 |
|
Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Tiller Operational Campaigns (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=11) +--- Thread: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released (/showthread.php?tid=35636) Pages:
1
2
|
Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Volcano Man - 06-24-2006 RE: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Marquo - 06-24-2006 All this sounds great. Excuse my ignorance, what is Project McNamara? Thanks, Marquo RE: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Al - 06-24-2006 Again, thanks for all the hard work, VM. Do you plan on applying Project McNamara values to other games in the series, including the Modern Campaign games? RE: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Volcano Man - 06-25-2006 Marquo, As far as what PM is, here is a quote from me from another thread explaining it. For the most part it is copied and pasted here from a discussion on some early problems in K43's PM change that I have sinced addressed. "...I took one constant, set in stone value, (the PzC 88mm FLAK gun that was finally decided on after years of adjustments) and then looked at the same rating in the CS database. From that I came up with a ratio that I could apply, through different formulas, for the "spectrum" based around that PzC number. So basically, I only used the CS series as a sort of guage to measure the distances between each value, from say a King Tiger to a Sherman or a Pz III vs. a T34. So the mechanics of either system (or the differences there of) play no real factor in it as I didnt just simply take the values from CS and plug it in because it wouldn't be relevant. Also, most of the values (defense and hard and soft attacks) remained the same. Since this is true then it was the first clue to me that the data was narrowing in and refining and not creating a whole new animal. As far as the artillery, much of the artillery remained the same as it was before. There are only a few exceptions where some artillery went higher or lower in soft attack strength and most of these had to do with increases in SA strength of rocket artillery. But, as you say, most of the change was in the hard attack factors. Again, I merely used the "spectrum" approach, averaging out the firepower of the CS value along its entire range and then taking that average and comparing it to a known PzC value. The result is, any way you cut it, WW2 artillery was not very effective vs armor. I recognize that everyone has grown accustomed to what I have called "the indirect anti-tank guns", but there resided one of the issues some had with the system. Artillery could be used on just about anything you saw, be it tank or man, and the effect was usually just as effective. However, taking the spectrum approach, the difference in effectiveness of the SA vs the HA in WW2 artillery it was almost 10 or 15:1 in difference. That is not to say that ALL artillery is not effective against armored units, just that they are not as effective as before. Of course this is all relevant to the target type. If you are talking about lighter tanks, scout cars and halftracks then artillery is still effective against them. Truth be told, it is only during the modern times (1980's) that artillery became truely effective against armored units (with DPICM type munitions). In regards to lower armored TDs and scout cars... I think (from testing) that the result will instead be a more realistic use of such assets instead of the traditional use of them right now (the front line units that they are used for). Have you played any of the modern campaigns with the BRDMs? These lightly armored vehicles stand no real chance on the modern battlefield if you constantly leave them on the front line, taking fire, so you have to use them for the intentional purpose; to move about using recon spotting, or to move and bump into an enemy (or take fire from unspotted enemies) and then move to the rear. They should NOT be used like we are used to using them, regardless of the mechanics of the system. As for the TD's, the lighter armored ones are purely standoff weapons. The light armored ones (Marders, M18s etc) are intended to be somewhat of a "self propelled anti-tank gun". Their strength is in their range and mobility. That is not to say that ALL opened topped TDs have low armor, in my database the M36 is opened topped but has a defense of 20. So opened topped only really plays a role in its assault factor (vulnerability) where as the defense factor is related to its armor and defense. So it doesnt quite matter if the scale is different... at least in my rationale behind the changes. Now I admit (and I mentioned this in the other post) that a lot of habits would have to change, but I think it promotes more realistic behavior. " Since this is copied from another discussion it might (I cant remember) make references to that discussion. Here is the thread: https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/showthread.php?tid=35337 ...as mentioned, this was after v 1.0 of the PM in K43 so many changes were done before I moved on to Stalingrad '43s ALT scenarios. RE: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Marquo - 06-25-2006 Are the CS values considered to be the Holy Grail for the purpose of assigning relative values? Are they more realistic than the values used in ACOW? I am very curious, because when I was making "new" units for the Flashing Sword of Retribution, I refered to these 2 databases. Marquo RE: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Tortue Agile - 06-25-2006 Never heard of it until today... Where can we find the McNamara standardized database? Do we have to own the CS game or is there a excel spreadsheet somewhere of it? RE: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Volcano Man - 06-25-2006 Marquo, Amongst many, yes the CS series database is considered very high on the list. ACOW is as well but the problem with that is that ACOW generally uses low ranged values making it difficult to translate into PzC terms (without huge shifts in ratings). Tortue_Agile, No, you dont require anything. It is just a name I applied to the project that me and Huib Versloot started a year or more ago with the intent of creating standized values across the board. As far as the spreadsheet, it is something we created and will likely not be making available because it is both a continous work in progress and also the amount of work invovled in creating it. RE: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Boston33 - 06-25-2006 Thanks a lot. This is my first PzC game. I've seen some screens of your art for other titles and was waiting for this. RE: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Volcano Man - 06-25-2006 BTW, I must mention (but I dont want to spoil the fun of discovery) keep in mind that you also dont necissarily need to wait for the entire defending stack to disrupt before you assault now. Check your unit ratings and if you have a stack of a soviet SMG battalion paired up with T34s then in most cases you have an unstoppable combination. Usually you may or may not take the ground or at worst you might have a 1:1 casualty exchange rate. But, you must play like a soviet. :) On the other hand, any German assault that includes Pioneers is also very effective. Boston33, Great, I hope you enjoy it and purchase more of them. :) RE: Stalingrad '42 ALT art pack is released - Gasbag - 06-25-2006 Thanks again for the excellent artwork on these games (and for helping me with my R '42 question too). |
){kind=link}