Page 2 of 2

RE: Question about indirect

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 8:19 pm
by LuckyJim1006
Have to say - why was this not picked up on in testing ?

If it is historical at least give your sources. Why is it so hard to fix ?

At the moment arty is broken. I am advancing North to South so the art lays down a barrage North - South. WTF ?

Are you seriously suggesting that command and control is so bad I cannot say I want a FFE East - West ?

RE: Question about indirect

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 8:57 pm
by Erik Rutins
It's worth noting that this has been the way it is since the original Panzer Command: Winterstorm release. When we started seeing a lot of complaints on this, I realized that the main difference was probably the new random battles. In the designed scenarios, the designer generally takes the artillery position into account, but in the random battles they can be a bit less ideally positioned.

Of course, this doesn't affect the Closed Sheaf at all, but as I've said above we're looking into seeing what can be done for the Open Sheaf.

Regards,

- Erik

RE: Question about indirect

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 8:58 pm
by Erik Rutins
ORIGINAL: NefariousKoel
The wrong axis of Open Sheaf is just killin me on the first scenario in the Soviet campaign.  So much artillery to lay smoke with and it gets laid straight down the map.   Now I have five rows of smoke & I'm looking at the ends of them whilst being fired upon still. [:@]

Odd, I haven't had trouble with that in that scenario - will re-check it tonight.

RE: Question about indirect

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 9:11 pm
by rickier65
ORIGINAL: LuckyJim1006

Have to say - why was this not picked up on in testing ?

If it is historical at least give your sources. Why is it so hard to fix ?

At the moment arty is broken. I am advancing North to South so the art lays down a barrage North - South. WTF ?

Are you seriously suggesting that command and control is so bad I cannot say I want a FFE East - West ?


I've been playing PC:K since it was released - and while I'm not a "tester", perhaps one reason that it wasn't a testing issue is because it doesn't happen as much as this thread would have you think. At least in my battles (not all that many perhaps <15-20) , it hasn't been an issue for me. I accept that it has been for some of the folks here, but I guess I've been lucky that my Art. plots generally where I expect it to.

Not arguing or anything it sounds like it something is needed, but just thought I'd give some balance to the thread.

Rick
release. When we started seeing a lot of complaints on this, I realized that the main difference was probably the new random battles. In the designed

Ah - perhaps this is why it hasn't been an issue for me - Most of my battles have been set battles or historical campaigns (just a few random).

Rick

RE: Question about indirect

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 8:52 am
by pndrev
I'm someone who enjoys playing random battles, so I'd very much like to see this patched somehow.

Even in set battles, so far I had only about half of my fire mission go the way I wanted them to.

RE: Question about indirect

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:31 pm
by z1812
Hi All,

I too would like more control over artillery.

I would also like more control over airpower.

regards John