************ Topic 24 Fri May 26, 1995 B-MAX [slvrhillaero] at 20:24 EDT Sub: Gary Grigsby's STEEL PANTHERS News and discussion about Gary Grigsby's latest design. 28 new messages. ************ ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 252 Tue Jan 02, 1996 J.WIRTH at 08:47 EST Will, The M1 Carbine has a higher INF kill rating than the M1 rifle because it had a larger magazine (15 rounds vs 8), was lighter, and was functionally more reliable. All of this translates into greater firepower. On the negative side, the Carbine is shorter ranged and less accurate. Everyone, I'll be glad to answer any other questions anyone has about how the small arms were rated. Jim Wirth ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 253 Tue Jan 02, 1996 SSI.SUPPORT at 14:50 EST Gary: that lockup may be a version problem. Try going back to v1.1 and see whether or not it still happens. W.Kerschener: That's what the editor is for. Feel free to use it to make scenarios which _you_ think are realistic and fun. Rob: I think Steel Panthers is close to realistic. I'm sure that there are some issues, but any more realistic, and I might be in the middle of a field eating rations, waiting for the Panzers to come up on my position. E.Sande: response indicates that we should spend our resources on correcting bugs and creating a good e-mail gaming system. As we know that some will be disappointed by our decision to put the modem play on the back burner for now, we'll be happy to give out refunds to those few who do not believe that the game is worthwhile enough to keep without the modem play. I apologize for misleading you with earlier comments, but we do have to choose what we do wisely. Venom: The scenarios work. Send me a note in e-mail containing the problem, as well as autoexec.bat and config.sys files. I'll create a configuration which should work better than what you've currently got running. Kato: Read reply for E.Sande. SSI has not done 'this' before. We had an idea that modem play would be realistic to implement, and useful to a majority of players. Currently, it appears to be neither. There is still some small chance that Gary and Keith may come up with modem play, but I believe that they are currently spending their time improving the game in other ways. Perr Dogg: It's been suggested that the keys be linked to the numbers 1 through 0 on the keyboard. Thanks for reiterating that. Matt S. SSI ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 254 Tue Jan 02, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 16:19 EST Another wishlist item: How about changing the "Pavement" hex key in the map builder to one that would make the hex the same black metal texture as SP's interface screen? Also, this "null" terrain would be out of play/forbidden to any unit. That way, you could change the size of the map to your own liking. Those small firefights could really be intense!! J.WIRTH: What do you think about giving the Molotov an HE number of 5 and an AP number of 5? I've tried this. The Molotov doesn't always blow up its target, but it always sets the target hex on fire, which in turn adds suppression to the unit being attacked. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 255 Tue Jan 02, 1996 V.MILAN [Vic] at 22:16 EST Venom => Do you have the SP disk in your CD-ROM drive? I have a 3-CD changer, & sometimes the game will not recognize the game-disk unless it's in the first, i.e. "D:" drive. When it doesn't find the disk, I can get the game to start without sound or cinematic scenes, but cannot load the canned scenarios. Don't know if the game will actually play under those circumstances. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 256 Tue Jan 02, 1996 R.BROWN113 [Robert] at 23:35 EST Jim, Well, since you mention it, the stats for pistols seem a bit...optimistic. I mean, half as effective as an SMG out to 100 yards? Within body odor range maybe, but 100 yards is optimistic for target shooting much less field conditions. This is the first I'd heard that the M1 carbine was more reliable than the Garand, and I'm not sure I see how it being lighter translates to better firepower, but the point about the magazines is a good one. And the carbine doesn't chime to let everyone in the area know you're out of bullets. Of course, the way the tables are generalized, the numbers should apply equally to, say, the Russian Tokarev self loader, and the British Rifle No. 5 Mk 1 (jungle carbine), a cut down Enfield. I don't think that holds up. And totally ignoring assault rifles is sad, but not surprising. They always get ignored in WWII games. Matt S. SP is fairly realistic as tactical computer games go, but it's not _that_ realistic. Very rare vehicles are overemphasized, and there is too much intelligence available on enemy infantry units, just off the top of my head. (I mean, can you really tell the difference between a Russian SMG squad and a Russian engineer squad hiding in the bushes 400 yards away?) ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 257 Wed Jan 03, 1996 M.PITTS4 at 01:42 EST I'm having some basic technical difficulties with Steel Panthers, and maybe someone can give me a solution. First of all, I can't seem to save a game file of any sort at any time. I click on the save game options, and i get to the menu that shows all the empty files. Either using the default name or typing in my own, I hit enter and the program responds with "GAME NOT SAVED". This is true of the scenarios and the tutorial campaign. Am I missing a step or is this a bug of sorts? Second question is sound related. I get the music just fine, and Ican turn it off through the options menu. However, I do not hear the effects at all. Is this also a bug, or do I need to reset the install? The computer is a 486/33 with a soundblaster pro sound card. Mpitts (m.pitts4) ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 258 Wed Jan 03, 1996 R.BROWN113 [Robert] at 01:56 EST The save game thing sounds like it may be trying to save to a disk that's read only (i.e., the CD-ROM), though I'm not sure how that would happen, or there isn't enough free disk space. I haven't had any problem with saves, myself. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 259 Wed Jan 03, 1996 M.MCCRAY [Sherrick] at 03:54 EST Rick Mc Thanks, Sherrick ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 260 Wed Jan 03, 1996 J.LANSFORD [John] at 05:58 EST I have to agree with Robert. I doubt there ever were enough Brummbars in one place to form a section, much less have a platoon of the things running around. Same with the Flammpanzers and KV-II's. But that's the fad nowadays. PzG had hordes of Matildas running around in 1940 and KV-II's in 1941 and the designer said it was for "fun". Same here I guess... John Lansford ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 261 Wed Jan 03, 1996 L.SHARP [SABRE] at 06:05 EST Matt SSI, Well buddy are you still interested in our game. I sent you the files awhile back. I'm in no rush just curious. Sabre ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 262 Wed Jan 03, 1996 LAST.RONIN [Kato] at 07:51 EST I enjoy dinking around with this game, and I've had some fun with it because I appreciate the blend of multi-media and small unit combat it presents. But... It's unfortunate that SSI seems to be trying to "let us down gently" with regard to the chance for modem play for this game. Speak as they might about their hunches about what gamers want, and where the priority needs to be with respect to this game's development, they can only take the bug-fixes and unit- effect-realism tweaks so far. At the core is an AI that's barely a challenge on the most difficult level (a miserable failure = not getting a _decisive_ victory!?) and a terrain system that ignores this most fundamental aspect of tactical operations. Tweak all they want, there's only one thing that can make it challenging and worthy of extended play: an easy human-to-human interface. And, for my money, the PBEM is a cheesy second compared to being able to take turns BAM BAM BAM over a modem with a live player, in realtime--even if it means a short period of activity while your opponent moves. Even this "wait" can be entertaining if you get to watch those units of his (in your line of sight) move and shoot, even if you aren't controlling the reaction fire. What sucks is the modem-play lead-on, when it appears it was never seriously considered at all. By seriously considered, I mean planned in from the ground up. Because, SSI is correct: adding that kind of interface as an afterthought requires almost a complete rewrite. No company can afford to do that. Which brings up the question: if it was never a serious intent, why was it mentioned at all? No doubt for the additional revenues such a declaration brings in. Shame. And shame on us, as consumers. We fell for the ol' "The Patch Will Have It," ruse again. And worse, SSI Execs know that we're still likely to buy into it, the next time they tell us. I will admit that I've enjoyed this game. It's worth the money if you don't expect a wargame to have a great deal of replayability. Unfortunately, I don't consider replayability to be high unless there's any doubt about how well you will do. I haven't gotten (and won't get) the play out of it I would if I could play against a decent opponent without being a masochist (which is what I consider PBEM junkies). I'm just angered because, once again, we've been brushed by a game that could have been so much more. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 263 Wed Jan 03, 1996 J.WIRTH at 16:24 EST Rick Mc, Gary uses a special close combat procedure for weapons like the Molotov to restrict them from being used against infantry. His thinking seems to be that the Molotov's fire starting effect was too minor to justify an INF KILL rating for them. Also the Molotov's ability to actually start a fire was so situation dependant that having it always start fires would being overstating its effectiveness. Robert, A pistol is not half as effective as a SMG. At a 2 hex range the hit probability of a pistol is 2%. The hit probability of an SMG at 2 hexes is 50%. Combined with its double firepower, the effectiveness of an SMG is roughly 50 times that of a pistol at 100 yards. At a range of 1 hex, the pistol improves dramatically to an accuracy of 50%, while the SMG's accuracy rises only to 74%. The double firepower still makes the SMG better than twice the effectiveness of a pistol, but I would agree that the pistol is overstated at 1 hex range. However to reduce the pistol's firepower to only1 would render the weapon useless when you consider that typically it is used by units of 6 men or less. I can just imagine people complaining that pistols never kill anybody. Personally I think crews would more often than not simply run away when faced with enemy infantry. The pistol was put in the game because AFV crews fighting like infantry with rifles was simply absurd. The use of pistols was extended to heavy weapon crews because of the tendency of these crews to open fire with their rifles and get themselves destroyed before their heavy weapon could be used. Overstated though it might be, the pistol is still the least effective weapon a unit can be armed with an still have some chance of harming the enemy. The Enfield carbine was not a semi-automatic weapon and to my knowledge not functionally superior to the Enfield rifle. We didn't forget assault rifle armed infantry, but simply ran out of room for them in the data base. John, I agree with your lament about focusing on rare armor types, but I've also seen people on this topic complain the T-35 is overvalued and we should have included the MAUS!!! You just can't please everyone no matter what you do. My solution is simple; I build my own scenarios and I rarely pick the oddball stuff. Jim Wirth ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 264 Wed Jan 03, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 17:52 EST Jim Wirth: Thanks for the reply. I understand completely. The reason I bring this up about the Molotov is that I think the way the computer allocates HEAT ammo is faulty. In the Battle Builder (under 1.11x), the computer seems not to be able to allocate HEAT very well. In other words, I've found my Russians throwing empty bottles at tanks...even when their suppression is 2 or less and the tank is buttoned or immobilized (but not abandoned). I would press the "S" key and fire the Molotovs from the Weapons Selection Box...only to find that the program would not LET me use Molotovs, because... ...the Molotovs had no HE or AP rating--though they had AP ammo--and the computer had not allocated them HEAT ammo. After I made this "alteration" in the HE and AP of a Molotov, I could use them with no problem from the Weapons Selection Box, and the result was what I had expected. Also (as we both know) the computer gives far too many Molotovs out. If you have 12 squads, just about every one of them have Molotovs. Then again...they only THINK they have Molotovs. They actually have bottles of vinegar. So I do think there's a problem in the computer's allocation of HEAT ammo. Again, thanks. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 265 Wed Jan 03, 1996 R.BROWN113 [Robert] at 19:16 EST Jim, Ah, I'd forgotten about the accuracy figure; I was just looking at the HE rating. Okay, I see the design decisions that were made, now, but I still think a better choice would have been to leave out pistols and figure that into the close combat, like bayonets. Of course, if you'd done that, someone would be here complaining that their crews are totally ineffective as infantry and can they please have some ranged weapons.....:\ I hadn't known about the database limitations. Interesting. Of course, if you dropped the pistols, that would free up some room. :} No, the Enfield carbine was less effective than the rifle...and that was my point. In general, carbines are less effective but easier to carry than a full sized rifle. And the way the database is designed, the 'carbine' on there stands in for _all_ carbines, not just the M1. John, It was those hordes of Matildas that finally drove me away from Panzer General for good. I was giving it another try when I ran into more Matildas in north Africa than I had units in my army. I exited the game, deleted it from my hard drive, and gave the package to a friend. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 266 Wed Jan 03, 1996 W.KERSCHNER at 21:20 EST Matt SSI: While I am aware of the capabilities of the editor, I strongly prefer the extra sense of realism from the ongoing involvement of a campaign to any stand- alone scenario. Jim Wirth: Being quite familiar with both the M1 Carbine and the Garand (I own both), I can assure you that the carbine is NOT more reliable. It also has a MUCH shorter range, is MUCH less accurate, not to mention stopping power. It was intended as a replacement for a pistol, because it's easier to learn to shoot than a pistol. The cartridge is essentially a ".30 magnum" pistol cartridge, not an intermediate-powered "assault rifle" cartridge like the German 7.92mmK or Soviet 7.62x39mm cartridges (or that old American favorite, the .30-30). In fact, in the Pacific the GI's didn't consider it worth spit for stopping the Japanese (who didn't go looking for a medic at the first sight of their own blood). The 30 round mags were issued with the full auto M2 version (which could logically be treated like an SMG), but the M1Carbine was issued with 15 round mags. That didn't offer enough advantage of the Garand's 8 shot clip to justify the game stats in light of the other issues. In fact, while veteran infantrymen commonly ditched their issue Garands in favor of "scrounged" SMG's (even captured ones in calibers our army didn't issue), I NEVER heard of them doing the same thing in favor of carbines. The carbine was far more widely issued than Garands & SMG's (as in, to just about everybody in the army who WASN'T an infantry rifleman), so it would have been rather easy to do if they had wanted to. Sounds like the guys who carried the Garand had a pretty clear picture of which one was more effective in combat, huh? Will ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 267 Wed Jan 03, 1996 V.NEWELL [VENOM] at 22:14 EST Vic: To tell you the truth I do not have the CD in. I reinstalled it and still had problems. Probaly something stupid on my part. VENOM. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 268 Wed Jan 03, 1996 V.MILAN [Vic] at 22:36 EST Matt => Just FWIW, I don't think anybody was complaining about a _lack_ of the Maus; it's just that somebody like Rick was dinking around with the editor or the database or whatever, & came up with a way to simulate one. As I understood it, this was a just-for-fun kind of thing, not a criticism of the game. === Re the great M1 Carbine vs. M1 Garand debate: basically everyone I've ever encountered who saw combat in the Vietnam War agreed that with the M16, standard operating procedure on engaging an enemy at twenty feet or less was to give him the whole 20-rd magazine [or 18-rd, as they tended to be in practice]. Nothing less, it seemed, was likely to ensure a stop. And that's at a range at which the .223 bullet still has enough velocity to cause "poison bullet" wound-cavitation enhancement through hydrostatic shock [which, granted, has been mightily oversold]. The .223/5.56mm NATO round the M16 shoots is by any system of measurement far more lethal than the .30 M1 Carbine. By contrast, a hit inwards of the elbows or knees with a single .30-06 bullet from inside a hundred yards [if not more] stood a pretty good chance of going down. Not being incapacitated, necessarily. But needing some time to sort it all out, at least. The debate over the merits of reduced-power bullet sprayers - SMGs & assault rifles - vs. powerful, slow-shooting but accurate long arms such as the Garand is one thing; game designers & the military establishment tend to say one thing, shooters another. But it's hard to make a case that the M1 carbine was in any way as effective as the Garand. They were easy to carry, sure [FWIW, an UZI or AK-47 weighs about what the Garand does; the M1 Carbine is even lighter than the M16, which is a light rifle]. But if you actually had to _shoot_ somebody.... ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 269 Wed Jan 03, 1996 V.MILAN [Vic] at 22:43 EST Venom => Even with full installation, I believe the docs say you have to have the CD in for the game to run. As I say, in my experience, the game'll _boot_ without the CD in, but not give you everything. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 270 Thu Jan 04, 1996 J.LANSFORD [John] at 05:57 EST Robert, It was the hordes of KV-II's in Russia that did me in for PzG. Now it seems they've followed me over to Steel Panthers, though... John Lansford ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 271 Thu Jan 04, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 13:31 EST Jim Wirth: One more thing about the Molotovs/HE/AP/HEAT. When I gave the Molotov an HE and AP rating, it was primarily an experiment to see if I could "wake up" the weapon. The Battle Generator did not give the Molotovs any HE ammo, so therefore I couldn't have used it against infantry anyway. Subsequently, I've returned the HE rating to "0". BUT...I do believe that without giving the Molotov an AP rating, it won't work. The computer is not allocating HEAT "ammo" or "capacity". A player wouldn't realize this just from looking at the squad's on-screen capability, which indicates the ammount of HE and AP ammo available for a particular weapon. Of course, if you give a Molotov HEAT "ammo" in the scenario editor, it works just fine. But not in the Battle Generator, 'cause the computer's not giving HEAT "ammo". I was wondering if maybe this problem is in the Campaign Game, as well. In fact, it might be that ALL HEAT-based weapons are being deprived of their "ammo"...which is why a lot of people can't figure out the assault routine or why assaults won't work. It's worth looking into, I think. VIC: Absolutely right. I did "simulate" a Maus just for my own fun. I keep it on a hilltop in a "Last Days Of The Reich" scenario. The sound of its weapons firing makes dogs bark, children cry and my wife ask if it's time to go to the bomb shelter yet. :) I've NEVER had a problem with the editor. I think it's great! Likewise, I don't think the Maus SHOULD have been included with the original game, so I hope no one thought I was complaining about a paucity of armor! In fact, I would agree with John that there's too much armor coming at you in every situation. All the suggestions I've made are ways to try to "beef up" the infantry side of SP. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 272 Thu Jan 04, 1996 J.WIRTH at 17:06 EST Rick Mc, You have to "assault" with the Molotovs to get them to work. As you have discovered, you can't "fire" a Molotov like a rifle. Actually Hand Grenades should have worked the same way but nobody thought of it. The profusion of Molotovs in the game is a data base limitation; either a squad has Molotovs (or any weapon for that matter) or it doesn't. There is no in between. Robert, Will, Vic, The "Carbine" (represents only the M1 Carbine) is not as effective a weapon as the "Semi-Auto" Rifle (represents the M1 Garrand and Johnston Rifle). The Carbine has a shorter range (6 vs 10) and is less accurate (3 vs 5). Perhaps its firepower (rated at 3 vs the Semi-Auto rifle's 2) is a bit overstated, but again given the normally small number of men using the weapon, its "game effectiveness" seems reasonable. Please remember when evaluating these weapons that the game system itself imposes limitations on how accurately a weapon can be modelled. The ratings of 1, 2, 3 or 4 to measure the firepower of everything from a pistol to a Browning Automatic Rifle allow for only very crude approximations. Distortions in some aspects of a weapon's effectiveness are unavoidable. Jim Wirth ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 273 Thu Jan 04, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 17:34 EST Jim Wirth: Please...don't think I'm a fool. I DO assault with the Molotov. It's a 1-hex-range weapon, isn't it? I'm suggesting that the computer is not allocating HEAT. Therefore the close- assault weapons that rely on HEAT ammo are not working. If you're not fully understanding what I'm talking about--and how this affects the game--I'd be glad to call you (my dime, of course) and explain it without the Bulletin Board getting in the way. If you'd like to leave me a message with your phone number, please do. I'm not trying to put anybody on the defensive or be detremental to the excellent work that's gone into SP...but this MAY be a big problem. Assaults have to be perfectly planned. They go by so fast, most players probably wouldn't realize their close-assault weapons are not working as they should. I'm using 1.11x. This might be different in other versions. Anybody else having trouble with close assault (HEAT-based) weapons? Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 274 Thu Jan 04, 1996 B-MAX [slvrhillaero] at 18:51 EST What ever happened to the nexr patch, experimental or otherwise? ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 275 Thu Jan 04, 1996 C.DAVIS [charles] at 20:01 EST Shame on you SSI for mentioning whelching on y9our promise to bring modem play to this game. SP needs modem play to allow for its true strengths to come into play. chuck ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 276 Thu Jan 04, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 21:46 EST WHOA!! Jim Wirth: Are you saying the program forbids you from "using" the following close assault weapons when they're shown in the Weapons Selection Box? Flamethrower Satchel Charge Molotov Anti-Tank Mine Panzerfaust Those are all 1-hex-ranged "assault" weapons. But after carefully--and I DO mean carefully--setting up my assaults I can't choose the weapon to lead off the assault with? You mean in a game that has an UNDO key, has tanks that slam through stone buildings and race through woods... ...has almost-perfect communications between officer and artillery battery (or air base)... ...has enemy soldiers that can see dug-in troops inside buildings even when the troops have NOT fired... ...has tanks that go exactly where I want them to, at the speed I want, and fires at the enemy with the weapon I choose... ...I CAN'T DIRECT A CLOSE ASSAULT? How were we supposed to find out that these weapons could not be "fired" from the Weapons Selection Box, but can only be "fired"... ...from the "Direct Fire" button? DAMN! Does anybody at SSI know how this game works? I understand the drooling over armor in this game... but I can't buy the spitting at infantry!! Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 277 Thu Jan 04, 1996 V.NEWELL [VENOM] at 22:27 EST Does any one know the file number for ver. 1.11x I can not find it. VENOM. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 278 Thu Jan 04, 1996 M.RODGERS [Michael R.] at 22:37 EST This game is good for one's ego. Three scenarios against the computer, and I've won every one decisively. Does anyone know what happens when you change the difficulty from average to harder? Does the computer get more units, better units, or something else? **** Michael R. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 279 Thu Jan 04, 1996 M.RODGERS [Michael R.] at 23:22 EST R.McCammon, Thanks, you just gave me a good reason to install the patch. **** Michael R. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Sent on 1/04/1996 at 10:08p Matt, Sorry but SP is not realistic. The forces are way to tank heavy. The LOS just "sucks". Mortars are too ineffective as militaries around the world issue lots of them and SP players don't see any need to buy them. Vehicles moving into buildings is like Saturday morning cartoons. In many situations, the local force commanders would have a map of the expected terrain. Not necessarily accurate but better then what we see. It has great graphics, a poor AI and is a lot of fun. The grognards would like more realism and the others won't know the difference. Perry ---------- Message 281 is a repeat of 280 ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 282 Fri Jan 05, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 01:50 EST Jim Wirth, SSI, whomever: One more "assault" and I'll pack up my opinions. "Close assaults" as they are carried out in the game now are only allowed through the "Attack A Hex With Direct Fire" key. Yes? This is basically a "hex"--or "area"--attack instead of a "specific target" attack. Right? So I assume there is an accuracy or "scatter" modifier, in addition to the accuracy ratings of the close assault weapons and whatever morale and experience modifiers are being considered. Gentlemen, by not allowing a "specific target" attack in assaults, you are diminishing one of the few real weapons infantry has in this game. A prepared assault can be derailed because of the "accuracy" modifier in the area attack. I agree that CERTAINLY not even prepared assault was successful... ...and also that close assaults (particularly against AFVs) were relatively rare, but this procedure further guts the infantry game. Oh...please read "every prepared assault" in that above sentence. My fingers are as upset as I am about this. Anyway...the player (as the--well, what IS the player in this game? The guiding warrior spirit, maybe?) ought to be able to direct a specific target attack in assaults. Isn't that how it was done in PANZER STRIKE and TYPHOON OF STEEL? A "unit" attack instead of an "area" attack? I think so. I mean, really...why are you able to rally a tank crew and have it fire a pistol if you can't direct a specific-target assault? An assault was a fierce concentration of force toward a specific target...NOT toward the contents of an area (or "hex"). What...are my determined men--who have been waiting patiently for the opportunity to assault and have their weapons in hand and ready--turning aside from the target... ...and smashing their Molotovs on the ground and trying to fix their anti-tank mines to trees? Urban combat is a total bust under these conditions! If real Russians had been as fumble-fingered as these SP troops, Stalingrad would have been lost in the first week!! Gentlemen, please bear this in mind: tanks might be the most "glamorous" weapons--if any weapon can be called that--but it was the infantry who raised the victory flags. Please give 'em a fightin' chance!! Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 283 Fri Jan 05, 1996 M.KENNEDY20 [MAK] at 02:12 EST Michael R. Re: This game is good for one's ego. Try playing it against a seasoned tactical gamer face to face. Spent the weekend a while back playing this against Bug Stomper face to face. Very humbling... but fun. MAK ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 284 Fri Jan 05, 1996 DONDO at 02:22 EST Venom: File 10262. ==Dondo ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 285 Fri Jan 05, 1996 J.WIRTH at 18:04 EST Everybody, The following changes will be in next version of OB files posted to GEnie: 1) Revised unit costs; 2) Corrected availability dates and unit weapon configurations; 3) AP ammo for SU-152 & JSU-152; 4) Properly functioning Molotovs and Anti-Tank Mines; 5) Revised firepower ratings for small arms as follows: Pistol - reduced to 1 from 2 Carbine - reduced to 2 from 3 6) New weapon added, German Assault Rifle, weapon #153 I will be very interested in your feedback on these changes. Jim Wirth ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 286 Fri Jan 05, 1996 R.BROWN113 [Robert] at 19:37 EST Sounds good to me. Seriously; it's a good sign when a company and developers listen to the users. I've worked at some software companies where that wasn't the case....:\ ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 287 Fri Jan 05, 1996 L.SHARP [SABRE] at 21:38 EST Sounds good to me. Especially like the addition of AP ammo to the JSU-152. Of course old Wolfgang isn't going to be thrilled about that. Sabre ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 288 Fri Jan 05, 1996 M.MARTINO [JAY] at 21:49 EST Rick Mc, Your raise lots of good points. As an ex-infantryman I have a great deal of sympathy towartds the PBI in SP. Here's to hoping the data changes to make the infantry a bit more effective than it historically ended up. Jay ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 289 Sat Jan 06, 1996 L.SHARP [SABRE] at 09:02 EST Wolfgang, Matt has been strangely quite about our email game. How about we do a multiplayer game. About 4-6 people to each side. Of course this is not the topic to discuss email games. It would be for anybody else except you and I. Sabre ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 290 Sat Jan 06, 1996 D.WOODARD5 [DougW] at 11:06 EST Sabre, I'd be interested in a multi-player game. I do much better in games that do not need any eye-hand corodination. Another advantage of SP over Tornado is that if you hit a building in SP the building goes. In Tornado its vica- versa. I'm out of here as the above contains _two_ off topic comments. Doug ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 291 Sat Jan 06, 1996 LAST.RONIN [Kato] at 19:15 EST Comment on changes? Nice little tweaks to weapon "realities." ...but they do very little to improve the game. But then SSI has already retracted that carrot, haven't they. Wonder how many people would give up the next five patches JUST for the ability to play H2H via modem? ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 292 Sat Jan 06, 1996 R.PRUDEN [Rob] at 19:42 EST Jim, Great news about the upcoming changes! It sounds as though you and Gary are carefully considering each suggestion that you get and finding ways to incorporate the best ideas without destroying the historicity or playability of the game. That being said, I'd like to offer my own suggestions based on some other good ideas I've seen on this topic: - I second most of Rick Mcammon's suggestions uptopic for a "wish list" with the following caveats: 1) It should be more likely for vehicles to become immobilized when entering a buildings hex - depending on the vehicle and the type of building. 2) It should be less likely for infantry or AT guns in urban or woods terrain to be spotted if they don't move or fire. This may be in the game already but not in my experience. It is vital for, as Rick stated, a realistic Stalingrad or Arnhem-type scenario. 3) I don't like the "prisoners" idea. Keep in mind that this game models a firefight. Let's not try to get too detailed when it doesn't matter. 4) If the "banzai" rule were adopted, those units would, of course, be more succeptible to casualties from fire. This may be a bit sticky, since this rule would also make necessary a "final protective fire" ability for units that have used all their "shots" but are charged by banzai units. 5) I'd REALLY like to have a keystroke that commands a unit to fire all of its shots at the current target until that target is destroyed or the turn is over. I get real tired of hitting the "F" key. 6) Tweak the AI without "cheats"; for the Hard AI setting. 7) Clean up the infantry anti-tank assault procedure as mentioned uptopic. Make sure to include a pre-assault morale check! Thanks for the great support. Even with its faults, this is an excellent and compelling game. Rob ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 293 Sat Jan 06, 1996 M.KENNEDY20 [MAK] at 22:55 EST Jim- Have to agree with Rob. You've got to lose the prisoner idea. If SSI balked at swastikas, what will they do when a player has to shoot prisoners. How politically incorrect can you get... GOOD LORD MAN, WHAT WERE YOU THINKING OF? ;) MAK ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 294 Sun Jan 07, 1996 SAM.BAKER [V'ger] at 07:24 EST Y'all, Santa and the kind and lovely lady I live with put a copy of SP under the Christmas tree. Oh MY what a GAME! I have installed the 1.11x patch and have finished my first scenario as the Germans in a long campaign. (Due to problems similar to Perr Dog (I have an SCSI CD-ROM drive and understand that the game doesn't like that) I can't play scenarios. I had a exciting time playing an assault vs the Poles. I didn't boogy fast enough in the begining and was also out of position so I didn't start taking any VP hexes until 5 turns before the end of the scenario. Pulled out a marginal victory but I didn't really care. I was having so much fun playing and got so excited when I KOed a pillbox! Man oh MAN! Thank you, thank you, thank you Mr. Grigsby! Takes me back the the days when I played hours of Tank Charts. A most excellent miniatures game of some years back. Certainly is easier when the computer worries about the rules, tables and where the shots are coming from. Not to mention having all your "lead" painted so nicely by the computer. Has there been any thought given to allowing players to buy (and perhaps give us a point beny for going with historical t/o) whole companies? I would love to be able to run an armored battalion (about the smallest org that would have all the assets; recon, arty, etc.) instead of the penny- packet system we have now. Certainly the organization I have ended up with bears little likeness to a real Pz battalion. Achtung! Minen! V'ger gone ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 295 Sun Jan 07, 1996 J.WIRTH at 08:40 EST Kato, When I asked for comments I meant after you had played the next version. Rob, Unless I misunderstood Gary, I believe immobilizations will be more likely in the next version. Spotting seems to be a controversial subject. Some people complain units are spotted too easily, others that units are too difficult to spot. With the exception of units in clear terrain, I lean towards the view that units are too easy to spot in SP. Hopefully spotting/line of sight rules will be improved in the next version also. The "prisoners" idea is not mine and to my knowledge is not under consideration for inclusion in SP. Since Japanese units neither retreat, rout or surrender, you can conduct a "banzai charge" anytime you want simply by advancing straight at the enemy at full speed. ( My experience has been that the computer "banzai"s all the time.) Admittedly to capture the true "flavor" of a banzai charge the Japanese would have to be immune from pinning also. In TYPHOON OF STEEL, there was an"auto banzai" routine (it occured whenever the computer judged the situation "hopeless") which I truly hated. I would prefer to have no banzai routine than one that relied on the "judgement" of the computer. I agree that a "sustained fire" command for direct fire would be nice. I would also like a "sustained fire" command for indirect fire artillery to simulate something approaching a real barrage. Maybe then people would have more respect for the artillery. I am hopeful the next version corrects all the infantry vs armor close assault problems. Jim Wirth ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 296 Sun Jan 07, 1996 R.PRUDEN [Rob] at 13:02 EST Jim, Thanks for the feedback. Along the lines of improvements to the artillery: eligible forward observers (have radios, maps, contact with artillery - more common with the US, much less so with the Russians) should be able to adjust the point of impact of artillery fire missions, if they can see the impact hex, without additional delay - i.e. delay of zero. This is the way real artillery works ("drop 200, right 50, fire for effect!") and should be reflected in the game. V'ger's suggestion about real-world force mixes available for campaigns or scenario generation is a great one as well. I would like to be able to choose between an actual, period-specific, company-to-battalion sized formation rather than having to make something up every time. Rob ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 297 Sun Jan 07, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 13:12 EST The "prisoners" idea was mine. It was an idea, not a demand. But...SP counts every shell, every rifle shot, every SMG burst, every man killed. What happens to the prisoners? I do agree, it would be tough to put a "prisoners" routine in the game, and probably have no point other than testing the player's humanity--or lack of it. Re "banzai": the Japanese don't retreat, rout or surrender, but they do earn suppression points...which makes them stand like dummies as they get slaughtered. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 298 Sun Jan 07, 1996 DONDO at 13:45 EST Hey tankers, the new update [1.12] is now available as file 10295 [Lib 19 of course]. ==Dondo ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 299 Sun Jan 07, 1996 J.LANSFORD [John] at 14:23 EST Does the new upcoming patch have a fix for the "every artillery shell path shown" problem? I haven't played SP since I found that bug, which really slows down a scenario in real-time minutes, especially in assault/defend scenarios. John Lansford ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 300 Sun Jan 07, 1996 R.BROWN113 [Robert] at 15:15 EST V'ger, Don't worry about it; real panzer battalians weren't organized like real panzer battalians either....:} ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 301 Sun Jan 07, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 18:34 EST Matt at SSI: Been playing SP 1.2(x?) all afternoon (Sunday). Hmmmmm.... Well, I don't know quite what to say yet. I do have a question I hope you can help me with. In the last version, I "personalized" my game by going into the exe file and changing some of the messages, as in: "Men Are Killed" to "Killed/Wounded" "Shot Bounces Off Armor" to "Ricochet/Dud/Misfire" and "Routed" to "PANIC!" which helped me immediately see what units had dissolved on the unit roster. Unfortunately, this new version has wiped those out and I can't see how I can make the changes again. As I mentioned up-topic, my "face-to-face" cadre of SP players depended on some of these altered messages as game cues. Therefore--at least on this count--our two-player games have been damaged. Any possible way I can get my personalized messages back in? KATO: I'm beginning to think you're very, very right. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 302 Sun Jan 07, 1996 B.MILLER31 [Brad Miller] at 19:24 EST Can somebody who knows please post what the changes are with the 1.2 update? I started a long campaign in the Pacific with the US vs Japs using the 1.2 patch. Just some observations so far: I tried to run over some buildings with some Halftracks. There seems to be about a 10% chance of immobilization doing this, I'm not sure what the chance was before so this may or may not be an improvement. You do lose all further movement, at least with the Halftracks,though. The problem with the smoke is still there. When starting a saved game that had smoke on the map the smoke does not show up until more smoke is created. I also had several instances of Jap squads just "popping" up in clear terrain after US units passed over the hex. LOS is MUCH improved. More reports to follow as things are noticed. Brad ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 303 Sun Jan 07, 1996 V.NEWELL [VENOM] at 19:39 EST SSI: For Steel Panthers I did a full install. But now when I use the CD to access the scenarios it will not look for it. It use to when I would look at the video between missions. VENOM. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 304 Sun Jan 07, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 19:48 EST BRAD: Don't know what the "official" improvements are in 1.2, but here are some I've noticed: As you mentioned, greatly improved LOS. Urban combat working pretty well now. Troops dug in in buildings stand their ground longer. Close assaults working better, too. All in all, I think, a better "feel" to urban combat. Anything else, I have no idea. On the down side, I note the enemy ART still tends to come slamming into the building your troops are occupying, when they haven't been sighted by an enemy squad or tank yet. To their credit, though, these soldiers seem tougher--or more desperate--than the wimps of 1.1. I don't think immobilization has been improved. Still smashing, crashing and bashing, through stone buildings, swamp and woods. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 305 Sun Jan 07, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 21:51 EST Just got the 1.12x version. And unless I am doing something very wrong (which is difficult to say since THERE WAS NO README FILE), the PW scheme for PBEM is useless. Goes something like this. Set up game for 2 human players. Enter password, deploy units, save game. Send to opponent. He enters PW, deploys, then saves. I get game back. The menu is still set to the other player. You can work around this by hitting enter 3 times, so for the deployment phase this is a workaround. Where it gets really problematic is when you actually do the unexpected - you start to PLAY the GAME. I take my turn, hit END TURN, then it automatically pops up and asks for player 2 PW. I have NO option to save the game at this point, and of course since I don't know the enemies PW (What a quaint notion, eh?) the thing is locked in a hopeless loop. I am fuming at this point. If anyone has been able to sit down without boiling over and figure a work around for the NEWEST addition to PBEM - PW protection that completely renders PBEM impossible, please share the wealth. Sheez... the fiasco grows. First no data charts in manual, no LOS fix, no modem play, no readme with the patch, and now THIS ? Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 306 Sun Jan 07, 1996 M.MARTINO [JAY] at 21:52 EST Rick Mc, Reference your "personalizing" of the .exe file, I'd say you're going to have to do the work over again. Since the patch is a full replacement for the .exe, any changes you made will be overwritten along with the previous file. Now, if Gary likes the changes you made, maybe he'll put them into the game permanently. I know I like them at first glance. Jay ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 307 Sun Jan 07, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 21:59 EST John, There is a way to turn shot animations off - check the manual, I'm not sure what it is offhand but I know its there.... Brad, Regarding the smoke in PBEM - just hit the "c" key when you first load the turn - seems that the "clear" option gets toggled in PBEM so you have to toggle it back to "un-clear" Just saw that LOS is supposedly fixed - retraction in order, at least until I actually start to play 1.12. Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 308 Sun Jan 07, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 22:07 EST Wolfgang, I read you!! I don't know...is it just me, or is this "fix" a worse mess? My sound, which worked just fine with all the other versions, has now gone "fluttery", which means I have to stop the game, go out to DOS and come back in again. The immobilization rate seems to have been "eased" from what it was in 1.11x. Just may be me, though... But...well...I don't have a lot of hope anymore for this one. Out of all the suggestions that were made, the designers chose to implement showing you what kind of ammo (HE, HEAT, HVAP) your unit is firing? Wouldn't you already know? And why does it matter? Well...friends, I'm going back to 1.11x. I'm going to redo the unit data-- using the WPNEDIT program--the way I want to, and to hell with the rest of it. I figure maybe I can lower all the infantry weapons' hitting power, to try to encourage infantry to stand their ground that way. I just hope Gary Grigsby NEVER again works with a team!! Sorry, Matt...Jim Wirth...SSI...this is a clunker. SP is two games: the armor game and the infantry game. The armor game is artificially strong, and the infantry game artificially weak. Which adds up to a disappointment--for me, at least. You can have a good infantry game without armor, but an armor game without strong infantry just becomes a boring slugging match. Man, I waited such a long time for this game!!! Sadly... Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 309 Sun Jan 07, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 23:44 EST JAY: Thanks. Glad you like my "personalized" reports. Part of my dismay with 1.12x, though, is that the new .exe file is written entirely in "Hexo-Decimo-Mathematico" language, which is entirely foreign to me. There was text in the previous .exe files, which meant you were able to "personalize" some things. I even put my own name and my friends' names in the American slots. Unfortunately (intentionally?) the 1.12x .exe overwrites all previous .exe files with this "hexo-decimo" language--which means you either take what they give you, or you don't. Well...I don't, which is why I'm going back to 1.11x. Warts and all, 1.11x is a friendlier game. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Sent on 1/07/1996 at 9:53p Jim, I agree with you that spotting in non-clear is too easy and in clear (desert) is too hard. Please make it easier to keep an arty (or mortar) barrage coming down on a target. Look into shortening the delay so mortars might be used more. They should be quicker then arty to respond. Rob, FO's can and do use wire, even in the US Army. Give FO's a chance to be "connected" and lose the connection if they move (unless they have working radios). Radios in WWII where much less reliable then we think. Perry ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 311 Mon Jan 08, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 01:14 EST Good news. LOS does seem a _lot_ better. Tried Danube, lots of bldgs and smoke. Seems to work well now. Not sure how it handles hills/elevation. Sabre tried the PBEM and had the same result. Guess we'll have to go back to 1.1 if using PBEM. Too bad, really because the new version has some nice features. Selecting which weapon to fire is very nice. No more wasting AP on soft targets. Execpt that for the first pulse that you fire at a unit it seems you must let loose with all weapons. Once you have that unit targeted, then you can be specific. I have noticed that I am missing all weapons sounds now execpt artillery. Sound seems much more sporadic. Anyone else notice this ? Perhaps I need to do a reboot and see if it clears up. Could have some corrupted memory or something. I ran a HT around the map trying to run bldgs over. Result: HT 1 overran 2 bldgs and was immobilized on the 3d. HT 2 was immo'd on the first. HT 3 on the second. Not sure about tanks - yet. Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 312 Mon Jan 08, 1996 SAM.BAKER [V'ger] at 05:49 EST J.Wirth or Matt, What game has the best "manual" for SP? Is it Typhoons of Steel or Panzer Strike? I'd like to know so I can pick up a copy. Vic, Thanks for saying you had difficulty with your changer. I have a changer too and was having the same problem you describe. I switched SP so it was the first thing in the changer and Voila! full video, scenarios work, the whole nine yards. Now as long as I don't find another program that needs to be first, I'm ok. Y'all, I played my second battle, restarting my campaign after having reconsidered my core purchases. Got a decisive victory. When I got to the fix/upgrade screen I noticed that 5 of the engineers I had taken as support troops were now part of my core units. Is this supposed to happen and does it happen each time? I don't know that I MIND having some engineers as part of the core, but I wish I would have known. When the patch comes out I will try taking the Russians. I would hate to have to start a campaign over. Put a Tiger in your tank, V'ger gone ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 313 Mon Jan 08, 1996 J.LANSFORD [John] at 06:35 EST This is to anyone who has used version 1.12 so far: What specifically happens when you order indirect artillery fire or are attacked by it? Does version 1.12 show the "one explosion--4 hexes" of shellholes, or do you get 4 views of incoming shells like you see with direct tank fire? The second happening is what I get with version 1.11. Before I download v1.12 I want to know if this is fixed. John Lansford ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 314 Mon Jan 08, 1996 J.WIRTH at 10:32 EST Rob, US artillery superiority is built into the game with a special modifier which boosts the "artillery rating" of US leaders. The game effect is that while they can't correct fire any faster, they are more likely to actually have their fire missions hit the target hex. Due to the smaller unit limit in SP (as opposed to the PANZER STRIKE system), Gary discarded the company level organizations. Without PS's command control system, these organizational levels would have had no game effect. Rick, "Stand like dummies while they get slaughtered" sounds a lot like Japanese tactical doctrine to me. Seriously, the "banzai" routine worked badly in TOS and I'm skeptical about adding it to SP. Frustrated with the latest version? Now you're beginning to know what it feels like to be a playtester. Each revision is going to bring its own share of bugs which will have to be fixed with the next version. (Remember that there were 22 versions of PACIFIC WAR and I'm sure there are still a few bugs in it.) The alternative is to fix only glaring bugs and release a quick 1.2. Is that really what everyone wants? BTW, I work only on the data bases using an editor. I do NO PROGRAMMING. V'ger, Since TOS is the newer of the two games, its manual is probably a better bet. Jim Wirth ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 315 Mon Jan 08, 1996 GA.GRIGSBY [SSI-WIZ] at 11:04 EST John, If you go to the Options Menu and set the 'Message Level' to LOW or MEDIUM it will speed up the artillery resolution by showing you fewer animations. This is true on ALL versions of the game. Wolfgang, DO NOT use the END TURN button when you are done with your turn. Go to the Options Menu, save the game and then hit the EXIT button. All, I persuaded Matt to allow me to put version 1.12x into the GENIE library without the usual in-house testing. The 'x' stands for EXPERIMENTAL and UNTESTED. Some MAJOR bugs were present in version 1.11x and I felt that making the fixes available as soon as possible would be in everyone's best interest. Version 1.12x is not the final version of STEEL PANTHERS, we will continue to fix bugs and improve the game. I think the E-MAIL system in it's current form can be made to work. However, it is obviously very clunky and flawed and I will try to fix it as soon as possible. Gary ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 316 Mon Jan 08, 1996 B.MILLER31 [Brad Miller] at 12:59 EST Gary, No problem. Just glad to see this level of support from a game company. This is my first SSI game in a LONG while so I am VERY pleased with the experience so far. I really am enjoying this one even with some of the flaws/features (which from what I can see will be corrected) that are present. Brad PS - I've seen several people here mention a screen to select which weapons are fired by a unit. I've been unable to find this screen yet could somebody tell me how to find it? Also where can one get the editing program for the database that is being used? ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 317 Mon Jan 08, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 16:11 EST Brad: To find the Weapons Selection Box: 1. Verify the target (you'll see a red line from firing unit to target). 2. Press the "S" key. There ya go! WARNING! I understand close-assault weapons (except hand grenades) can NOT be used from this box. Concerning the WPNEDIT program: It was written by Nicholas Bell, and allows you to see the values of the weapons in the weapons database. It's freeware, and is NOT approved (looked upon kindly?) by SSI. You can, if you like, change the numbers and even create your own weapons for the empty slots. I've been able to make a Kampfpistole, 380mm Rocket, 37mm Canister, Magic Bushido Swords, Screaming POWS (close-assault, HEAT only) and Godzilla to lead my Japanese troops. I'M JUST KIDDING, JIM!!!! Brad: Really, though. For what it's wirth, the WPNEDIT program is very useful. The only problem is, it's just on CServe right now. I'd try to upload it here... ...but the last time I tried to upload anything to GENIE, I was kicked unceremoniously off the system and warned to keep my cyberfingers out of General Electric's slush fund!! :) Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 318 Mon Jan 08, 1996 MO.MORGAN [Mo] at 18:04 EST Does anyone know if version 1.12x has been uploaded to CompuServe? I just checked there last night and they weren't showing it--just 1.11x. Matt, can you load it up on CIS? I can download stuff at 28.8+ a WHOLE lot faster than at 9600 (assuming the downloads run at anywhere near the baud rate, which I doubt). The primary reason I stay on GEnie is the quality and calibre of the people who post to topics I find interesting. This a very special group of folks who stop in and leave messages on this bulletin board. Mo ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 319 Mon Jan 08, 1996 J.LANSFORD [John] at 18:21 EST Gary, Does that mean the individual incoming rounds of indirect artillery are meant to be seen? I liked the old way where the shells just exploded on target after the whistling incoming noise happened. Plus, I like to see all the messages. Changing the message level to low or medium detracts somewhat from the game for me. John Lansford ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 320 Mon Jan 08, 1996 M.MARTINO [JAY] at 19:05 EST Rick Mc, As Gary has already pointed out, the versions posted so far are by no means the final version. You plunked down $$ for the game, and may plunk down $$(or cents) for downloads, so I encourage you to have some hope. One of the things that kept Pacwar on so many harddrives was the patches Gary provides. It may take a little patience, but it's worth it in the long run. The best part is that you know you're getting a game that has some element of your own participation in it, even though you may not be in the credits. WPNEDIT sounds neat. Do you have access to the Internet? If you can get it to an FTP site I can try to pass it along to Genie. Jay ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 321 Tue Jan 09, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 00:00 EST The sound in 1.12x is very spotty. I am only now getting about half of the sounds. I get the following: ricochets immobilization "thuds" artillery incoming "whistle" plane diving sound grenade hitting vehicle vehicles and inf. moving sounds the chinking of rounds hitting armor What I am not getting: main armament firing mg's firing artillery impact exploding rockets or arty firing mortars firing rifles firing Very strange. My configuration hardware wise hasn't changed. Is anyone else losing sounds in 1.12x ? ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 322 Tue Jan 09, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 02:14 EST Just tried an experiment. I loaded the 1.11 version exe file instead of 1.12 and still had the same problems with the sound. Maybe it's the 4 data files that are unpacked with the executable in 1.12 ? Reinstalled 1.1 in a separate dir to be sure and the sound worked o.k. in that installation... ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 323 Tue Jan 09, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 12:03 EST I've noticed a few more, ahem, irregularities in 1.12x. 1. Trying to put together a US/German meeting engagement in 44'. Map was to be random. 4 or 5 times in a row it generated the same map. Flat, devoid of any elevation whatsoever, just wheatfields and rough terrain. 2. Tried the 6th time, and voila, I did get a new and interesting map complete with elevation, woods, bldgs, etc. BUT the Germans were given 994 points whereas the US was only given 3. Yikes... The 7th time, Germans still got 994 to the Americans 42. Double Yikes.... FWIW, I was setting this game up as 2 human player, random map, large, meeting engagement, 6/44, human selection of units, and it was to be an Email game. Really, the only good things I see in 1.12 are the vastly improved LOS and the S function. Sound is really awful now, and there are some pretty major glitches as seen above. I even wiped everything out and did a complete re- install, then patched it. Still full of problems. Set up a 1.11x dir on the D drive and it has no problems such as above, just the old LOS, et al problems.... Hard to decide which version to use at this point.... Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 324 Tue Jan 09, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 12:41 EST Please forgive the length of this post!! Lots of *important* stuff to say!! (IMHO) JAY: I failed my Morale Check!! Thank you for rallying me. Of course I'll hang in. Also: I tried uploading WPNEDIT last night. If all went well, it should be in the SSI library--file #10298--soon. WOLFGANG: I think you're right about the OB files causing the sound glitches. I was gettin' 'em too. GARY GRIGSBY, JIM WIRTH, EVERYBODY: I tried playing 1.12 again--playing a couple of quick scenarios that I have set up as "test runs". Let me qualify my statements by first saying that I do NOT play the campaign game. I play only scenarios and use the Battle Generator, and it's my understanding that 1.12 really helps the Campaign Game. To me, though, 1.12 seems "sterile". I can't really explain why I feel this way, or what I mean by it...other than it seems too "computery". There was a "dirty" feeling about 1.11x that I liked. Even with the LOS problems, I could theorize that a "patch of fog" or "dust" or whatever obscured portions of the map. Version 1.12x has a "better" LOS, in that it's certainlu cleaner, but...I don't know. I DO know that the factor of "Controlled Dirt" would be the most difficult thing to program, and probably the most elusive. Ooops! Read "certainly cleaner" in the line above. But: here's the crux of this post... I'm still playing 1.11x, as I prefer this "dirt" and also my personalized combat messages. Last night I went into the weapons database and lowered the HE value of almost every weapon by HALF. Give or take "1". The small arms are more problematical, of course, so you have to use common sense. I know I'm risking wrath to come down on my head, but I think the HE values in the original database are too high. (Spoken as an "unofficial" playtester--the same as everybody else in this catergory :) ) The first thing I noticed is that, in a rocket attack, the rocket did not totally demolish the wooden building it hit...but instead knocked a hole in its roof and set it on fire. Infantry began to stand their ground better. The firing was more give and take. The close assault procedures worked better. In fact, EVERYTHING about the infantry game seemed improved with lower HE values in the database. In fact, the game now has "life"--in that, the beauty of the command and control system comes through. Before, the brutal HE values caused everybody to break and run. Now, you can tell the differences that the morale/experience/rallying numbers sysystem makes. Some squads WILL break and run early, but some will steadfastly stand and keep fighting it out. It's absolutely great!! The game has come to life!! I think the original HE database numbers are "lab" and "paper" numbers. And Jim, I'm not throwing any rocks at you and your work. We're all in this together, aren't we? And trying to make SP the best it can be? My feeling about lowering the HE values by half (or thereabouts) is that the new numbers more accurately reflect battlefield conditions: dirt, fear, screwed-up communications, shouted commands, gut-checks... ...fortitude, determination, patriotism, dumb luck, fate... ...and a myriad of other factors that can't be simulated strictly by "lab" or "paper" numbers. In my opinion, SP is now a fabulous infantry game. Now: I havem't TOUCHED the AP numbers. The tank values seem just fine. Either an AP shell hits, ricochets or penetrates. Simple enough. But the HE values, it seems to me, are more objective as per random events-- and the turn of fate, helped by courage and luck--on the battlefield. GARY...JIM.... Please at least TRY this before shooting me down. Please!! Again, I'm still using 1.11x. I have the highest respect for all and everyone who has worked on SP, and I think it's a great achievement. Thank you all for your long hours, your patience and your vision!! Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 325 Tue Jan 09, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 17:07 EST Rick, et al, I have a feeling that the new ob's have changed some of the AP values. I did a test run of 1.12x last night and unless this was just *bad luck*, it seems the 75L on the Panther is not as lethal as it should be. I had 2 MkV's sitting next to a Sherman. 4 shots at point blank bounced off the dang turret - one even off the SIDE. To paraphrase the infamous words of Telly Savalas (surely our favorite tank commander of all time) - 'they were bouncing off like tennis balls..' This happened numerous times. It even happened with an 88LL. And not being able to hear my MA fire gives me little confidence. Is it _really_ firing ? I like to HEAR the thing for cryin out loud. RE: the HE values. I have always felt that arty was probably not effective enough. Even 150+ has a tough time getting outright kills. It was rare for a direct hit (although the "directness" may in fact be an issue) but in any case, what looked like a direct hit very rarely killed more than one man. This on infantry double timing it throuhg a wheat field or open ground. I like the new and improved LOS. It's feels a lot more like the board games from whence this grog came. You can still see through woods hexes - sometimes. There are still some "surprises", but on the whole, elevation and intervening terrain seems to work in accordance with the known laws of physics and geometry. At least IMHO.... Bottom line.. it's getting there. I have railed about the LOS from day one. This was one of the bigger flaws IMO. It works acceptably now. If we could now get the sound glitches fixed, the bugs mentioned in my post regarding the battle generator, and heaven help us, MODEM PLAY, then I would be satisfied. All, Does anyone have any historical reference to the Battle of Overloon ? I have actually been to the battleground and used to have a small piece of lit put out by the tank museum there. There was apparently a 2 day skirmish there involving various German and Canadian units. According the the information I have it was another case of 1 or 2 88's on a nearby hill dominating the battlefield. The trenches where they fought h2h are still there. I'd like to put together a scenario based upon this engagement. If you don't mind, check the indexes in your books and see what you can come up with. I'll bet 2:1 that Perr has some stuff ... Send me e-mail if you dig something up.. Cheers, Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 326 Tue Jan 09, 1996 THE.CROW [Milo] at 18:48 EST Help. I have been trying to play the France 1940 Campaign. In the first scenario, I am having no luck getting anything other than foot soldiers loaded on the barges. What do I need to do to load armor or other wheeled vehicles? I can't believe you can ever win this scenario in 14 turns if all you can ferry across the Meuse are foot soldiers. What am I doing wrong? ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 327 Tue Jan 09, 1996 M.MARTINO [JAY] at 20:00 EST Rick, Interesting to hear about your experiment with HE values. You may have a point there, though I'm inclind to think that artillery shouldn't be changed. While I don't think it's as ineffective as Wolfgang does (I'm an arty nut, BTW, I -always- use it when I have it available), I certainly don't think it's too effective. The direct fire weapons are another story. I find that it's not satisfying to see all the infantry get massacred by tank guns. Still, it's probably fairly accurate, infantry casualties were much higher in WWII than tank crew casualties (and not due to there being more PBI). Wolfgang, I just played a scenario where I badly shot up almost a company of PzKw Vs, with Shermans! Actually, my force was greatly aided by almost a squadron of Typhoons, and I'd set up a pretty good ambush, still, I only lost one tank! I found that it wasn't the 75L70 not penetrating, though, it was that they were missing the few shots they managed to get away. I only had about 2 hits on my tanks: one was a mobility kill, and one destroyed the Sherman, the rest were misses. In any case, all of my kills against the Panthers were top or side hits, not a single round penetrated the front, which I guess is realistic. I haven't checked to see if the armour values were changed. Oh, BTW, my favorite tank commander is Oddball (Donald Sutherland), quote: "Tigers will shoot holes in my tank!" (or words to that effect, it's been a while since I saw the movie). Jay ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 328 Tue Jan 09, 1996 R.OLIVERE [Oly] at 20:06 EST Milo, Make sure that the trucks unload their passengers first and they should load on the barges no problem. Could there be some pbm in our future? Oly ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 329 Tue Jan 09, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 20:16 EST Wolfgang: Strange about your ART's lack of killing power. Just this afternoon, I was playing a river crossing scenario under the "revised" HE values in my game's database. I had an entire dug-in Russian infantry squad killed at one time by an ART shell--though I forget exactly what the ART weapon was. You might need to buy a more vicious computer!! :) Seen your name over on the ASL category. Great game, though I don't have the time to play it. Hope AH gets off their b(CENSORED OFF TOPIC THIS IS NOT ALLOWED)s. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 330 Tue Jan 09, 1996 J.LANSFORD [John] at 20:28 EST Jay, Since you use artillery so much, maybe you can tell me straight out. Does version 1.12 fix the "direct fire" version of the offboard artillery fire? You know, where the shell comes streaking in and impacts the target, and then three more do the same thing one at a time for each section of OBA called in. In the original version, we just got an "incoming round" sound and an explosion, followed by 4 total hexes of either craters (HE) or smoke. Maybe I'm in the minority, but I liked it the original way rather than having to see every tedious shell come in and impact over and over and over again. John Lansford ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 331 Tue Jan 09, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 22:13 EST Hey, Guys!! I just got back from a visit to the SP messages on CServe. Know what they're talking about over there??? Halving the HE values by using WPNEDIT!! (only they misspell it as WEPEDIT). Somebody's tapping our well, guys!! Be on the lookout for spies!! Ask suspicious characters what Babe Ruth's longest hit was!! And for Patton's sake guard the ammo dumps!! Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 332 Tue Jan 09, 1996 D.FLAMIANO1 [dom] at 22:34 EST Is there any way to get wpnedit if you're not on compuserve? ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 333 Tue Jan 09, 1996 LAST.RONIN [Kato] at 22:44 EST Heh heh, sorry, Jim. I know that some of my barbed comments may seem to be directed at you--that isn't my intent. For what it may be worth to you, I think you've done a hell of job designing this game. I only wish the framework in which you work wasn't so limited; I attribute that to SSI. I may be wrong, but it'd surprise me. No comment on that is needed. Rick: I am right. But you have to understand that my demands for a top notch game aren't realistic from a bottom-line point of view. No doubt there's a convoluted maximization problem some bean counter has worked, which details just what needs to go into a game to generate the most profit with the least cost. Combine that with the idea that a company doesn't WANT people to be playing their game for a year or more; such enthusiasm might keep the customer from buying something else within a month or three. And if the customer will buy your product every two months rather than every six or eight months, there is incentive NOT to improve your games. It's a bed the consumer makes and must sleep in. But I don't have to like it, nor do I have to respect the mentality that embraces that reality. By the time a game makes it into the nebulous list of "Favorite All Time Games," there are no more revenues geing generated, and it's a hollow victory to all except those who took pride and enjoyment in the game's creation. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 334 Tue Jan 09, 1996 DONDO at 22:57 EST Ok, the weapons editor is now available as file 10298. Enjoy, but remember it is not an authorized SSI product, and you are assuming the risks of use [i.e., if it trashes your database, it ain't their fault!]. ==Dondo ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 335 Tue Jan 09, 1996 M.VINARCIK1 [Michael J.] at 23:27 EST ======= To: D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] ======= > The sound in 1.12x is very spotty. I am only now getting about half of > the sounds. I get the following: I tracked my loss of sounds to turning off the animation. It seems that the main gun sounds and such are tied to the animations. Gary, is there any halfway point? Movement animations really bog down the game on my 486/66, but I miss the shells flying through the air. Maybe make them independent of each other? Mike ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 336 Wed Jan 10, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 00:28 EST DONDO: Thank you. KATO: I agree wholeheartedly. Sad, isn't it? What really kills me is that I used to play SSI's first games on the Apple IIe, when the graphics were less-than-great but the innards were Herculean. Now...just when the machine power and the graphics are great, the guts have fallen out. Not just SSI, either, but a lot of companies. This "dumbing down" crap really drives me up the wall. But I do have hope for SP...ONLY because Gary Grigsby is involved with it. I wouldn't give you 2 cents for Mindscrape. I think they've contaminated SSI's outlook: Sequels + Dumbing Down= BIG $$$$. Thanks for your (at least to my way of thinking) highly valuable opinion. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Sent on 1/09/1996 at 10:11p Wolfgang, I think I have seen a book recently Overloon. I did not buy it because the maps were disappointing and I have run out of bookcase shelves. I wil have to go to Barnes & Noble and look at lunch. Mike, I strongly agree w/ your point on animation. I turn off move because it really slows things down. If we can just get the animation button on the orders menu then it would be quick to toggle. Now we have to switch back and forth among the menus and it is tedious. The range selection has NOT been fixed to accept numeric values. Perr Dog ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 338 Wed Jan 10, 1996 K.BAILEY1 at 05:42 EST Hi There!, I have a quick SP question which has nothing to do with historical accuracy versus gameplay (I'm _way_ over on the accuracy side of this one; of course I admit that my ideal game would sell about 15 copies ). Nor is my query in relation to the relative values assigned to the various instruments of war ('though between the sources available to me and my own experiences with weapons, I think that I could get in there and debate on even terms with most of those here). I'm not even going to demand the final, perfect game patch be released to us all tomorrow. What I am going to ask about is the source of one of the game's video clips. I recognize virtually all of them, with one big exception: the final clip during the game's introductory credits. This is a beautiful bit of footage showing three German AFV's roaring past attended by young, (tragically?) hopeful men. This is a terrific piece of film, and it is surprising to me that I cannot identify it. Would someone be kind enough to inform me of its provenance? From what I have seen of it, I would guess that it taken in Summer-Fall of 1944, somewhere in France or Belgium (of course, since I said that, it will probably turn out to have filmed in Norway in Winter of '42 ). My thanks in advance to anyone who takes the time to respond positively to this post. Oh, and before I go, allow me please to note how much I have been enjoying the ongoing discussions here. Lots of good information and insightful ideas.... Returning to Lurk Mode, Kent ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 339 Wed Jan 10, 1996 M.VINARCIK1 [Michael J.] at 07:46 EST ======= To: P.ANDRUS [Perr Dog] ======= > I strongly agree w/ your point on animation. I turn off move because it Yeah, but putting it on the orders menu will prevent the animation when you get attacked during your move(s). I just like seeing the little specklies when a machine gun attacks! Mike ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 340 Wed Jan 10, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 13:29 EST For those who fear the violence and carnage levels of SP would be damaged by halving the HE values, let me assure you that's not the case. Last night I played an Aachen scenario created by the Battle Generator (version 1.11x). I took the American side. First and major mistake: I sent three unsupported scout cars into the city. The first one was hit by a Panzerfaust and immediately exploded, killing the formation leader and throwing everyone into confusion. But where was the firer? No sighting! I sent the second scout car closer to try to get a sighting...he's somewhere in one of those buildings on the... Boom! A panzerfaust again, and the second scout car goes up in flames!! But my third scout car has a sighting! Indeed, the enemy's in that building over there! Open fire!! The enemy holds his position. Bam! Comes another panzerfaust round, but it's a dud and it bangs off the scout car's fender. More fire from the scout car, but the enemy won't budge! Then another panzerfaust round, and my third scout car explodes! By this time, my squads--I make no pretense that I can play this game well, gentlemen--have come up in support. Again, the enemy must be located. He fires his rifles. We have a sighting! An intense firefight ensues, as I try to surround his position. He does not break, but keeps matching fire for fire. This goes on for 5 turns. (10 minutes, game time!!) Finally, he smokes and withdraws. My squads (minus two that have taken casualties and withdrawn) follow him into the maze of buildings to finish the job. ...and they run right into an ambush!! Fire from the left and right!! They hold out as long as they can, but one by one they begin to break!! Nothing to be done, now, but count the dogtags and say "Next time, Fritz. Next time." This is from the Battle Generator under 1.11x, guys. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 341 Wed Jan 10, 1996 C.SCHILLING [Curt] at 16:01 EST Wolfgang, I just got back last night and saw some comments to the effect that you might be looking for material on Overloon. I have been dallying in one book (The Battle for Overloon and the Maas Salient 1944-45) for a little while now. Let me know what you might need and I'll see if I can E-Mail you some info. Curt ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 342 Wed Jan 10, 1996 J.WIRTH at 17:07 EST Rick Mc, Believe it or not, but I also think SP is TOO BLOODY. However the solution is not to halve the HE values. All of the HE values were carefully developed in relation to one another and unless every HE value in the game is halved, this proportionality will be ruined. The proper solution is to reduce the lethality of direct fire combat. I tried to lobby Gary & SSI in that direction and failed. Maybe the people on this forum can have better success. Wolfgang & Jay, If the Germans aren't shooting straight, don't look at me. No penetration values or armor ratings were changed in the revised OBs. Jim Wirth ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 343 Wed Jan 10, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 17:50 EST Jim: I've done exactly that. Change the HE value of EVERY weapon, so the balance isn't skewed. By "change", I know you understand I mean "halved". (Whew! To communicate on these bulletins boards, ya gotta be a lawyer and a semantics expert, plus have graduated summa cum laude from charm school!!) Back in message #324, I suggested halving "almost every weapon", but what I meant was "every possible weapon". Some--like the small arms--can't be halved. I suggested the use of common sense. Anyway, in essence EVERY weapon's HE in my game has been halved, or at least modified a little bit. ART may have to be worked on, and aircraft weapons...but I gotta tell ya, Jim...I've got a great game on my computer right now!! Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 344 Wed Jan 10, 1996 M.MARTINO [JAY] at 19:37 EST John, Oddly enough, my original had the 4 shells land individually. That changed with 1.11x, where suddenly one would have the sound effect, and the others would all land at the same time. I did something to it, though, that caused it to revert back to the old way. 1.12x still has the animations for the 4 individual shells. BTW, I like the idea of being able to switch it on an off (if possible, separately from all other animations), but if I had to make a choice I'd go with you. It just gets tedious watching the fall of shot. One other interesting tidbit: if the individual shells are falling, there will be a pause between shots when one hits an infantry unit or gun and causes casualties. This provides a bit too much intel IMO. Jim, I'm not complaining about the Germans' lack of accuracy, just commenting. I think it was due to my tanks not being exposed until the Germans began trickling into my view. Each one would have two to four Shermans firing on it as it appeared. I reckon I caused so much suppression before they fired, that they were bound to miss more often. I think you're right: direct fire is far too lethal in relation to indirect fire (which, for those who don't know, was the biggest battlefield killer of the war). Jay ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 345 Thu Jan 11, 1996 DONDO at 00:36 EST Rick: Well, I tried your idea of halving everything, and it certainly makes for a more interesting and entertaining game. I think there is a problem at the low end of values though. The infantry seems to have trouble killing each other. Obviously, the smgs must be kept at 2 as compared to rifles at 1, but then the lmgs must be 3, and so on. Instead, what about incresing the accuracy of some of the small arms a hair. I realize this is counter intuitive, but perhaps a way to increase killing power of small calibre weaponry? Anyway, thanks for the idea! ==Dondo ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 346 Thu Jan 11, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 00:46 EST Dondo: Right!! As I mentioned up-topic, the small arms are somewhat problematic, but I think with some common sense and experimentation they can be brought into line. What I've found under this system is that the infantry is able to move and maneuver a bit more freely, which relieves them from the duty of serving as firing-range targets. Thank you for your comments. Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 347 Thu Jan 11, 1996 BC.MILLIGAN at 01:02 EST Now that I've called attention to myself by criticizing, I have two comments. These may or may not be bugs, and I do keep that "x" in mind, on the new version: 1) I no longer have aircraft engine sounds. 2) I had thought the sighting rules were improved. With that in mind, here's what happened to me in a campaign game, U.S. (me) versus AI Germans: I deployed an engineer unit in a house, set its range at 1, and waited for the Germans to roll down the road and into trouble. Instead, at a range of 8 hexes, an SP-251 traveling fast somehow spotted my squad, which I had _thought_ was hidden in the building, and opened fire. Other HTs at this or greater range joined. What made this even odder was, as nearly as I could see from the terrain, my squad was a height of 15, the German SP-251at a height of 10, and a small hill at a height of 20 was blocking 3/4, or possibly even all, of the intervening distance. On my turn, an infantry squad in a nearby building tossed smokegrenades in front it its own building, as well as the engineers' building, in a desperate effort to provide some cover. It makes sense to me that the German units would then be able to fire at the infantry, but not necessarily that they should be able to quickly shoot it and the engineers to pieces, at the same long range, with fast-moving, single-mounted machineguns. I know others have asked this question before, but why is it that the computer can have a squad, AT gun or sometimes even a vehicle "hidden" in the open, which the unwitting human player doesn't see until it opens fire, but I can't hide inside a building behind a hill, not to mention the smoke that came later, at a scale distance of 400 yards or more? Is this a bug, or am I missing something? And if you can't hide in a building, behind a hill and smoke, from a fast-moving vehicle 8 hexes away, how _do_ you hide your own infantry? A response would be greatly appreciated. Baffled in Baltimore ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 348 Thu Jan 11, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 11:22 EST Mike, Hmm... sounds tied to animations ? Interesting. I'll have to try that. So it's either put up with the shot animations that Lansford is complaining about (which I don't like either) or get spotty sound... Not good.. Perr, Will keep on the lookout for any info you can dig up. Meanwhile I am going to give the folks up in OH a call to see what can be had.. Rick, Nice post. That sure sounds a lot like the old ASL skirmishes. One heroe with a schreck or ft could _really_ ruin your day. I'm still leary of changing all HE values by half. I'd like to do some experimentation or at least see some more of your experiences posted here. Curt, Great ! I'd like information particularly on which units were involved, times, length, etc. If you could scan or xerox a map that would be superb. I do have somewhat of a recollection of the terrain since I was there but that was about 10 years and a few hundred thousand brain cells ago . ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 349 Thu Jan 11, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 12:26 EST Wolfgang: Thanks. Sorry I didn't make a better showing for our guys. I used lousy tactics (actually, no tactics at all) and I didn't have the right tools for the job. I should have had combat engineers available, with some FTs. The way I was able to finally move that sonofagun out of his stone building was to rush him and drop grenades down his throat, but... ...I paid a high price in crossing the street, even with all the smoke and fire between my men and the enemy's nest. It may not, in fact, be necessary to halve ALL the HE values to give the infantry a fighting chance. ART, as you and Jay have pointed out, may need to be bumped up a few points. Take a look at these figures--from the weapons database of 1.12x--and see what you think. Bear in mind, these numbers are unmodified. #1 Rifle; HE value: 1 Accuracy: 4 Range: 10 #2 SMG; HE value: 4 Accuracy: 2 Range: 4 #3 MG-34LMG HE value:8 Accuracy: 8 Range: 10 #4 MG-34MMG HE value:14(!)Accuracy: 12(!)Range: 18 #5 MG-42MMG HE value:16 Accuracy: 12 Range: 18 #6 MG-34TMG HE value:12 Accuracy: 6 Range: 10 Some other weapons: #33 75mmFH HE value: 6 Accuracy: 5 Range: 133 #67 95L22Gun HE value: 8 Accuracy: 5 Range: 40 #83 Flamethrower HE: 10 Accuracy: 25 Range: 1 and, as a last example: #106 50 cal HMG HE: 14 Acc: 15 Range: 20 Take a look not just at the HE values, but the way the numbers interact. The FT, I think, is right on. But look at those LMG and MMG numbers!! This kind of outrageous firepower negates ALL cover. Gentlemen, this is why your infantry won't--CAN'T--stand its ground. Now, these may be accurate "spec" numbers, taken from weapons books, but those are "firing range" figures that don't take into account the importance of cover or a squad's mobility. With firepower like these--pure and simple--your infantry will almost instantly become pinned, or retreat. Once you lose control of your men--and it happens mighty fast in SP--you're up the creek. Jim, won't you PLEASE help us? If you fail--or chose not--to respond, you're going to lose control over the database. SP has great potential. All of us know that, or we wouldn't be here typing on a blue screen. (At least, mine is blue). We WANT to help, and be helped. If you were driving on a trip and needed directions, and you pulled over and asked someone how to get from point x to point z, say... ...you wouldn't drive off in the opposite direction, grit your teeth and say resolutely "I'm NOT going the way that guy suggested! NO WAY!!" Well, doesn't this bulletin board exist for the gamers to give you guys directions when it appears you "might" need a helping hand? Or is it simply set up for you to tell us what we should buy and what we ought to like, whether we have opinions or not? Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 350 Thu Jan 11, 1996 V.NEWELL [VENOM] at 14:07 EST Looking for a balenced scenario. Any help would be appreciated. VENOM. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 351 Thu Jan 11, 1996 J.LANSFORD [John] at 19:30 EST I put the level of messages on Medium, and the tracer effect went away but the explosion sounds is still there. So are the direct fire tracers, so that's good. All four indirect explosions make noise now, though, so I guess this is a new enhancement from the original version. John Lansford ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 352 Thu Jan 11, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 22:31 EST I made a fatal blunder tonight in the Xmas Greetings scenario. I had the unmitigated audacity to smirk as I crested a hill in a PzIVh and saw..........an M3 Halftrack. Two turns later, the PzIV was in full retreat, the apparent casualty of lack of nerve .... or overrated machine guns. These darn halftracks are more fearsome than a Sherman. I actually had a StugIII taken out by an M16 (quad .50) by frontal hits ! The only way I can see this is if one of the bullets had hit a rivet in the glacis (but weren't these welded?), the rivet then ricocted around in the crew compartment eventually striking a round of ammo directly. Granted I haven't played against the Americans much, spending most of my time wintering on the steppes. But it seems to me that mg's both vehicular as well as infantry employed are way too potent. Comments ? I tend to agree with Rick re: infantry lethality. It would seem that after a few rounds of cover fire, a well placed smoke grenade or two and a carefull assault move into a hex should leave a decently moraled unit with at least a shot or two to get a grenade or satchel charge into the hex. As it works now, however, any time you move adjacent to an infantry unit in good order, you are bound to be shattered. Try this with 3 or 4 squads in a row. An infantry unit defensively firing into a smoked stone building hex should not break the assaulting unit 9 times out of ten. My suggestion for artillery would be to make it more lethal, but to reduce the number of tubes available. There is just no way that a battallion size engagement would routinely have that many battery's of the big stuff available. Except perhaps for the U.S....On the other hand, the effects of arty, even though not immediately lethal as in KIA's, certainly do slow down an offensive by shattering the moral of the target units. Units continue to be pinned are sitting ducks for subsequent barrages. I still feel it needs some tinkering... Not sure if I mentioned this or not, but the sound glitch I experienced was related to the animations. Shux. Also noticed that the arty animations from _my_ barrages were about 3 times faster than the enemy. Mine were coming in from the right of the screen, the computer controlled enemy was sending the stuff in from the left. Strange indeed... Wolfgang out for now, I also had 2 squads that were listed as destroyed when I passed the cursor over them but yet they remained on the map. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 353 Thu Jan 11, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 22:59 EST Jay, Re: Oddball... I liked the one where Eastwood finds Oddball sitting under a shade tree. The Sherman had broken down and Murray (MTM fame) was trying to get it running. Kelly asks Oddball what he is doing and in a very 60's So.Cal manner says.." just kicking back under this tree, having some wine and cheese, and catching some rays.." Has anyone figured out how to model the paint shells or the loudspeaker ? Rick, Just re-read your post re: the Aachen scenario. It came to mind that if the HE values are fudged like this, then most of the canned scenarios will probably have to be lengthened due to the prolonged firefights...n'est-ce pas ? Also, just saw your table of HE values. Interesting. I was trying to compare these to what I recall from ASL. In ASL a FT had an inf rating of 30, whereas the MG42 had a rating of 4 if memory serves. The most potent MG the .50 and it had an 8. You could of course intensive fire and squeeze 12 out of it but with about a 16% chance of jamming it. To compare, the 150 shell of a Brumbar had an inf rating of 30, same as a FT. Since I wasn't actually a participant in the Big One, I can't speak from experience. Most of the benchmarking I do is based upon my ASL experience. That has proven to be one of the most succesful gaming systems ever, so I feel that it must be at least somewhat accurate. Particularly with regard to the infantry side, since it was designed primarily as an infantry sim. Perhaps what needs to be done (and heaven knows I've asked about here months ago) is that we need to get a terrain effects modifier chart, including the effects of moving in the open, moving through smoke, stone bldgs, the whole shebang. And then what we do is we make it more defensible to, say, close assault move (read: move less than 2 or 3 hexes) into a stone building that is smoked. Course, this would probably be a lot more difficult, but it would be the best of both worlds. Infantry moving in the open _would_ of course get chewed up by a .50, but infantry in a thick woods hex or entrenched or in a stone bldg would probably just suffer a hit to their morale and some suppression. What do you think ? Venom, Shameless plug here, but my Danube scenario is pretty even - although some have said that the Germans have the edge. Note, I don't know how if any scenarios designed under 1.11 will play with 1.12. Also, check out the Christmas Greetings in the canned scenarios. I just finished and it was 732 to 722. Pretty even if ya ask me... Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 354 Thu Jan 11, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 23:24 EST Wolfgang: Not sure about the need to lengthen the canned scenarios. I think my Aachen scenario might have been somewhat abnormal, as per that scout car-killing squad standing its ground so long. I made the Americans "average" and the Germans "veteran", so I think I may have run into a high-morale SS type. Also, it was an American assault, so of course the Germans were really dug in tight. I never turn the victory hex flags on in Battle Generator scenarios--as I don't like to know where the enemy is likely to be waiting or what his destination is likely to be. So: I believe my men basically blundered into the victory hex area held by SS men. As it was a relatively short--12 turns--scenario, they weren't about to back off as the scenario reached its end. That's what I THINK happened, at least. Regarding your quest to get the terrain values: Good luck!! These questions have been asked before--as well as a plentitude of other important questions--and we're all still listening to the dial tone. I'm really beginning to believe no one knows these answers. I'll tell you, Wolfgang, when the Prima book on the "Secrets Of Steel Panthers" comes out, it's gonna have to be five hundred pages long!! Take it easy!! Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 355 Thu Jan 11, 1996 M.MCCRAY [Sherrick] at 23:36 EST Milo, Try sending the infantry over in their own rafts (just move them into the water and they will inflate automaticaly) and use the barges only for armor. Sherrick ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 356 Fri Jan 12, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 00:24 EST Sorry to be so verbose tonight, but since i have taken a hiatus from SP and now am back, i've got a lot bottled up . And with the snow still falling outside, it looks like I'm snowed in for a 4 day weekend. Plenty of time to play SP...So I'll be around here a lot . BTW, If you are looking for a decent Russian front scenario, give Counterattack a try. Well designed and challenging. You will learn to hate those Tu2s.... Rick, The more I think about it the more I figure that I really don't have a clue as to how to make the HE/infantry game feel "right". As i said in a previous post, I too feel that most aspects of the infantry game are a tad bloody. I think I'll run some tests with wepnedit, assuming that it works with 1.12x - the LOS fixes, albeit not perfect, make me reluctant to go back to 1.11. Wolfgang back to the front... ---------- Category 25, Topic 24 Sent on 1/11/1996 at 9:27p Mike, No, putting it on the orders menu just makes it much easier for those of us who want to turn it off and on. You can easily leave it on. Wolfgang, Curt is talking about the book I have seen but not bought. Perr Dog ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 357 Fri Jan 12, 1996 P.ANDRUS [Perr Dog] at 00:27 EST Mike, No, putting it on the orders menu just makes it much easier for those of us who want to turn it off and on. You can easily leave it on. Wolfgang, Curt is talking about the book I have seen but not bought. Perr Dog ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 358 Fri Jan 12, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 00:31 EST Rick, Those high-morale SS types, eh ? They will give you fits won't they . Just ask Sabre.... I still think that a squad running in the open _should_ be machine gun fodder. A well placed burst could easily wipe out 3-4 men if the squad was double timing it. Now, if they were using assault move that would be a different story. Perhaps herein lies part of the problem. For AFV's the movement rate seems to matter both in terms of the moving AFV's ability to hit targets, as well as in the defending units ability to hit the moving AFV. Perhaps something similar should be modeled for the infantry. Course, it may already be, but I don't see it... Again, keep us in the dark... Prima looms I'm afraid. I am almost reluctant to buy these aftermarket manuals any more. The industry that has evolved with such publications seems to be a cause rather than an effect IMO. Obviously its market driven, but chalk it up to more greed I guess. The manuals in games like ToS, Kampfgruppe, etc, all circa 5 years ago, were fairly replete. Now of course, to really get the kind of stuff that should accompany the game you must plop down another 20 bux or so... This stinks... I can see it for "hint" books of the sort that come with the RPGs. But in a WARGAME, this is going a bit far... Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 359 Fri Jan 12, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 00:33 EST Perr, Thanks for the info. If Curt doesn't come up with the info I'll probably buy it myself if I can find it... Of course, you wouldn't have that much trouble squeezing ONE more book into the bookshelve ?? What about the coffee table? Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 360 Fri Jan 12, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 00:38 EST And another thing... For those of you with Win 95, an Internet account, software such as Pow Wow, and a willing opponent, the next best thing to SP modem play can be achieved. You simply load up your dial-up networking software, connect to your provider, get Pow Wow running, and SP as well. Get a Pow Wow connection with your opponent, and you can actually play SP via e-mail, chat, and email the files directly to your opponents internet e-mail address. This worked well with 1.11 but with the new and improved e-mail friendly 1.12 its a bit of a problem. I and Sabre have still yet to figure this one out. Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 361 Fri Jan 12, 1996 R.WOLKEY [RobW] at 01:01 EST Sorry if this has been asked recently, but I got SP for Christmas and since my CD-ROM will only work thru Windows 95 (it recognizes the SCSI card, DOS does not), SP will not run. Is there a current SP upgrade that runs in Windows 95? RobW ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 362 Fri Jan 12, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 02:08 EST Something's rotten in the state of Denmark. Just loaded the Nijmegen scenario. If Don Ho were there it would have been perfect. There were friggin palm trees in the terrain mix ! Has anyone else seen this ?? I propose a SP tournament. I have heard that the weenies over on CIS have had one, so why not a GEnie tourny ? I was thinking along these lines. Everyone who wants to participate would play the same scenario, the same side, and the person who gets the highest score wins. What I also had in mind was to use a home grown that I design so that no one can have the advantage of having played the scenario before the tourny. Gentlemans honour, of course. Of course, we could do a PBEM affair but given the rather dismal state of SP PBEM it might be better to simply do it in the aforementioned fashion. If anyone is interested or has any suggestions, I'm all ears... Wolfgang ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 363 Fri Jan 12, 1996 D.ROBERTS57 [Wolfgang] at 02:15 EST Do any of you ASL afficionados have the OOB for "Hubes Pocket" ? ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 364 Fri Jan 12, 1996 L.HOBAN [Leo] at 02:31 EST RobW, SP can run under Win95. (I am), set up a 'shortcut' to START.BAT, go into properties, and make sure it is set for full screen. Oh, and make sure that working directory is set to the right thing. If that doesn't work, you can simply start up an MSdos session, or even, heaven forbid, run it in MSdos mode, with will shut everything else down while you are running the game. I find I can even multitask in it, at least if I'm running in 640X400. The screen garbages up a bit, but it fixes itself if I hit + or -. I'm running through France at the moment, and I'm sorta shocked how useful Jadzpanzer I's are. I've also been running 3engineers/1mmg for infantry sections, and the MGs really do a job on soft targets. Heavens. Leo I just got this game before the last big storm, and am having a lot of fun with it. Not as good as Panzer general as far as quick gameplay, but the interface is much less annoying than Allied General was. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 365 Fri Jan 12, 1996 B.MILLER31 [Brad Miller] at 07:14 EST Wolfgang, Ask and Ye shal receive! Hubes Pocket OOB from ASL: GERMAN: ------ PZ VG (75LL) x 1 PZ IVH (75L) x 3 SPW 251/sMG x 1 SPW 251/1 x 3 10-2 LDR x 1 9-1 LDR x 1 8-1 LDR x 2 6-5-8 (SS) x 11 PSK x 2 (Panzerschreck) HMG x 1 LMG x 2 9-1 (Armor Leader) Demo Charge x 2 RUSSIAN: ------- T34/85 (85L) x 3 T34 M43 (76L) x 6 9-1 LDR x 1 8-0 LDR x 1 8-1 LDR x 1 6-2-8 x 8 4-4-7 x 10 LMG x 3 Location is listed as Southern Russia near Buchach, April 6, 1944. If you need anything else let me know. Brad ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 366 Fri Jan 12, 1996 LAST.RONIN [Kato] at 07:58 EST Dondo, maybe the solution is to NOT increment the values as you're doing. A heavy machine isn't necessarily more lethal to infantry to a medium machine gun--it merely gives the ability to "affect" a harder target. So perhaps the smgs stay at 2, but so do the lmgs--for their HE value. The additional ability is reflected in their AP value, if they have one. (this is totally off the cuff; I haven't even looked at these values). BC: look again at yer unit selection menu. You may have thought you'd selected engineers, but in fact you chose a unit of College Fraternity Students. All the ruckus and naked wimmens being chased onto the roof of the house, not to mention Animal House blaring from the windows, is what really attracted the notice of your German AI. ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 367 Fri Jan 12, 1996 J.WIRTH at 10:08 EST EVERYONE, I will try to as concisely as possible explain how the INF KILL values were determined. To begin with all comparisons to ADVANCED SQUAD LEADER are meaningless. SP uses a completely different method to assign firepower to weapons and a completely different method of combat resolution. Secondly, the PANZER STRIKE game system (which I was not involved in) was Gary's basis for all the values used in SP. My involvement centered on "developing" the rather generic values used in PS into more individualized ratings by actual equipment type. With but a few exceptions, the deviations from PS values produced by my work were minor. In PANZER STRIKE, the INF KILL rating of all LMGs was 6; a BAR was 4. When I consulted the actual technical information on these weapons I discovered that most had a rate of fire of around 600 rounds per minute. This coincidence was so convenient that I used the simple formula of rate of fire divided by 100 to calculate an INF KILL rating. As a result, a slow firing weapon like the Italian Breda LMG gets an INF KILL rating of 4, while the MG-42 (ROF of 1,100 rpm) gets a rating of 10. If you think the MG-42 is overrated, remember this baby was nicknamed "Hitler's Saw". These ratings are very realistic when you consider that a bolt-action rifle with a maximum rate of fire of maybe 30 rounds a minute has an INF KILL rating of 1. An MG-42 LMG with over 30 times the rate of fire of a bolt-action rifle has only 10 times the firepower. Even taking its superior accuracy into account, the MG-42 is still underrated!!! Tripod/vehicle mounted machine guns were considered "sustained fire" weapons and given roughly twice the firepower of their LMG counterparts. Non-German air-cooled machine guns were degrated to take overheating problems into account. (The German MG-34 & MG-42 had quick change barrels to get around this problem, however German tank machine guns were degrated.) The 12.7mm/50 Cal heavy machine guns were slightly overrated to take into account the tremendouslethality of these large caliber rounds. The INF KILL ratings of High Explosive rounds were factored upward from the smallest caliber weapons. The bigger guns tended to get progressively undervalued. For example, a 5 lb hand grenade has an INF KILL rating of 4. The 25 lb round of the British 25 Pounder has an INF KILL rating of only 8. A 75mm round which would weight around 15 lbs has a INF KILL rating of 6. Compared to a hand grenade, HE rounds cannot be said to be overrated. If you think the grenade is overrated to begin with, I can assure you that 2 factor grenades will have a much more difficult time killing people than grenades did historically. I think that all of the weapons in SP are reasonably valued based on their technical specifications and actual combat experience. If direct fire combat in SP is too bloody, its the combat resolution formulas, not the INF KILL ratings that need adjusted. Jim Wirth ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 368 Fri Jan 12, 1996 R.MCCAMMON2 at 16:23 EST Jim Wirth: Thank you for your response. This is just the kind of information I (we?) have been needing to hear. I understand your points, and they are extremely well made. I apologize if it's seemed I've been shouting from the bully pulpit. It was always my intention to clarify, instead of muddy, the waters. I have to return, however, to the drum I've been beating--my dismay (disappointment) over the infantry game in STEEL PANTHERS. Under the current (unmodified) system, sustained infantry firefights are impossible. As the AI's forces seem to have the edge in both sighting and accuracy of first fire, this means your men can be shredded before you can return fire. It's my understanding from my WWII reading that, though the weapons were certainly fearsome and leathal, actual casualties were surprisingly on the low side in infantry firefights. In a ten minute firefight between two squads in stone buildings, the casualties might be two or three wounded, one or two killed. This was borne out in the Aachen scenario I reported on earlier. This is what I call "the miracle of the human animal", for lack of a more precise definition. It is on this subject, Jim, that I think our philosophies are vastly different. You value the technical specs and the hardcore numbers. That's fine, and certainly important. I value the random factors that can undermine and "lower" those numbers. Let me say, you're absolutely right about SP not being on the same scale as ASL, and therefore shouldn't be judged in its shadow. Actually, Jim, SP is MORE detailed than ASL. The details are MORE intricate in SP than they are in ASL...there's just not as much of it. The bullets, for instance. SP tracks all the rounds. The choice of infantry weapons. MUCH more detailed than SP. I would argue that the morale/experience/rally system is equally as detailed in SP as in ASL. And does ASL name every squad and formation leader? Does it give them a "personality" of sorts through the rally number system? Certainly not. As I am not a programmer, the only way for me to affect changes in SP's infantry game is through the weapons database. You're absolutely right about the problem not being in that area, but that's all I can get to. My lowering (I won't say "halving", because that's not accurate in all cases) of the HE values of the MGs and other weapons is an attempt to model the following: The fact that weapons are not being continually fired for these two minute time periods. Possible weapon breakdowns. Jammed clips. (See above) The weight of machine guns, and moving them to new positions while in sight of the enemy. Scared to death gun operators, no matter what the caliber. The dirt and fury and confusion of combat. Heroism. Stupidity. Mistakes. Failure of courage. New-found courage. Clinging to cover as if it's a second skin. Shouted and garbled commands. Fire and duck, before you get your head blown off. Quick bursts of unaimed area fire, which was usually unlikely to hit anybody. Well...there are others, I'm sure, but I hope you get my meaning. Our philosophies are different, Jim, because I think these "random" dirt factors are extremely important in SP. I think they're more important than the hard spec numbers. See where we're not communicating? Of course, maybe these things don't matter to Gary Grigsby, either. In that case, I say, fine...but I still prefer the random dirt and the "miracle of the human animal" to the cold spec numbers. I've talked myself out on this one. My friends, I've got to get to work!! I've spent far too much time on this board, though I've certainly enjoyed it. I'm going to have to hibernate for about eight months to get some work done, so I'm going to bid you all farewell for a while. Thanks so much for the stimulating ideas and conversation!! I look forward to seeing what SP will be within the next year. It truly is a gamers' game...one with incredible variety and incredible potential. Again, thank you, Jim. Thanks all. Fight the good fight!! Rick Mc ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 369 Fri Jan 12, 1996 J.LANSFORD [John] at 18:29 EST Historically, not many soldiers were killed by hand grenades anyway unless they were in an enclosed area (building, bunker, etc) where the fragments could be contained. The radius of effect for the grenade was low compared to the dispersal of men in the squad in a given area. Putting it down to an HE rate of 2 may make more sense than keeping it up at 4. John Lansford ------------ Category 25, Topic 24 Message 370 Fri Jan 12, 1996 THE.CROW [Milo] at 18:36 EST Got the barge-carrier problem worked out. Thanks. I discovered the assault boats by accident. They made all the difference. Well on the way to the sea and the BEF. Somebody was commenting on the slowness of movement on a 486/66. I am running this on a 486/50. The movement of large columns was killing me it was so slow. I discovered a very easy fix. Zoom out when moving many pieces long distances. For instance, moving a large column down a road when zoomed out is about 20 times faster than when zoomed all the way in. I zoom in to move the head of the column carefully then zoom out to move the remainder up behind it. It also helps to zoom out before doing end turn. Arty attacks go much faster. Of course, their are times when you want to be in close to see the action. When it matters less, zooming out is a poor man's Pentium. On more tip. Check the roster before hitting End Turn. Look for units that have many moves left and go to them. It may prevent you missing an important move. It's an easy and quick double-check. I am not going to get into the technical debates. I don't have the grognard or historical experience. I do enjoy reading them though. I will make one statement. No matter how realistic we try to make it, until you are killed playing it, it's not realistic. While I want it to be ALMOST that realistic, I am satisfied just learning how it works. I'ld rather have a smooth running game with stable rules and good PBEM than something that is constantly changing/mutating to reflect the current favored opinion of what is realistic. A couple of things I have noticed in terms of quirks. I have had occasional ghost units among the opposition. Usually vehicles that can be seen but not targeted even when adjacent nor do they show ID flags. They never fire. They just sit there once they appear. Perhaps they are immobile and abandoned. I have had a barge go "off-map" while unloading. This hurt as I was in short supply. It showed on the roster as having moves available but was listed as "off-map". When I did a "go to" SP went to the truck. I may have screwed up the unloading somehow. I did have a game that would create a large "streak" across the middle of the screen when centered on a certain section of the map. It created it every time but in different colors. I can't remember if this was in 1.0 or 1.12. And another question. Why is it that some of the arty I choose arrives on the map and some is off-map? Does it have to do with it being part of the core or in support? Or is it dependent on the type chosen as in strike A/C? Some things I have observed in two weeks of SP war: Most of this is certainly not new but as my old professor once said, "You have a flare for the obvious." Saw a plane shot down for the first time last night. It was cool except it was mine. Learned that going into buildings with armor in 1.12 is very risky. 88s can kill some tanks from VERY FAR away. Calling in strike a/c for close proximity attack is risky even when the vis is good. Placing the on- map arty is the most critical part of the deployment, next to having a plan. Hills are great places to be but the bad guys think so too. ( The "Little Round Top" Rule). Units will move around detected mines in 1.12. Movement draws fire. Fire draws fire. Sitting quietly sometimes draws fire. Trucks blow-up with ease. Detect-manuever-surpress-maneuver-kill. "The greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears, to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters." Genghis Khan ------------