Matrix Games Forums

Is reliabilty taken into account in W@W? As far as I can tell many vehicles especially early panthers had mechanical problems including tendency to catch fire while moving. It seems to me that even on this scale moving vehicles that are prone to mechanical failures is a risk. If this issue is already addressed that is cool. If not can it be addressed some how in some later patches. The reason I asked this question is that in long campaigns choosing you vehicles and or replacements would be greatly affected especially if you have to move a lot. Last question can this also be extended to reliabilty of weapons. Thanks. By the way you are doing a great job thanks. Panther

Reliability on this scale tends to be either "a big nasty die roll" or related to "high speed" that in essence reduces the max speed.

We may include it in the future if we think up a good way to do it, but most gamers cry foul if their key piece of kit goes Tango Uniform on them right when they need it most...of course that is what Mr. Murphy predicts

Lacking any good data other than some things "were less reliable" and unable to translate that into menaingful statistics, we have left it out for now.

Thank you, Panther, for taking the time to visit us. That is what keeps us going...WB

------------------
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games

Frankly, that seems blery hard to model. As one who in civil and military life has had vehicles break down on me, I would not be upset if it was left out. But I understand there will be breakdowns in mud, snow, water, buildings.

troopie

One of the reasons that I wanted vehicle breakdowns was to add to the balance of the long campaigns. We always hear about how big and powerful certain weapons were exemple the hunting tiger or king tiger. But even commanders of the battle groups in many cases chose to use panthers (early model A were very unreliable) and panzer IV to lead their attacks due to the limitations of the vehicle speed as well as reliability. Weight also played a role since many bridges could not support the weight of these vehicles. If possible for those that do not like vehicle breakdowns it could be possible to maybe toggle these on or off depending on the preference if they are ever implemented.

I promise you guys that you will not be disappointed with the reality of breakdowns.

In fact, the day will come when you will curse this feature as you speed your Tiger to the aid of the beleaguered Army troops under assault by enemy T-34s, only to find it bogged down in the sticky morass of Russian soil.

THEN, you will say, "Man, why did they have to do this to me!"

The Devious Wild Bill

------------------
Wild Bill Wilder
Coordinator, Scenario Design
Matrix Games

But these are mostly impacts at the operational level, It affects howmany are avialble for battle, but figures on things breaking down in the middle of battle are very difficult to come by.

As Wild Bill says, TERRAIN consideration will cause breakdowns, but it is uniformly likely to affect all vehcles of a certian class. We don't get into differentiating based on specific type of vehicle, the data is just there to do across the whole range of vehicle types.

Originally posted by Wild Bill:
I promise you guys that you will not be disappointed with the reality of breakdowns.

In fact, the day will come when you will curse this feature as you speed your Tiger to the aid of the beleaguered Army troops under assault by enemy T-34s, only to find it bogged down in the sticky morass of Russian soil.

THEN, you will say, "Man, why did they have to do this to me!"

The Devious Wild Bill

Bill, can one set in any way vehicle breakdowns (on/off) ? In scenario with 10 tanks aside one bogged down/immoblised/air conditioning malfunction does matter, but in any "tank apocalypse" scenrio (say Kursk) the questions are:

a) can it fire
b)can it move

and nothing else...

Second, are breakdowns random for everyone or do Tigers break more often, while other tank could be more raeliable ?

IIRC Tigers and Panthers were notorious for their automotive unreliability. They were excellent fighters when operational, but spent a lot of time in the repair shop. T-34s were designed to be fought and maintained by semi-literate peasants. They were brutally simple. I've been told quality control in Soviet factories was spotty, but often enforced with the firing squad. Shermans were more complex, but quality control in Detroit was high. As for other vehicles, American and British lorries were very reliable, and Jeeps even more so. I drove a Korean war surplus jeep as a kid. It had over 300000 kilometers on it and ran like a Swiss watch. It kept burning out light bulbs and starters, but the transmission and engine were original equipment.

troopie