Quick comments

[Szilard]

- AA seems to have settled down to something sensible.

- Don't notice much difference in PO defence yet; maybe a little bit less inclined to attack. Formations with defend orders can still charge off into the wild blue yonder away from their objectives if there's nothing much in front of them. Formation order semantics and modelling have always been screwy since TOAW I, IMO, and could do with reworking from scratch; not just tinkering.

- Turn-end processing time reduced by maybe half on average for the medium/big thing I'm working on. But variable - some turns can take as long as before. That's what I would expect from tinkering with the algs. Still think that changing reconstitution placement to something simpler would be best way of getting further (& desirable) speed ups, rather than alg-tinkering.

Actually the biggest speed improvement I notice so far is in AI movement - presumably uses the same path-finding?

Further speed-ups I think most important for testing; probably only marginal importance for playing, given the improvements in this patch. But to the extent Elmer vs Elmer is now a good first test for a scenario, you really want the thing to be fast enough to run multiple tests for most changes you make which might effect balance or event logic - maybe 10 or more runs. Not very feasible if a run takes 1 hour+, which my biggish-but-not-huge scenario does at the moment.

- Did the withdraw-army bug get fixed? haven't tested that yet, or the various event editor/force editor bugs.

[JAMiAM]

ORIGINAL: Szilard
- Did the withdraw-army bug get fixed? haven't tested that yet, or the various event editor/force editor bugs.

No, we haven't addressed that yet.

[Spartan07]

Guys,

A bit late with this probably as I just bought the game. IS there any plans to make the replay screen full size in Pbem replay? I find it pretty much unusable and it spoils the game a lot.

[swistou]

Dear sir,
 
First I would like to thank you for the game, a very complete and nice playable game.. a must for modern warfare i will wathever send you these few comments  about the game. Perhaps it would be interesting to look to integrate such features to a future patch [&o]:
 
 - The game lack of a equipment editor, a lot of Western armored equipment since end of 2000 year has been modified or upgrated to new feature added (especially anti-RPG features) 
 
- The equipment database has few errors, i think few gamers has showed the errors already. Perhaps it would be interested to upgrate it with recent material
 
- The artillery ...  against armor (tank, IFV, APC...) is unrealistic even ridiculous... [:(] it is not rare to see a 0% casualty report after even an entire brigade of self propelled guns or MRLS shoots over another armor and/or artillery unit (wathever the size/quality of the firing unit... it is always the same result)
 
...since 1980s years the western armies has developped ICM ammunition against Armor (recently the French apache missile / or the US JSOW can spread such sub-ammunition). All western MRLS, SP-guns, towed guns from all europe, US and allies benefits ot the tactical effect of this type of ammunition which attacks every armor vehicule from top side (as Javelin AT-missile and recent anti-tank/anti-armor missiles do). An ICM shell/grenade can penetrated between 2,5 to 3 inches of top armor which is actually the average armor thickness in Tanks/IFV/APC), intelligent ICM can be guided by thermal imaging which limitating the circular error during top attack (engine exhaust gas are good for thermal imageriing...).
 
The consequence is that when artillery begins a structured barrage fire, few dozens rockets or shell fitted with ICMcan spread dozens to hundreds anti-armor grenades capable of penetrating all top armors of  even recent) armored vehicvule. It was so effective during 1991 gulf war that even armored iraqi forces from republican guard (armored with decent T-72s, T-62, T-64 BMP1/2s) called it the "steel rain ...". Most of these forces were attacked and destroyed / disabled by such ICM.
 

 
An entire brigade of dozens of SP-guns and MRLS can lunch a devastatous attack with thousands of such ICM ammunition (imagine a 54 SP-Gun and 18 MRLS firing a mission of 4 minutes beetween 6 to 12 rockets/shell per minute with each inside 12 to 18 ICM anti-armor ICM ). Any impact on engine, tracks, radios antenna, fuel tanks, spare parts, ammunition & weapons exposed sights can seriously alter the effect on an organised force and disable a lots of armored vehicules as simply halt the progression of armored troops.
 
 Do'nt forget that with tactical reconnaissance feature (included in TOAW III) as GPS/ UAVs and recon troops artillery fires can be precise !
 
The flipe side effect is than about 16-30% of these ICM does not explode. Perhaps it coulb be possible to introduce this effect to increase realism.
 
Other material is the counterbattery radar such Cobra systems  or similar which were utilized in Bosnia in 1993 by NATO forces to shoot back on serbian artillery forces... several batteries of Serbian forces were wiped out by using counter battery fires. Actually only 90s is necessary to locate, send data to active counter battery fire to shoot back (e.g. PZH 2000 artillery SP-GUN recently introduced in German batalllions, or other in europe forces)... . Not to say than towed artillery batteries can not survive long because of this feature
 
I would respectfully suggest to correct such errors or complete artillery capabilities which causes a serious lack of realism in modern warfare in TOAW III. ON the contrary in the game the artillery effect is efficient against all other troops and light vehicule (infantry & lights wheels)... so the job is partially done  !!
 
Byu the way I am playing with it and i will signal any other interesting feature ti integrate or discuss [;)]
 
Swistou