LEAVE 1.04 ALONE !

[Jason Petho]

(Sorry Jason, I thought about sending the turn to you, but ended up deleting the file. Any future incidents I will forward to you.)

Thanks Gavin, that would be appreciated.

Jason Petho

[Bioman]

It's also contra-productive because nobody in the dev team now bothers to listen to him anymore after so many rants.

/H

Well, I would hope that they listen to him because he makes some very good points. To ignore his concerns just because you do not like what he is saying is nothing more than arrogance.

/H

Adolf:

Ed has stated many times that he feels that there is a problem with the new assault rules. Maybe there is and maybe there is not, I can't say for certain. From some of his prior statements he has sent some examples in and did not like the responses that he got. Now he refuses to send in any more examples and he has just decided to complain that the system is broken. This is not a constructive attitude. I have to admit that some of the responses to what he has said are not constructive either.

I think that what needs to be done at this point is that both sides need to step back and look at what has been said and cool off. Neither side has the high ground at this point as both sides are guilty of arrogance and sending derogatory posts.

For those that feel that there is a problem with the new assault rules, send in examples of your complaints with your explainations. It may take quite a number of examples to prove that there is a problem. For those on the development team look at the examples with a cool head and no preconcieved notions. There may in fact be a problem that you are not seeing.

Remember the fairy tale of the boy who called Wolf. If you keep complaining with no examples people WILL stop listening to you. That is a fact!

[Steelrain60]

I am not even close to understanding why this issue simply will not die.

For the last time: nobody forced anybody else to buy 1.04, and for those who did, nobody forced anybody else to play with the options on.

Where is the issue? Play with the version you like. If you cling to your Talonsoft, play that. If you still love JTCS, have at it. It really is that simple.

I am so tired of this argument. I could practically recite the points of both sides verbatim at this point.

For the record, however, I have yet to encounter the weird assault results some are encountering. I played a few turns of "Verdun on the Volga" tonight against the AI to see what kind of results I encountered. I have to say that none of the results shocked me. In particular, I launched an assault with full strength mot. rifle platoon and a full-strength pioneer platoon that failed against a disrupted Soviet rifle platoon and disrupted ATR platoon in a city hex with IP. The assault failed, but I subtracted 1-SP of the rifle platoon. Somebody explain to me, where is the crime in that result? Several other similar assaults failed with similar results, one or two other assaults succeeded in capturing hexes. Again, I find that the heavier damage inflicted by direct and indirect fire against a unit or units, the better the chance of success in assault. Now, how different is that from the way things were?

[The Rattler]

Personally i think the work done by Matrix and all involved is quite incredible. A lot of free time has been put in to this series to keep it sustainable.
Im quite happy with most assault results.....sometimes inflicting losses on defender without moving them...sometimes taking losses with no gain...sometimes being successful and over-running/capturing the defenders.I do feel on occasion that some of the "no result" assaults confuse me as surely some losses were taken ?.....unless this counts as a repelled assault....attacker got pinned down on approach ? As Jason said morale is important as well as the defenders terrain.This seems to me quite fine. Some small issues are assaults issued against lone AT guns or against weakened disrupted units on a road/open hex....or when the defenders are greatly surrounded and outnumbered and you achieve a no result...... Of course considering a turn is six minutes ? > it may take some turns to be successful?
I agree having the option to play with rules on or off makes sense but i do like to play with them on.....i think the game has improved greatly with new units and OOB's etc.....and disrupted no longer means as good as dead.

lastly i think discussion is good and keeping in mind we all at the end of the day want the same thing......To play CS with fellow members, test our own strategies...have a try at an historical scenario or two......and just have some fun.Very few games get support like is offered currently.
Anyway i have a bridge to cross and im under heavy fire :-)
Again thanks Jason and co for all your hard work and continuing support.....
regards
s

[K K Rossokolski]

I strongly suggest eveyone on this thread take a step back and again read Bioman's post...3 or 4 back.

[Valor]

As I see now the main problem is not whether there is something wrong with 1.04 or not. The problem now is whether Ed sends file in or not... don't you think that it went a bit wrong way? :chin:

Please stay on the topic! Which is again 1.04! Do you want to have it as it is, or not.

Best regards

Slawek

[Kool Kat]

I am not even close to understanding why this issue simply will not die.

Maybe because you have not experienced the "growing pains" of multiple patches and have not played many ver. 1.04 games with the "extreme assault" option on? :chin: I noted you just joined the CS ladder last month and have no recorded / finished matches.

For the last time: nobody forced anybody else to buy 1.04, and for those who did, nobody forced anybody else to play with the options on.

I do wish players would stop citing the "nobody is forced to play xyz version" as a valid argument. This is NOT what the objections are surrounding ver. 1.04 extreme assault.

Where is the issue? Play with the version you like. If you cling to your Talonsoft, play that. If you still love JTCS, have at it. It really is that simple.

I wish it was as simple as you state, but it is not. The argument that Ed and other players have raised is this one. Is the ver. 1.04 extreme assault too "extreme" with combat results / sequences that slow the game and introduce too high of a "luck factor"? (too many isolated, disrupted and strength-reduced units turning into John Wayne supermen - holding off waves of attackers for multiple turns.) :chin:

I am so tired of this argument. I could practically recite the points of both sides verbatim at this point.

IMO, I believe both the player and developer communitities need to keep an open mind on the "playability" of ver. 1.04 extreme assault. Let's get some more suspect game files to Jason and document questionable assault mechanics. I plan to send Jason my game files with any weird assault play.

For the record, however, I have yet to encounter the weird assault results some are encountering.

Please note that just because you have not experienced "weird" assault results does not not invalidate what other players have experienced. I have experienced much more difficult assault mechanics under ver. 1.04 (extreme assault! :whis:) and a few "questionable" results. Again, I will send Jason any future game files that I believe are suspect.

IMO, we (players, developers, CS community) should keep an open mind regarding ver. 1.04 extreme assault and its playability factor. Let's also not demonize any CS players who bring such concerns forward. :smoke:

[Steelrain60]

I am not even close to understanding why this issue simply will not die.

Maybe because you have not experienced the "growing pains" of multiple patches and have not played many ver. 1.04 games with the "extreme assault" option on? :chin: I noted you just joined the CS ladder last month and have no recorded / finished matches.

For the last time: nobody forced anybody else to buy 1.04, and for those who did, nobody forced anybody else to play with the options on.

I do wish players would stop citing the "nobody is forced to play xyz version" as a valid argument. This is NOT what the objections are surrounding ver. 1.04 extreme assault.

Where is the issue? Play with the version you like. If you cling to your Talonsoft, play that. If you still love JTCS, have at it. It really is that simple.

I wish it was as simple as you state, but it is not. The argument that Ed and other players have raised is this one. Is the ver. 1.04 extreme assault too "extreme" with combat results / sequences that slow the game and introduce too high of a "luck factor"? (too many isolated, disrupted and strength-reduced units turning into John Wayne supermen - holding off waves of attackers for multiple turns.) :chin:

I am so tired of this argument. I could practically recite the points of both sides verbatim at this point.

IMO, I believe both the player and developer communitities need to keep an open mind on the "playability" of ver. 1.04 extreme assault. Let's get some more suspect game files to Jason and document questionable assault mechanics. I plan to send Jason my game files with any weird assault play.

For the record, however, I have yet to encounter the weird assault results some are encountering.

Please note that just because you have not experienced "weird" assault results does not not invalidate what other players have experienced. I have experienced much more difficult assault mechanics under ver. 1.04 (extreme assault! :whis:) and a few "questionable" results. Again, I will send Jason any future game files that I believe are suspect.

IMO, we (players, developers, CS community) should keep an open mind regarding ver. 1.04 extreme assault and its playability factor. Let's also not demonize any CS players who bring such concerns forward. :smoke:

mwest,

I started out in this club as steelrain60, and that is what I play under. I was encountering problems logging in to the forums, so I changed my login. I have over 100 games played in this club; I am no newbie. And yes, I have experienced the multiple patches with which the game has evolved.

My fatigue with these threads stems from the fact that both sides are repeating their arguments ad nauseum. Everyone has a right to an opinion, and everyone has a right to express it, regardless of what that opinion is. The truth is, just about everyone has vented their spleen on this issue. Everything that needs to be said has been said. I'd rather club members be talking about actual game action on this board rather than constantly b***ching and complaining. Let's move on, shall we? You play your version, I'll play mine. You play your rules, I'll play mine. Trust me, I'm not offended if somebody tells me they won't play me because I won't use variable visibility. C'est la vie.

I do have to say, however, that it is extremely unfair to Jason and other developers to keep complaining about 1.04 and not to provide him with any files.

[Steelrain60]

I am not even close to understanding why this issue simply will not die.

Maybe because you have not experienced the "growing pains" of multiple patches and have not played many ver. 1.04 games with the "extreme assault" option on? :chin: I noted you just joined the CS ladder last month and have no recorded / finished matches.

For the last time: nobody forced anybody else to buy 1.04, and for those who did, nobody forced anybody else to play with the options on.

I do wish players would stop citing the "nobody is forced to play xyz version" as a valid argument. This is NOT what the objections are surrounding ver. 1.04 extreme assault.

Where is the issue? Play with the version you like. If you cling to your Talonsoft, play that. If you still love JTCS, have at it. It really is that simple.

I wish it was as simple as you state, but it is not. The argument that Ed and other players have raised is this one. Is the ver. 1.04 extreme assault too "extreme" with combat results / sequences that slow the game and introduce too high of a "luck factor"? (too many isolated, disrupted and strength-reduced units turning into John Wayne supermen - holding off waves of attackers for multiple turns.) :chin:

I am so tired of this argument. I could practically recite the points of both sides verbatim at this point.

IMO, I believe both the player and developer communitities need to keep an open mind on the "playability" of ver. 1.04 extreme assault. Let's get some more suspect game files to Jason and document questionable assault mechanics. I plan to send Jason my game files with any weird assault play.

For the record, however, I have yet to encounter the weird assault results some are encountering.

Please note that just because you have not experienced "weird" assault results does not not invalidate what other players have experienced. I have experienced much more difficult assault mechanics under ver. 1.04 (extreme assault! :whis:) and a few "questionable" results. Again, I will send Jason any future game files that I believe are suspect.

IMO, we (players, developers, CS community) should keep an open mind regarding ver. 1.04 extreme assault and its playability factor. Let's also not demonize any CS players who bring such concerns forward. :smoke:

mwest,

I started out in this club as steelrain60, and that is what I play under. I was encountering problems logging in to the forums, so I changed my login. I have over 100 games played in this club; I am no newbie. And yes, I have experienced the multiple patches with which the game has evolved.

My fatigue with these threads stems from the fact that both sides are repeating their arguments ad nauseum. Everyone has a right to an opinion, and everyone has a right to express it, regardless of what that opinion is. The truth is, just about everyone has vented their spleen on this issue. Everything that needs to be said has been said. I'd rather club members be talking about actual game action on this board rather than constantly b***ching and complaining. I think Jason and the other developers have gotten the idea that there are some seriously unhappy campers out there.

Let's move on, shall we? You play your version, I'll play mine. You play your rules, I'll play mine. Trust me, I'm not offended if somebody tells me they won't play me because I won't use variable visibility. After 1.03 came out, I was fairly unhappy with the assault rules and I made my feelings known, as did many others. I also decided not to play with 1.03 until this was remedied. I didn't have a conniption fit over the fact that 1.03 wasn't exactly to my liking. I simply continued playing 1.02 with like-minded members. Remember, folks, this is a game!

I do have to say, however, that it is extremely unfair to Jason and other developers to keep complaining about 1.04 and not to provide him with any files.

This will be my LAST comment on this subject. To Jason, et al, thank you so much for the hard work you have put into keeping the game alive and relevant. It is deeply appreciated by this player. It may not be perfect, but few things in this world are. If you decide that re-vamping the assault rules in the future is warranted, I'll give that a shot as well. In the meantime, however, I'll stick with 1.04 because to date, I have seen nothing in the assault results that would make me want to return to 1.02. A few turns ago in "Cauldron of Fire", I assaulted and eliminated a Russian bunker in a smoked village hex with 3 rifle platoons, an MG platoon and engineer platoon and a 45mm A-T platoon, all disrupted by direct fire. It took me a few turns to set it all up and to bring the Russian forces in the hex down to a manageable size, but that was just part of the challenge (On a side note, I wouldn't mind going back to the 2.5% armor disable in the next version; I've already lost 2 Elefants to random arty).

[Kool Kat]

I do have to say, however, that it is extremely unfair to Jason and other developers to keep complaining about 1.04 and not to provide him with any files.

I agree! :)

Copied and pasted from my earlier post:

"IMO, I believe both the player and developer communitities need to keep an open mind on the "playability" of ver. 1.04 extreme assault. Let's get some more suspect game files to Jason and document questionable assault mechanics. I plan to send Jason my game files with any weird assault play."