Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: polarenper

German OOB is more or less finished, as soon as i can force myself to stop combing through the sources for units like Wach-Btl.Siemensstadt, LW.Wach.Btl.Berlin or Versuchs-Abt. Berlin Spandau.

Yes, yes, I'm nuts,

Looking for obscure units? .....
In April of 1945, a panzerjäger-versuchs abteilung fighting was in Berlin. Its equipment consisted partially of VW Kübelwagen and Borgward IV equipped with Raketenpanzerbüchse 54/1....There is photo evidence of abandoned Borgward IV in the area held by 11. SS Freiwilligen Panzergrenadierdivision "Nordland" in central Berlin.

I read about another Panzer-versuchsabteilung which fielded a handful of surviving Pz I and II

We will see. The Russians did land on a Danish island (which i decided to leave off the map, as any sensible player would evacuate the garrison asap)in the last days of the war. Apart from that the Kriegsmarine was practically the only navy active in the Baltic, apart from a few submarines.

I've got two of these from Tessin; Versuchs-Abt. Berlin Teltow
and Versuchs-Abt. Berlin Spandau. I'll probably try to equip one of them in the way you mention.

The (or one of them, anyway) Pz. I unit was equipped with old Pz.I's with panzerfausts mounted on the sides of the turret. I've not managed to find a name for this unit though.

I've run out of place names! Already!!

So, there is a rumor that the limit will be increased, right? Please tell me there is...

Anyway, here's what I've finished so far. It's a 30MB jpeg file. Oh, and ignore the units... They are but an experiment!

I hope to have the map extend to the Elbe in the west when it's done. I need to go a bit further south as well, so there's still some work to do here.

Looks very promising, not sure about the names but some here should have more insight and maybe they know if there is a chance for raising the limit.

ORIGINAL: polarenper

I've run out of place names! Already!!

So, there is a rumor that the limit will be increased, right? Please tell me there is...

Anyway, here's what I've finished so far. It's a 30MB jpeg file. Oh, and ignore the units... They are but an experiment!

I hope to have the map extend to the Elbe in the west when it's done. I need to go a bit further south as well, so there's still some work to do here.

Placename limit will be increased. Map looks good btw. Keep it going!

Could you tell us where the limit is and to what it will be raised?

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Could you tell us where the limit is and to what it will be raised?

The current limit is 800 placenames. The new one will be 4000. That should suffice i would say.

Woa 5 times more that should really be enough, do you know of other limits that will be raised?

Thanks for the confirmation Telumar!
I vaguely remember reading that the map and unit as well as the event limits were due to be raised. Barbarossa at battalion level anyone?[:D]

ORIGINAL: Telumar

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

Could you tell us where the limit is and to what it will be raised?

The current limit is 800 placenames. The new one will be 4000. That should suffice i would say.

I rather have only 100 place names *more than sufficient even for my Kiev, Kharkov & Mius series together* & 3.5 released before I turn 50... One of the reasons I am holding back on my two new scenarios *Kharkov '43 - Operation Star & Gallop is still being updated* is the simple reason that I have no clue what's going to change or being changed in 3.5. I don't envy the monster scenario creators who won't get a glimpse of 3.5 during the secrative beta testing phase

Klink, Oberst

A good point, maybe a sticky topic with what is on the list for 3.5 would be helpful so designers can decide if the improvements make a hold in their scenario development necessary or not.
No need to release it when 3.5 makes a revision necessary.

ORIGINAL: Oberst_Klink...I don't envy the monster scenario creators who won't get a glimpse of 3.5 during the secrative beta testing phase

Klink, Oberst

I don't think you appreciate the weighty financial considerations and the threat of industrial espionage hanging over a product like TOAW. This has been explained before. They can't just tell the whole world what changes they are contemplating. What are you suggesting?

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

A good point, maybe a sticky topic with what is on the list for 3.5 would be helpful so designers can decide if the improvements make a hold in their scenario development necessary or not.
No need to release it when 3.5 makes a revision necessary.

I'm curious to see if 'improvements' should be in quotes or not.

And I'm curious if anyone sees thru the 2 former postings.

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

And I'm curious if anyone sees thru the 2 former postings.

What do you mean?

What I mean? What do you mean by "'improvements' should be in quotes" and "weighty financial considerations and the threat of industrial espionage"?
If it is true what is being worked on of course these points are improvements, the other point is that I don't believe anything except an unreliable communication line between the guys(well anyone besides Ralph?) who work on it and the community leads to us standing in the dark on the state & aims of the current development.

ORIGINAL: BigDuke66

What I mean? What do you mean by "'improvements' should be in quotes"

Changes that have been made in the past were not inarguably improvements. In the pre-Matrix era, AA shot down about as many planes as it historically did -- a bit high, but not bonkers. That was briefly 'improved' (someone 'fixed the error') producing loss rates that bore no relationship to historical reality. That was admittedly eventually rectified -- but at long as we're on the subject, at the moment we have no AA at all.

Supply units were altered so that they can no longer exert a decisive effect.

Changes were made so that 'sea roads' no longer work.

Hence 'improvements.' Many changes have been made. Granted, some of these changes were inadvertent -- but inarguably, not all were improvements.

"weighty financial considerations and the threat of industrial espionage"? ...I don't believe anything except an unreliable communication line between the guys(well anyone besides Ralph?) who work on it and the community leads to us standing in the dark on the state & aims of the current development...

Au Contraire. Curtis has argued that an NDA prevents him from discussing any changes that may be contemplated. I strongly suspect that if he inquired, he would find out that no one actually objects to him discussing contemplated changes. Of course whoever owns the rights to TOAW doesn't want someone making the entire source code or whatever public knowledge. However, that's not what we're discussing here. Then too, TOAW's not exactly a hot intellectual property to begin with. That lends a definite note of absurdity to the whole 'we're bound by the NDA we signed' argument. Has Curtis asked if it would be okay to list the proposed changes?

ORIGINAL: ColinWright

Changes were made so that 'sea roads' no longer work.

Most probably i'm missing something... but sea roads never stopped working for me either under old or new supply rules.

Anyway...let's not use the forum to voice our 'displeasure' about certain information policies (or the lack off). I teamed up with polarenper via Dropbox and so far we got 2.5GB of reference material of all sorts. It would be helpful and encorage our team spirit and cohesion if others would share etc. do the same. Hopefully, with the next version release of TOAW, a few of us can present some top class scenarios for the community.

Klink, Oberst