Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Deputy

Here's an interesting comment on the 1.03 update:

XLVIII Pz. Korp: "and it may have been nice if the artillery affects vs. armor had been confined to increasing the disruption chance rather than kills... seeings how in my opponents last artillery shoot I've just lost more Elefants than I had lost from direct combat in the preceding 14 turns of Earl's "Cauldron of Fire"."

tm.asp?m=1862232

Yep....sounds like artillery is really functioning great [8|]

How can you make any claims on reality and historical accuracy when you are a DCG player? And then your assumptions.... I'm not even going into that. You obviously don't know who I am.

ORIGINAL: Huib

ORIGINAL: Deputy

Here's an interesting comment on the 1.03 update:

XLVIII Pz. Korp: "and it may have been nice if the artillery affects vs. armor had been confined to increasing the disruption chance rather than kills... seeings how in my opponents last artillery shoot I've just lost more Elefants than I had lost from direct combat in the preceding 14 turns of Earl's "Cauldron of Fire"."

tm.asp?m=1862232

Yep....sounds like artillery is really functioning great [8|]

How can you make any claims on reality and historical accuracy when you are a DCG player? And then your assumptions.... I'm not even going into that. You obviously don't know who I am.

That statement wasn't made by me and wasn't about historical accuracy, other than the fact that artillery raining down and destroying Elefant tanks is pretty ridiculous. And no, I don't know and really don't care who you are. Even if you are John Tiller, I doubt very much he would endorse the mass destruction of tanks by artillery and mortar fire.

Deputy, I agree with you .... I had more fun with a porcupine in a closet then with artillery stuff. I reverted to 1.02b on XP. I already have included some of the newer units in the encrypt files so that is good. I liked the simplicity and how streamlined some of the file structure was in the old tlaonsoft side. It made more fun to learn how to do the modding and such. There should be a thread just for the 1.02b side with incorporation of some units. Great Idea. You have one supporter in your camp

Former Grognard that turned into a marshmallow from age

ORIGINAL: barker

Deputy, I agree with you .... I had more fun with a porcupine in a closet then with artillery stuff. I reverted to 1.02b on XP. I already have included some of the newer units in the encrypt files so that is good. I liked the simplicity and how streamlined some of the file structure was in the old tlaonsoft side. It made more fun to learn how to do the modding and such. There should be a thread just for the 1.02b side with incorporation of some units. Great Idea. You have one supporter in your camp

Former Grognard that turned into a marshmallow from age

Barker & Deputy:
Good luck with 1.02b
Both of you are using only a tiny portion of the game: DCG's and a bit of home modding. Yet I have rarely seen 2 people spamming this board with the same arguments over and over as if what YOU are doing with the game is SO important that everybody else who visits these boards has to read the same stuff dozens of times in multiple threads. It's getting really, but I mean really boring. [>:][>:][>:][>:][>:]
Both of you have made your point. Obviously Jason and the crew disagree or are not interested in what you have to say. Please move on and stop repeating yourselves, or at least do not use so many different threads for the same points.
Thanks.
/H

ORIGINAL: Huib

ORIGINAL: barker

Deputy, I agree with you .... I had more fun with a porcupine in a closet then with artillery stuff. I reverted to 1.02b on XP. I already have included some of the newer units in the encrypt files so that is good. I liked the simplicity and how streamlined some of the file structure was in the old tlaonsoft side. It made more fun to learn how to do the modding and such. There should be a thread just for the 1.02b side with incorporation of some units. Great Idea. You have one supporter in your camp

Former Grognard that turned into a marshmallow from age

Barker & Deputy:
Good luck with 1.02b
Both of you are using only a tiny portion of the game: DCG's and a bit of home modding. Yet I have rarely seen 2 people spamming this board with the same arguments over and over as if what YOU are doing with the game is SO important that everybody else who visits these boards has to read the same stuff dozens of times in multiple threads. It's getting really, but I mean really boring. [>:][>:][>:][>:][>:]
Both of you have made your point. Obviously Jason and the crew disagree or are not interested in what you have to say. Please move on and stop repeating yourselves, or at least do not use so many different threads for the same points.
Thanks.
/H

I keep trying to "move on", but so MANY people keep posting the same complaints[:D]. So we highlight what the problems are with the new patches in the hopes SOMEONE at Matrix might hear us. I don't think it's fair to guys to ignore them because they are complaining about a part of the game that is so important to them. Obviously the new patches have met with a lot less universal approval than 1.02b did. When you completely change the nature of the game, you better expect to hear voices of complaint. Wouldn't you get upset if you were playing chess and suddenly the opposing player said "from now on bishops can move onto any color square"? I've already posted suggestions in another thread about how to try and overcome the new anti-tank artillery.

We are using a tiny portion of the game? Nooooooo....we are using the portion of the game we enjoy the most. Or did until the new patches. Now we must forego any improvements in those new patches because of the drastic change in artillery abilities. And were these changes made for ALL players? It doesn't sound like it. It sounds like it was done strictly for PBEM and single scenario players. DCG players be damned seems to be the attitude of those who like the mods. I have a feeling that Matrix and Jason weren't aware of how many of us really enjoy the DCG campaigns.

ORIGINAL: Deputy

I have a feeling that Matrix and Jason weren't aware of how many of us really enjoy the DCG campaigns.

Are you serious?

I've spent countless hours working on new organizations for the DCG players. That in itself is a huge effort. With the help of Richard, hunting down bugs that have caused the notorious DCG crashes.

Absurd.

Jason Petho

I only return to the site as in watching the reaction of even the most favored users of the Matrix version, they have now experienced the frustration I originally felt. I stand by the pervious statements that Talonsoft runs far better and I continue to use that version exclusively. Without problem. Ever. In fact, some problems (like the sound effect repeat) have not occurred in months and the three games run without error for me.
I have been waiting and watching the hundreds of emails on the 1.03 and 1.04 and can say I didn't even apply the patches because it appears that little was resolved and more problems for DCG players like myself have to be resolved. I also didn't want to bug Jason with dumb questions because I was too lazy to read ALL the emails (though now there are just too many to make the game fun). I cannot keep up with them now. In fairness to Jason, I think he's done the best he could but is not getting the support from the manufacturer, Matrix Games. That does not make me want to buy another of their products.
I think I mentioned that Play-Testing is the last step before release of any wargame. I imagine it's a lot tougher for Jason with the computer commands than adjusting a hard copy of the rules we use to play with (when using actual minitures).
Hang in there Jason. I still own the new version and am sure it will be far better than the Talonsoft version in the end.
I'll keep reading the emails and appreciate that you send them to me. Don't give up guy...you've come to far.
One might say of some of the comments, "et tu Brute."
Tim 41

You may say repeating and boring but look at the threads and see how many repeats are on the Assult rules, Visibility etc....Well I guess I will be boring and heard even if no one listens....Never been in the in crowd and never expect to be here

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

ORIGINAL: Deputy

I have a feeling that Matrix and Jason weren't aware of how many of us really enjoy the DCG campaigns.

Are you serious?

I've spent countless hours working on new organizations for the DCG players. That in itself is a huge effort. With the help of Richard, hunting down bugs that have caused the notorious DCG crashes.

Absurd.

Jason Petho

Jason: It's very nice and we certainly appreciate that you put forth the effort for new organizations for DCG players. But what good are they when these new artillery and invisibility rules for PBEM and single scenario players have all but made the game unplayable for DCG players in the new patches? We CAN'T use the new organizations because we don't like what we are forced to take to get them. Don't you think we WANT all the new organization features??? Good grief we certainly do!!!! I've been looking forward to the new patch with as much as or more anticipation as everyone else. I can't describe how disappointed we all are that we can't use it because of the unwanted and unnecessary changes it did make.

The point was that there has been an effort made to bring new elements to the all elements of the Campaign Series.

You clearly implied there wasn't.

Have you tried altering your tactics? Possibly adjusting to battlefield conditions?

Not everyone is having the same issues you are.

Jason Petho

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho



The point was that there has been an effort made to bring new elements to the all elements of the Campaign Series.

You clearly implied there wasn't.

Have you tried altering your tactics? Possibly adjusting to battlefield conditions?

Not everyone is having the same issues you are.

Jason Petho

Yes...and I described the changed strategy in another thread. But it's usually not practical to hide in forrests or behind hills if you actually want to capture your objectives in the allotted period of time. And I beg to differ...quite a few people are complaining about the exact same thing.

ORIGINAL: Deputy

ORIGINAL: Jason Petho

ORIGINAL: Deputy

I have a feeling that Matrix and Jason weren't aware of how many of us really enjoy the DCG campaigns.

Are you serious?

I've spent countless hours working on new organizations for the DCG players. That in itself is a huge effort. With the help of Richard, hunting down bugs that have caused the notorious DCG crashes.

Absurd.

Jason Petho

Jason: It's very nice and we certainly appreciate that you put forth the effort for new organizations for DCG players. But what good are they when these new artillery and invisibility rules for PBEM and single scenario players have all but made the game unplayable for DCG players in the new patches? We CAN'T use the new organizations because we don't like what we are forced to take to get them. Don't you think we WANT all the new organization features??? Good grief we certainly do!!!! I've been looking forward to the new patch with as much as or more anticipation as everyone else. I can't describe how disappointed we all are that we can't use it because of the unwanted and unnecessary changes it did make.

I have no intention of defending the changes. I have been disagreeing with other changes in the recent patches that were made without no apparent reason and with no benefit. But from your description this particular change has made the game more difficult. Maybe unrealistic, certainly different. But for a game this old each new challenge can be a blessing. I understand your frustration but maybe you should try and approach it differently? Sustaining higher losses means that you have to think harder, if you forgo the annoyance maybe it will actually be fine? Just a suggestion, sometimes when we know something so well we react negatively to any change. You can always go back to a previous version, but maybe it worth a try to take the game as it is, not as it was?

ORIGINAL: Borsook



I have no intention of defending the changes. I have been disagreeing with other changes in the recent patches that were made without no apparent reason and with no benefit. But from your description this particular change has made the game more difficult. Maybe unrealistic, certainly different. But for a game this old each new challenge can be a blessing. I understand your frustration but maybe you should try and approach it differently? Sustaining higher losses means that you have to think harder, if you forgo the annoyance maybe it will actually be fine? Just a suggestion, sometimes when we know something so well we react negatively to any change. You can always go back to a previous version, but maybe it worth a try to take the game as it is, not as it was?

It just saddens me that a game that was so enjoyable to play has turned into what it is now. I know it's an old game. But Matrix has a few old games they are selling. "Steel Panthers: World at War" is even older than the John Tiller games. But the changes that have been made to it have all been welcomed by users.
I've used up every strategy I can think of to win scenarios in a DCG. It really isn't that difficult to figure out alternative strategies, rather than charging straight at an objective. But if you want to take objectives AND not take heavy losses in the process, within the alloted period of time, I just don't think it's possible. Perhaps by presenting these new challenges they have made certain types of games, PBEM and single scenario, more enjoyable. But it seems to have been done at the cost of DCG games. Right now playing with 1.03, 1.04 or 1.04 beta, I feel like I am leading a banzaii suicide charge every time I play a scenario. It has occured to me that the command I choose (always a tank unit) may be my biggest problem. But playing with an infantry unit feels like "fishing with worms". It just takes too long to get anything done. I need a Blitzkrieg style of attack, not a plodding crawling trudge. I fall asleep in front of the computer commanding an infantry unit [:)]

ORIGINAL: Deputy


...But what good are they when these new artillery and invisibility rules for PBEM and single scenario players have all but made the game unplayable for DCG players in the new patches? We CAN'T use the new organizations because we don't like what we are forced to take to get them. Don't you think we WANT all the new organization features??? Good grief we certainly do!!!! I've been looking forward to the new patch with as much as or more anticipation as everyone else. I can't describe how disappointed we all are that we can't use it because of the unwanted and unnecessary changes it did make.

I'm very satisfied with my results so far in my 1.04 beta Barbarossa DCG. However my character got killed only 2 months into the game.... c'est la vie! I'm continuing on just to test the beta patch. Personally I wouldn't think of starting a barbarossa DCG with a pre-1.04 OOB. I fixed dozens of errors that were potential upgrade crashes - carried over from the Talonsoft days.

I use all the optional rules except armor facing. I'm not a proponent of all the new stuff but for me, you dance wit who brung ya.

Richard: You certainly have my admiration. Actually, I think I would have rather been killed off than to have to face the OKW with all my units destroyed, which is where I was heading. [:D]

Crashing hasn't been a problem for me at all with 1.02b or prior versions of the Matrix game. But when I installed 1.04 beta I experienced my first CTD since Matrix started releasing the game. The good news was it had saved my location so I could resume. The only DCG games I tried were late war (post 1943) games. I just got depressed watching my Tigers and Panthers being systematically destroyed by invisible anti-tank guns and anti-tank artillery barrages. So I am back to 1.02b. It doesn't have all the OOB updates, but it also doesn't have features I don't want. [;)]

ORIGINAL: Huib

ORIGINAL: barker

Deputy, I agree with you .... I had more fun with a porcupine in a closet then with artillery stuff. I reverted to 1.02b on XP. I already have included some of the newer units in the encrypt files so that is good. I liked the simplicity and how streamlined some of the file structure was in the old tlaonsoft side. It made more fun to learn how to do the modding and such. There should be a thread just for the 1.02b side with incorporation of some units. Great Idea. You have one supporter in your camp

Former Grognard that turned into a marshmallow from age

Barker & Deputy:
Good luck with 1.02b
Both of you are using only a tiny portion of the game: DCG's and a bit of home modding. Yet I have rarely seen 2 people spamming this board with the same arguments over and over as if what YOU are doing with the game is SO important that everybody else who visits these boards has to read the same stuff dozens of times in multiple threads. It's getting really, but I mean really boring. [>:][>:][>:][>:][>:]
Both of you have made your point. Obviously Jason and the crew disagree or are not interested in what you have to say. Please move on and stop repeating yourselves, or at least do not use so many different threads for the same points.
Thanks.
/H

I suggest that as part of "the team" you might want to refrain from telling the "customers" and "players" of the game to "move on".
One, you are not a policeman who can tell people to do anything.
Two, as a member of the team and "playtester/contributor" you might be part of their problem.
Three, if their questions are not satisfactorily answered by those responsible, just what is their recourse?

If they wish to repeat themselves that also is their right? If they step out of line they can be modded by the forum hosts? Those hosts happen to be ... ?
Why not come up with a solution to their problems and not give them the "party line" of "if you disagree with us you will be told to shut up, move on, or find other tactics". I think that is a silly response and always will believe so.

RR

Actually I did move on , I added tank Transport, LCI that carries 2 Platoons on a Beach, Rocket LCT, Screaming Mimis, to 1.02b I also got figured out barage effect on Smoke (3 Hex). Working on the Aeronca PUP OB Plane...but hey what the heck it is only 1.02b...Then Again You can marry the OOB's to the Rising Sun Engine and get the Night Excercises....there just is some old school Documents you need to have to walk you through it. You can add countries and etc without messing with the Game engine...also the main, weapon, and Platoon and etc can be edited to add those screaming units..Camo on a barely visible ICON in 3d mode cool...good eye candy but I would rather had the time spent on getting the rampant vehicle derby fixed...but hey what do I know Nada...I am just a consumer.

Barker, my friend, I was quoting Huib. He seems to think that being part of the team allows him to tell posters when it is appropriate or how often they can post. Huib is neither an employee or moderator of the forum (at least the last time I checked).
 
When we are on the forums we can all say what concerns we have, as many times as we have to say them. Especially when those concerns seem to be ignored, unanswered, or belittled? The forum moderators have the tools to edit or delete content.
I think you and Duputy made some good points. I may not agree with all that you say or how you present it, but I will support your right to express your concerns and ideas.
 
RR

Thanks, for the remark...sometimes i am very adament to the point of being abnoxious and I do apologize for that...I just felt that with the eye candy it just wasn't worth the money...granted it is a cool update but when they tought bring a classic back...that is what i fell for because i love the game. I love doing the research to create a game that I can say this is cool stuff and it works...that my freind is a sense of accomplishment...ASL is a great game but tons of variables and rules , counters etc...ever tried to pla a huge 15 board game with regiments on that damn...hours on set up...hours of strategy, then your turn comes up then a fur flash jumps on the table and the family cat is staring at you like WTF...that is why i went into computerized war gaming. You have flexibilty while still having those complex rules built in, and it all fits on a monitor, no worry about the cat but god forbid the errant storm and power outage

ORIGINAL: barker

Thanks, for the remark...sometimes i am very adament to the point of being abnoxious and I do apologize for that...I just felt that with the eye candy it just wasn't worth the money...granted it is a cool update but when they tought bring a classic back...that is what i fell for because i love the game. I love doing the research to create a game that I can say this is cool stuff and it works...that my freind is a sense of accomplishment...ASL is a great game but tons of variables and rules , counters etc...ever tried to pla a huge 15 board game with regiments on that damn...hours on set up...hours of strategy, then your turn comes up then a fur flash jumps on the table and the family cat is staring at you like WTF...that is why i went into computerized war gaming. You have flexibilty while still having those complex rules built in, and it all fits on a monitor, no worry about the cat but god forbid the errant storm and power outage

Sometimes changes are good. If the Matrix version would be just the old Talonsoft with a bugfix or two many would call it a rip-off... although indeed some of the particular changes are not that great, but still.

Since you brought that subject up - actually JTCS is very cat-unfriendly. I happen to have 3 cats and with no undo and only autosave in campaigns a cat who decides that it is the time for a walk on your keyboard or better yet an attack on your mouse (no pun intended) can change the outcome of the battle