8.0 Corrections/Suggestions

[KG Erwin]

Furthermore, this is directed at three members--we know who they are, they know who they are, so the rest of you should not let these guys screw up this community. I realize that these problems have driven away some of the valued members. This was their intent, so don't let them keep you from offering your comments and opinions.

[harlekwin]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

Furthermore, this is directed at three members--we know who they are, they know who they are, so the rest of you should not let these guys screw up this community. I realize that these problems have driven away some of the valued members. This was their intent, so don't let them keep you from offering your comments and opinions.

[8|]

[KG Erwin]

No, Sven, I don't buy your argument. You could've been a valued asset, but you chose to be the ringleader of the few who want to tear down Matrix. You're indulging in a personal vendetta, and I know it. I hate that you have to be so petty and demeaning--you could've done some good, but now the whole community is aware of your agenda--your credibility is worthless, and you brought it all upon yourself. Yeah, as of now, you can still post your drivel, but I will no longer respond to it--I would request that no other forum member respond to you either. You can continue to embarrass yourself by continuing to post here, or just shut up and leave. The choice is yours.
The above statement also applies to Rune Iversen and Keke.

[Kevin E. Duguay]

Erwin,

Off board artillery is one thing that is acceptable, but do these off board units need Icons? Example; the U.S. T34 Calliope rocket fireing Sherman.[&:]

[Kevin E. Duguay]

If the useless twaddle on this tread were deleted (including this post) there would only be about 2 or 3 pages of usefull information and discussion.

[KG Erwin]

Help me out, Kevin. Give me a unit number, please.
In reply to your previous post, I have to keep these online until the offenders are dealt with. Afterwards, their posts, all of them, will disappear.
Glenn

[harlekwin]

ORIGINAL: KG Erwin

No, Sven, I don't buy your argument. You could've been a valued asset, but you chose to be the ringleader of the few who want to tear down Matrix. You're indulging in a personal vendetta, and I know it. I hate that you have to be so petty and demeaning--you could've done some good, but now the whole community is aware of your agenda--your credibility is worthless, and you brought it all upon yourself. Yeah, as of now, you can still post your drivel, but I will no longer respond to it--I would request that no other forum member respond to you either. You can continue to embarrass yourself by continuing to post here, or just shut up and leave. The choice is yours.
The above statement also applies to Rune Iversen and Keke.

I just sent a PM to David Heath.

I would like to thank you for finally being open, and NO KG you would not have valued my input anymore than you did Ammosgts awesome and well cited posts. She can be hard to follow and is admittedly a big booster for the US OOB but she also has impeccable cites and sources. I will in the interest of decorum refrain my usual wont to engage in a slap at this juncture of our comparison.

I am and always have been and shall ever reamain a fan of Matrix Games, David Heath, Paul Vebber and the rest of the original crew. I will refrain from positing my precise opinion of what you are attempting to model, but allow me to say you are doing a stellar job as a good representative of Matrix games. Unlike you I do not carry a badge by my name.

regards,(and best wishes)
sven

[Kevin E. Duguay]

Erwin,

T34 Calliope is unit 129 in the game editor, sym# 552
The same symbol is used for the M17 Whizbang, unit 130.

According to my brand new Icon Spreadsheet the Icons for these two vehicles can be found in, Icon0226.shp
The Whizbang shares a hull with both the;
M4A3E2 Jumbo sym# 553, Icon0226.shp, and
M4A3E8 HVSS sym# 531, Icon0223.shp

Does this help?

On the other subject, COOL![8D]

[BryanMelvin]

What can I say?

The reason for the OOB teams' silence is very simple to understand. A forum that was set up to help locate oob errors and fix them has turned into something out of this world.

It was the purpose of the forum thread to help the oob team fix the oobs and have, you, in the gaming community help refine these for their upcoming release.

Instead, a few individuals have begun to bombard the Forums with unwarranted rhetoric. Any response we give is immediately met with hostile words.

So we have been silent. Is it any wonder??

Several Persons have emailed me regarding that they no longer can respond to the forums here at matrix due to the abuse they receive as well have their responses from a select few spam every thread they open no matter the topic. This has caused several to stop reading the forums they once loved to discourse on.

So my answer to why the oob team has been silent is simple: Is it any wonder in this environment ???

I apologize to the many gamers for the rancor you have received and read from these forums. Many of you have read these Forums for many years once read with joy but are turning away in disgust at the manner in which the forums have become and I again apologize for this.

Several of you will respond with a vehement hatred and falsely accuse matrix of violating some concept of free speech but when many people express their dismay at no longer being able to write a thread or add to a forum's thread - what about that person's free speech that is being stopped by a few who are determined to sow discord and thus stop true free speech altogether? What should be done to them?

[Goblin]

At the risk of being banned, deleted, hung, etc:

With respect, but anyone who disagrees with you people is causing rancor and trouble. The responses you intially gave to cited fact were things like 'We feel its right.', and 'It was changed to reflect historic fact' when someone had posted the facts, and were different from yours. You also state 'game engine limitations' about everything, but only change one weapon in an entire category. Why does the game engine randomly take the same kind of weapons and treat them differently?

Why were numbers that were real-world accurate, and working in the game, changed to fantasy numbers? Why, why, why is what we ask. Granted, we were answered with the reasons of some of the changes, but not the why.

You say that some of us have bred the rancor in this forum section, and I say it takes two to breed.


Goblin

[Goblin]

One other thing:

This policy of secrecy started before 8.0 was even released, when the MCSE team couldn't even get the updated OOB's. I fail to see how anyone here caused the lack of responses by posting on the forum before it was even released...


Goblin

[harlekwin]

ORIGINAL: Goblin

One other thing:

This policy of secrecy started before 8.0 was even released, when the MCSE team couldn't even get the updated OOB's. I fail to see how anyone here caused the lack of responses by posting on the forum before it was even released...


Goblin

or considering I did not even start until shortly before we lost two days worth of posts after a long absence....but hey Gobby that is the spin.

[KG Erwin]

Bryan, the issues you brought up are being addressed. I'm with you, but the OOB Team has a responsibility to open discuss the changes that are being made, and we do indeed need player input on this. However, bowing to player demands created other issues in reagrds to historical accuracy. Is there a happy balance? Regretfully, no. With this game, a happy balance can never exist. I will state this publically-- even going with historical values, the official accounts don't agree with each other. One nation's tests of weapons capabilities may not not jibe with another's. As we all know, the manufacturer's stated values of a given weapon may break down in combat conditions. For WWII, the Reising SMG, as issued to some USMC units, failed miserably in combat. It was dubbed "The Rusting Gun". This is a classic example. For this reason, and many others, weapon values become a subjective issue. This is the core area of disagreement behind the vociferous opinions expressed by some gamers.
What the team is attempting to do is correct some of the obvious errors in 8.0. Now, this project has ballooned into a complete overhaul of the OOBs. All of the old arguments once again are raised, and are again equally pointless. There is no definitive answer in many cases, so the best educated guess must be applied. For better or worse, I've been forced into this debate, but this is my opinion as of today. The OOB Team is doing the best they can, as have all previous OOB update efforts, to get them acceptable to the majority of the gamers.
The problem then, and the problem now, lies with a very vocal minority who have their own agendas. This is gonna stop. The discussions should be for the majority who will actually be playing the game. If the majority feels that a certain weapon is under or over-valued or priced, then so be it. We might change it, but if it veers too far from historical relevance, then maybe not. I'm sure I'll get some comments on this, so I'll get back to you after we get some feedback.

[Goblin]

So because only a few of us post about the changes, we are a minority that should not be heard?!?! You asked us!

As for the disagreement of sources, you are correct. But when 5 out of 6 sources agree on something, and that is pointed out to the team, they state that it was game engine-induced.

Since I disagree with some of the changes, I will not post here anymore, since the posts will not survive anyways. I am glad that you all remember that we are players of this game too. many, like me, never posted a negative word about any of this type of stuff until this OOB. Its not personal, its fighting mistakes before they occur.

Now you will have a nice-rosy OOB section where only the people who agree with your changes are allowed to post. It will also be mostly empty.


Goblin

[Kevin E. Duguay]

Why cant' we all get along?

Here again are my two cents worth of twaddle.

I complained about many things for many years on this forum. For quite some time I was totaly ignored. But I kept pounding away at my key board makeing suggestions and asking for corrections. Now it seems some are being implemented. I still have issues that I know I'm right about, the 60mm mortar issue that I keep on the front burner, that stupid SU-37 spg (Not to be confused with the AA Vehicle) in the Soviet OOB and others. I think I saw that they finnaly fixed the Mobelwagen! I pointed that out about 3 or more YEARS ago. Persist, but do it with facts and keep repeating yourself. Sooner or later someone is going to listen. For instance the unit cost problem, hey, fine, what would YOUR unit cost suggestion's look like? POST IT! You dont like a formation or what's in it? Show all of us YOUR FIX! I remember not to long ago before the big crash (KILL ALL HACKERS!) that this thread was full of usefull suggestions. This use to be the 8.0 Corrections/Suggestions thread, now it's just complaint thread.

Now lets see some kind of change around here! And remember, just POST IT!![:)]

[Major Destruction]

ORIGINAL: Kevin E. Duguay

Erwin,

Off board artillery is one thing that is acceptable, but do these off board units need Icons? Example; the U.S. T34 Calliope rocket fireing Sherman.[&:]

Kevin,
Offboard units do not need icons but it does no harm to insert the icon number into the unit if the icon exists.

[Kevin E. Duguay]

Agreed, but if the unit has no ON board unit why wast the space?

[Major Destruction]

ORIGINAL: Kevin E. Duguay
I still have issues that I know I'm right about, the 60mm mortar issue that I keep on the front burner, that stupid SU-37 spg in the Soviet OOB and others. [:)]

Kevin, for the record, I opposed the SU-37, as did most of the OOB team during the v6 edit. We were over-ruled. I would delete it in a second if the unit slot was needed but I think the Soviet OOB has a few vacant slots left.

What was the 60mm mortar issue again?[:'(]

[Kevin E. Duguay]

The M19 Airborne version. Was used more like a jap knee mortar. Yes they did finnaly make a bi-pod for it. But according to I.V. Hogg with these items (Bi-pod, baseplate sights etc) the weapon weighed more than the original M2 60mm mortar and after a few units were produced the project was scraped as were most of the mortars. A few were retained in service with all the extras (Baseplate etc) until after the Vietnam War.

As it is now in the U.S. OOB we have two 60mm mortars with identical stats. Why not revert the M19 to the role it was intended for? A light easily portable close support weapon for Special forces and Airborne use?

The non existant SU-37 could be replaced by the SU-45. About 100 of these were built and fought on until late 1941. They were also used against the Finns durring the Winter War.[;)]

[Resisti]

ORIGINAL: VikingNo2

Oh well thanks for the info. Another question i like to play the Italians and I was looking through the OOBs I ran across a Submarine[X(] I could swear it had torpedos where could I use this weapon [&:]

Hmm, let's see...torpedoes..yeah, I got it! You can use these weapons against ships <G> [;)]
Check out the scenario #219 "Italian serie 04"