAMINATION

Task NavRecommended FREE } </pre>

[SlapHappy]

Originally posted by Oudy:

FinnN

I agree fully. There is a lot of tweaking that can be done to make the game more realistic. I've found a number of inconsistencies in the gun and armor data that are just crying out for adjustment. One example is in the 50mm_kwk_38_l42.ini file. It has the same penetration rating as the long barreled gun.

Oudy

Where did that gun come from? I thought only the 50L60 was in the game as a PAK? Was that in the patch?

I agree about tweaking the guns....the 75L24 is suspicious too. See my post regarding that.

[Oudy]

SlapHappy

The 50/L60 gun is not currently used in the game but it has a ini file for it. It may be that they thought it was going to be used, but then changed their minds. I'm using it, modified for more accurate penetration data, for my Pz.IIIG.

Oudy

[SlapHappy]

Ok. I didn't previously have all the gun data until you updated the filelist for the extractor, and I hadn't noticed the 50L42 yet.

[Lone Commissar]

How do you choose between the Russian and German Campaigns or do you have to play through one to get to the other?

[chanss]

Originally posted by Elmar Bijlsma:

God forbid you should be challenged by a game. It's do-able.

With a couple of hundred quick Save/loads yes. These campaigns feel more like work than fun, the majority of them for me atleast. It is not very historic either to have scenarious flooding with elefants and tigers and what not.........

Game Engine itself is fine though.

[Rapier]

If you wish to make the game easier.... you can via difficulty level or modding. Simple fact.

I've had problems with freezes and have had to use the ToW_1.4.exe file to play post patch.

Have just finished the first 2 Moscow missions and won both on hard setting... on first attempts. No save / reloads btw as I think thats just abusing the random number generator. If I lose a battle I will restart it from scratch.

Yes you don't have many T34s... I'm sure that historically correct.

However, I hide my AT guns and only opened fire when panzers were within 500m. You have a large numbers of AT rifles and normally there is another soldier beside him with 50 extra rounds.

The RPG-40 grenades are simply awesome. Once in range they rarely miss. Since the patch it would appear infantry are easier to keep alive. Its even possible to sneak a man close to a tank now.

Losing battles continually will mean your men are inexperienced. Thats the way the missions / campaigns are designed.

[ July 03, 2007, 06:53 PM: Message edited by: Rapier ]

[chanss]

Originally posted by chanss:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Elmar Bijlsma:

God forbid you should be challenged by a game. It's do-able.

With a couple of hundred quick Save/loads yes. These campaigns feel more like work than fun, the majority of them for me atleast. It is not very historic either to have scenarious flooding with elefants and tigers and what not.........

Game Engine itself is fine though. </font>