to whomever is working for the next patch, :bow: a few odds and ends I'd like to bring up, both glitches to report and questions to ask.
Glitches;
1. A German unit in the oob in the summer of '42 called 'Personage' - this unit has an ugly white square around it that needs to be corrected. The 'default ground' a unit is on, normally a patch of grey soil, is missing as a result. (btw, what is this unit used for exactly? It looks exactly like a foot officer)
2. The 2d icon in view 4 (2d zoom in) for the German units 234-2 'Puma' and the Psw 234-4 (75mm AT armored car) seem to have been reversed. A small glitch, but noticeable.
3. The 2d zoom-in icons (view 4 again) for the Pzkfw 7/1 quad-20mm halftrack and Pzkfw 7/2 37mm AAA halftrack are incorrect. The 7/1 quad currently uses the Pzkfw 10/4 ht icon, and the 37mm AAA HT icon needs to show the original 7/2 silhouette. Should be an easy fix.
4. The axis Romanian horses (didn't check as allied) have a 2d zoom-in icon that is blank (should be showing a horse silhouette). Again, easy fix.
Questions;
1. The supply dump and fuel dump units in the game. Do they have an actual function, like double as an HQ unit? Or are they mainly to add value to a captured area (since they cannot move)? Very curious about this one.
2. For scenarios that were designed with the Blitzkreig scenario pack; Are these scenarios going to be revised for an upcoming patch? I seem to recall there was some kind of effort being made to update these for the current JTCS, but can't remember what the plans were for these unplayable scenarios. I ask this because I heard these scenarios absolutely will not work with the JTCS.
3. Will the German officers ever be equipped with schwimmwagen - that is, will there ever be motorized axis officers added to the oob that have amphibious capabilities? German tanks are already in there with amphibious abilities after all. Also, will the schwimmwagen ever get a transport capability in the future, to carry small numbers of troops (and foot officers)? Such a useful unit that could add some interesting tactical possibilities.
4. Will the '5% chance to disable' for artillery hits vs. armor be reduced back down to 2% in the upcoming patch? Please say yes.
5. I notice a huge number of motorized vehicular units in the oob's (WF, EF, RS) that have a defense of '1' - these vehicles are going to be brought up to '2' to be consistent with trucks in the next patch, correct?
6. The little 'fireball' icon is missing from assault-type units in the info box. Will this be added back in with the next patch? I notice the area on the info box where it is supposed to be (on high assault units only) still has the background 'underlay,' but the fireball itself is not present. Sorry to nitpick on this one.
7. Russian machine gunners. They're weak. As in, their firepower (or lack thereof) does not seem indicative of a MG platoon. Has anyone ever thought this besides me? I *love* those Anti-aircraft machinegun (AAMG) platoons, but they can't ride on tanks. Seems to me the Soviet MG platoon, with a range of 4, should have a soft attack factor of say 10 at range 1, 8 at range 2, 6 at range 3, and 4 at a range of 4. This is just on off the wall question I have always wanted to ask, but I really believe that Soviet MG platoons are underpowered. and the obvious question - will these weak units ever have their firepower increased?
8. Roughly, when is the patch scheduled to be released?
Thanks in advance.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]4. Will the '5% chance to disable' for artillery hits vs. armor be reduced back down to 2% in the upcoming patch? Please say yes.
I would like to vote please say no. At 2% armor has nothing to fear from an artillery barrage. At 5% you at least have to think about it.
Of course as always make it optional like the assault function.
And to those who are worried about too many optional rules, please go look at a Panzer Campaign optional rules set up. The few in CS are nothing compared to that.
Thanx!
Erik
"Of course as always make it optional like the assault function."
Excellent suggestion Hawk. That way everybody is kept happy.
"At 2% armor has nothing to fear from an artillery barrage."
Sorry, but I was at the receiving end of many an armor kill at 2% in past years. When you add up the sheer numbers of light artillery hits, you will lose several tanks per battle at 2%.
I'm surprised anyone would support the '5% armor disable' rule; a whopping 250% increase in the chance to damage armor compared to before, this combined with the fact that large caliber artillery can already destroy light armor by fire strength alone. My main issue with the 5% rule is that it often leads to the cheesy tactic of people deliberately targeting hexes containing tough armor over and over and over again in order to get that lucky hit. It's nonsense and IMO it needs to stop.
I've seen one too many tanks with defense 10+ get taken out by 81mm mortars. I say, stop the madness!
Another question or two while I'm thinking of it.
1. Are Divided Ground and Divided Ground Vietnam (for JTCS) going to be included in a future patch, or will these be games we will have to purchase separately?
2. I notice a large number of the newer units have NO background / history filled in (when you press F2). Are there plans to include updated unit histories with these newer units in the future? It's a little frustrating when there's no description whatsoever of an otherwise interesting or useful unit.
C'mon guys, share your opinions!
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]1. A German unit in the oob in the summer of '42 called 'Personage' - this unit has an ugly white square around it that needs to be corrected. The 'default ground' a unit is on, normally a patch of grey soil, is missing as a result. (btw, what is this unit used for exactly? It looks exactly like a foot officer)
It is a special character that you can use to capture or kill for a lot of Victory Points. It serves no other purpose.
"P01281
This is a special character type for commando type scenarios. The character is worth many victory points. "
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]2. The 2d icon in view 4 (2d zoom in) for the German units 234-2 'Puma' and the Psw 234-4 (75mm AT armored car) seem to have been reversed. A small glitch, but noticeable.
Thanks! Added to the list.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]3. The 2d zoom-in icons (view 4 again) for the Pzkfw 7/1 quad-20mm halftrack and Pzkfw 7/2 37mm AAA halftrack are incorrect. The 7/1 quad currently uses the Pzkfw 10/4 ht icon, and the 37mm AAA HT icon needs to show the original 7/2 silhouette. Should be an easy fix.
Thanks! Added to the list.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]4. The axis Romanian horses (didn't check as allied) have a 2d zoom-in icon that is blank (should be showing a horse silhouette). Again, easy fix.
Thanks! Added to the list.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]Questions;
1. The supply dump and fuel dump units in the game. Do they have an actual function, like double as an HQ unit? Or are they mainly to add value to a captured area (since they cannot move)? Very curious about this one.
P01707
This unit represents a large supply depot. The unit DOES NOT move but it does have defensive capabilities. This is a high value unit that should be protected! The unit offers high victory points and provides on map supply at the Corp Level.
P01708
This unit represents a large fuel depot. The unit DOES NOT move but it does have defensive capabilities. This is a high value unit that should be protected! The unit offers high victory points and provides on map supply at the Corp Level.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]2. For scenarios that were designed with the Blitzkreig scenario pack; Are these scenarios going to be revised for an upcoming patch? I seem to recall there was some kind of effort being made to update these for the current JTCS, but can't remember what the plans were for these unplayable scenarios. I ask this because I heard these scenarios absolutely will not work with the JTCS.
My scenarios (the Odessa set) will be updated and included in the 1.05 UPDATE. My Smolensk set of scenarios (the ones intended for the second expansion pack) are due to updated (rebuilt) and included in the 1.05 UPDATE.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]3. Will the German officers ever be equipped with schwimmwagen - that is, will there ever be motorized axis officers added to the oob that have amphibious capabilities? German tanks are already in there with amphibious abilities after all. Also, will the schwimmwagen ever get a transport capability in the future, to carry small numbers of troops (and foot officers)? Such a useful unit that could add some interesting tactical possibilities.
Use non-motorized leaders and include the schimmwagen as their transport? They are available in West Front, looks like they need to be added to East Front.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]4. Will the '5% chance to disable' for artillery hits vs. armor be reduced back down to 2% in the upcoming patch? Please say yes.
The disable chance was reduced to 4% with the 1.04 UPDATE.
While the percentage chance may not be reduced, the type of tube that will cause the damage may be altered.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]5. I notice a huge number of motorized vehicular units in the oob's (WF, EF, RS) that have a defense of '1' - these vehicles are going to be brought up to '2' to be consistent with trucks in the next patch, correct?
Yes.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]6. The little 'fireball' icon is missing from assault-type units in the info box. Will this be added back in with the next patch? I notice the area on the info box where it is supposed to be (on high assault units only) still has the background 'underlay,' but the fireball itself is not present. Sorry to nitpick on this one.
Yes.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]7. Russian machine gunners. They're weak. As in, their firepower (or lack thereof) does not seem indicative of a MG platoon. Has anyone ever thought this besides me? I *love* those Anti-aircraft machinegun (AAMG) platoons, but they can't ride on tanks. Seems to me the Soviet MG platoon, with a range of 4, should have a soft attack factor of say 10 at range 1, 8 at range 2, 6 at range 3, and 4 at a range of 4. This is just on off the wall question I have always wanted to ask, but I really believe that Soviet MG platoons are underpowered. and the obvious question - will these weak units ever have their firepower increased?
Good question. I don't know at the moment.
(03-02-2011, 06:42 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]8. Roughly, when is the patch scheduled to be released?
Modern Wars: Volume I has the priority at the moment. The 1.05 UPDATE will be released after Modern Wars.
Jason Petho
(03-03-2011, 01:43 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]1. Are Divided Ground and Divided Ground Vietnam (for JTCS) going to be included in a future patch, or will these be games we will have to purchase separately?
These will be a separate purchase (although combined). It will be called Modern Wars: Volume I and has been a couple years in the making. Divided Ground has been axed (with good reason) and rebuilt from the ground up. It is now called "Middle East". DGVN is also getting a work over and is now called "Vietnam".
(03-03-2011, 01:43 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]2. I notice a large number of the newer units have NO background / history filled in (when you press F2). Are there plans to include updated unit histories with these newer units in the future? It's a little frustrating when there's no description whatsoever of an otherwise interesting or useful unit.
As time permits, yes, of course. More information the better!
Jason Petho
Jason, thank you so much for the info! I can smile again.
Quote:The disable chance was reduced to 4% with the 1.04 UPDATE.
While the percentage chance may not be reduced, the type of tube that will cause the damage may be altered.
Ah, this is interesting. Sounds like you're implying that only large-caliber artillery should have a chance of disabling armor. Nice! I would consider this an acceptable fix to the excessive 5% (now 4%) disable, especially since light armor seems especially vulnerable to artillery as it is.
Again, thanks for the heads-up.
(03-03-2011, 09:49 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]Jason, thank you so much for the info! I can smile again.
Quote:The disable chance was reduced to 4% with the 1.04 UPDATE.
While the percentage chance may not be reduced, the type of tube that will cause the damage may be altered.
Ah, this is interesting. Sounds like you're implying that only large-caliber artillery should have a chance of disabling armor. Nice! I would consider this an acceptable fix to the excessive 5% (now 4%) disable, especially since light armor seems especially vulnerable to artillery as it is.
Again, thanks for the heads-up.
It depends how you look at this, I suppose.
If we take a view where a "disable" is a capability for causing mechanical damage, the caliber is obviously a factor here.
If we instead take a view that a "disable" is a capability for causing the tank to be unable to continue for the duration of the battle, I suppose any caliber weapon, direct or in-direct, should be able to cause a disable, in killing or wounding a tank crewman.
Keep in mind, when commanding a battalion, regiment, or division, as you do in this game, you can give a general order that all tanks should only drive buttoned up (this term always confuses me. Is it buttoned up or down?), you can count on the fact that some tank commanders choose to lead with keeping their upper body out of the tank, for better visibility.
For this reason, I do not necessarily agree on this caliber adjustment. I could instead suggest we give the same 4% chance for a MG or any infantry unit for disabling a tank, if the player would opt for firing at them when outside the hard range but withing the soft range. :chin: Happened a lot, you know.
Will be available option to skip empty trucks while using ‘Cycle to the next unit’ button?
Is it possible to add new ability for recon units something like ‘look around’ (with high AP cost) to reveal enemy units in the same turn (with some % to success depending of concealment factor)? And I’m not asking is it possible to ad to 1.05 path but is it possible at all.
Quote:Is it possible to add new ability for recon units something like ‘look around’ (with high AP cost) to reveal enemy units in the same turn (with some % to success depending of concealment factor)? And I’m not asking is it possible to ad to 1.05 path but is it possible at all.
Manstein, that would be a little overpowered, don't you think? The ability to reveal all units visible to that spotter by simply expending all ap's for the spotter that turn?
As far as whether it's possible, that's a coding question, I would not think it would be possible, but Scud or Jason would probably know. I personally don't think this should be included.
I asked about a year ago if recon halftracks were going to be included in the game, and no one seemed to like that idea either. The axis used these fairly often early in the war; they were fully enclosed and had powerful communications equipment. In game terms, they would have a defense of 3 and...no special abilities whatsoever. Still, no one (except me) wanted them.
I also seem to recall asking about having ammunition carrier vehicles included, which would act like a minor HQ - providing a half-normal supply chance when within half the 'command' range of their subordinate units, as compared to a battalion HQ. Again, no one wanted them. A shame, because some ammunition carriers that i have seen would have looked kinda cool, and had likely would have decent point values for the enemy to capture or kill.
Quote:I could instead suggest we give the same 4% chance for a MG or any infantry unit for disabling a tank, if the player would opt for firing at them when outside the hard range but withing the soft range.
OMG...no, just please, no. :eek1: But I appreciate your input!
(03-04-2011, 12:14 PM)John Given Wrote: [ -> ]OMG...no, just please, no. :eek1: But I appreciate your input!
I was not actually saying this
should be done. Rather, I was thinking aloud there would be a rationale for adjusting the caliber both up,
and down.
I am quite happy how the disable works as-is.