Matrix Games Forums

I've gotta say that this is the greatest game I've played in a long time. I used to play SP years ago and what Matrix have done for this game is incredible. My thanks to all of you for your hard work and for giving us this awesome game.

I've been playing and seeing a few re-occuring annoying bugs that I'm hoping may be fixed in the next patch. Most are discussed in this Forum but I thought I'd lump them together for simplicity.

Here they are to let you know:

*Battle/Weather sound effects.

These sounds disappear when other sounds like Terrain sounds or loud firing sounds start up. I miss my weather/battle sounds. They add a lot of immersion and atmosphere to the game.

*Rifles

Definitely something amiss here. Rifle rounds are NOT inflicting casualties even at close range. I saw 1 hit incurred by rifles in a mainly all infantry game (at 3 hexes). Range 4-9 simply doesn't hit.

*Tanks Through Walls

This is another annoying one. EVERY time I go through a stone wall or house in a tank it immobilizes. There should be a substantial risk of this happening; say 10-15%, but at the moment it seems to be 100%? From what I know of tank durability and use in WWII this needs fixing.

Thanks again for a great game! If any other "outstanding" bugs show up I'll edit this post.

GH1967

[ November 26, 2001: Message edited by: GH1967 ]</p>

Hmm.. also I've noticed that when I order my 60mm mortar Amphibs (USAr) to go through a city or something, unless I move them practically hex by hex, they invariably go through a building and stick themselves.

And on topic, I would also question the 100% chance of a tank getting stuck in a building.. doesn't seem quite right, though such happening is definitely a risk.

As for rifles I am unconvinced that this is a real problem. I at least can say that it is an improvement, and that I haven't played enough to really speak as to whether it is an over-correction.

I dunno, I would think that one of the salient flaws (which I have already heard is being addressed) is the system for determining the cost of various vehicles. It provides too little flexibility and historical accuracy, and sometimes does weird things (like making a Panther A more expensive than a Panther D).

I would think a system much more similar to those we've seen in previous SP's would be much preferable, at least to set things right intra-nationality. As far as *inter*-national issues, we are told to fix these by adjusting points per side, and I would have to say this makes sense to me.

Matt

"I dunno, I would think that one of the salient flaws (which I have already heard is being addressed) is the system for determining the cost of various vehicles. It provides too little flexibility and historical accuracy, and sometimes does weird things (like making a Panther A more expensive than a Panther D)."

Panther A should cost more than a D model, it has extra machine gun and thicker front turret armor,(128-116)... but there are alot of other pricings that make you go HMMMMMM.. agreed. I know pricing has been looked into.

Stone walls cause immobilizing 100% gotta agree is a little extreme.

As for rifles, check to see if you get casualties on your first shot. this is where the rifles should be most effective.

Still like to see the yellow button greyed out in arty screen when an arty unit has no weapon due to a malfunction, as it is when a unit is routed/retreating or destroyed.

[ November 26, 2001: Message edited by: Alby ]

[ November 26, 2001: Message edited by: Alby ]</p>

you can turn terrain effects(sounds) Off from preferences.

First model Panther was a piece of ..... it had too weak drivewheels and some other things that immobilized 2 of 4 before they reached Kursk. (and it burned easily on its own..)

Stonewalls and stonehouses.. once you have crunched them down your other tanks can drive thru it. And recovering time for immoed vehicle is shorter than it has been, now they can be used in same battle again.

mosh

Originally posted by Khan7:

I dunno, I would think that one of the salient flaws (which I have already heard is being addressed) is the system for determining the cost of various vehicles. It provides too little flexibility and historical accuracy, and sometimes does weird things (like making a Panther A more expensive than a Panther D).

Matt

---

What makes the D cost more in your mind? I looked at them and thought the change in rangefinder just about equalled the additional mg. Actually with normal sighting ranges, like 10-25 the extra mg would be worth more, visibility needs to be over a mile before the extra rangefinder value comes into play.
thanks, John.

okok, maybe a bad example. But I know there are others. Anyone?

And this point is pretty moot anyway as it has already been announced that this feature is getting a fix.

Matt

I don't see ONE DAMN THING described in this thread that is a BUG! What I see are player's not getting their personal preferences catered to by the game, and crying it must be a fault in the game. I've been testing v7, and I have YET to find a BUG! Will people PLEASE get their language together and use the right words?!? For instance, "I don't like this, could it possibly be addressed in a future patch?" NOT, "I don't like this, it must be a BUG!" The only thing BUGGY in this thread is the inexact use of words - words which give the impression that the game is a piece of trash full of "bugs." IT IS NOT!! (Hear me roar!) <img src="mad.gif" border="0"> <img src="mad.gif" border="0"> <img src="mad.gif" border="0">

Ohhhhhhhhhhkay Warrior, nice soldier, down boy <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
As for the rifle situation that BUG <img src="tongue.gif" border="0"> ok ok, that change has been made to represent the actual effectiveness of a WW2 rifle. I´m not making this up, there´s a post about it (rifles in v6.1 I think) and it explains it.

The "tank imobilized in building" is annoying, I´m prepeared to buy a couple of plt´s of halftracks for this reason alone <img src="wink.gif" border="0"> But seriously, houses were used as hiding for guns and armour and there´s actually a post discussing this too somewhere.

The sounds do dissapear, like when you hold your pointer over a stream or a fire it kills the background sound, and the cricket sound during night battles freaks out on me from time to time, i.e it just get´s very load and annoying. Most of this can be fixed by going into preferences and switch battle sound effects (I think that´s the one) off and on again, and you get the background sound back.

I have to agree with Warrior. A bug is something that does not do what the designer intended it to do. While the wall thing seems not to be realistic to me, I cannot say what the designer had in mind so I cannot call it a bug.

To answer the original question. No. V7 is a cleanup of OBs and some changes to the MC code to fix a few real bugs. There is no coding changes to the game engine for the things that were asked about.

*Battle/Weather sound effects.

okay,there are some sound probs. but it doesn´t disturb me that much......


*Rifles

wrong. try US rangers (Garand) or german FJ´s (FJ gewehr ) w/ quite good experience and run some tests....i like my US units,as the kill good with the m1 garand,okay the "normal" rifles as K98 or such don´t hit very good,but they WERE not real good weapons,so i think it´s okay.take terrain effect into account....

*Tanks Through Walls

nope, the chance is some 92-94% i would guess. but still to high i agree on this point.


greetinx

frank

I also think it´s wrong of people to throw around the B word. But I don´t see how the point is lost in this. There is a small soundproblem (I have a temporary suggestion above) but is it wrong to point theese things out? Not if you ask me.
And like I wrote, the rifle-usefullness and tank/building-breakdowns have been discussed before, basically the rifle´s are portraided correctly, but the breakdowns are not. At least that seems to be the general notion.

No, to point things out is fine. A bad attitude or one like "we deserve better" would be atrocious. But I really don't hear that kind of stuff for the most part. I do think Matrix has been good on responding to and appreciating feedback. And when it's done well (on our part) it facilitates the addressing of issues.

But I am somewhat lost here. According to a post by Paul back about a month or more ago, don't look for anymore 'updates' or 'patches' for SPWaW. They are putting their efforts into other things.

Originally posted by General Richmond:
But I am somewhat lost here. According to a post by Paul back about a month or more ago, don't look for anymore 'updates' or 'patches' for SPWaW. They are putting their efforts into other things.

---

I think you are totally correct. As I understand it, v7 will be the ultimate SPWaW, and all further efforts by Matrix will be on the new games like Combat Leader.

To answer the original question. No. V7 is a cleanup of OBs and some changes to the MC code to fix a few real bugs. There is no coding changes to the game engine for the things that were asked about.

---

One question, more for interest than anything else, why are the versions jumping from 5 to 6 to 7, rather than incremental version changes (6 to 6.1 to 6.2 etc.)? Are the changes in v7 so great?

Originally posted by mao:


One question, more for interest than anything else, why are the versions jumping from 5 to 6 to 7, rather than incremental version changes (6 to 6.1 to 6.2 etc.)? Are the changes in v7 so great?

---

V6 made MAJOR changes to the infantry routines. Before that there was a situation where often any infantry fire caused one casualty and rifles and MGs were pretty much the same as far as casualities at long range.

V7 will make MAJOR OOB changes. That is before they were the best effort given time constraints. Now they should be the best possible.

Gotta support Warrior in this thread here.

A "bug" is an occurence that generates something horrible. Like crash your system in the middle of the game and lock up the computer. Or perhaps makes the screen image do something erratic or unpredictable.

I hate seeing people use terms that indicate they havent thought out their comment well.

Sure I hate tanks blindly driving into buildings.
So dont give them 10 hex sudden commands in the middle of a built up piece of terrain!. Its not a "bug" its the person at the keyboard not using their own AI thats at fault. You can also constrict the tanks available range of discretionary movement radius.
Brick walls, again this isnt a "bug" you just dont like the game at that point.

There are plenty of things about the game that frustrate me. But I also get frustrated by never rolling dice rolls, that never seem to go below the needed number to get a result I was hoping for. Does this mean my dice need fixing, nope, just dont buy any lottery tickets that day.

The solution to everyone thinking Steel Panthers needs yet another "patch" is to realise that the game can only be "fixed" so often before the people that "fix" it get tired of endlessly doing so.

Steel Panthers is what it is. I have been playing Whittman's Gamble lately.
Whats with this scenario I ask myself? Each time I play it I walk down the whole damn column and eliminate everything I shoot at. Statistically that seems odd to my brain.
But its not a design error.
I happen to know that in real life that is precisely what mr Whittman did. In a horrifying incident, that man and his Tiger tank almost single handedly eliminated an entire British column.

I think it is precisely that Steel Panthers generates preposterous results that makes it seem real to me.

Warfare is about preposterous events. Does anyone recall Sgt York, Auddie Murphy, hitting the Bismarck in the rudder, the battle of Midway, the Germans failing to "liberate" the people of the Ukraine, man the whole of human history of warfare is full of cases where you just cant believe it actually happened that way.

For all those that seem disgruntled about Steel Panthers "bugs", how about signing on with the next stage of the evolution of Steel Panthers and prepare to buy CL.

I have a few comments that I believe might improve gameplay. (NO STINKING BUGS HERE.)

I've found that the AI does not purchase barges for it's armor during river crossings and never lays smoke to conceal the crossing (love those rubber raft turkey shoots but not really fun.
Perhaps the "purchase routine" if there is one, for the AI could be tweaked when the mission is determined so:
The AI buys art/ac for assaults/river crossings to more often accurately depict the "softning up" prior to attack. Oh, and lay some smoke too!
The AI buys some riverboats? to aid the crossing.
The AI buys some barges for the armor in river attacks.
The AI buys more mineclearing tanks/engineers for Assaults and more art. Oh and lays MORE smoke for cover!
I'm convinced every other squad in WW2 carried an ATR rifle?! Seems like Poland buys 50% MG squads. Britain buys 50% HQ squads with Boys ATR. Russia buys dozens of PTRD ATR's, and so on and so forth. Perhaps the scarcity factor for the AI purchase is off allowing for some really skewed results like 50 plus AT guns which get set-up so far back that nothing happens (Not to mention the absurdity of so many guns!). Players can 'improvise/restrict' units/mines and such but the AI can't (at least not yet in my experience.)
I've never seen the AI buy paratroopers and/or drop. Same with special ops or gliders. The AI mine laying routine is rather predictable as well!

Another solution for AI battles involving rivers may be to randomly extend the "centerline set-up point" like other scenarios (based on LOS I'm assuming) from the center of the river (I mean the green set-up line which always appears in the water for both sides) so that many times you can's set up on the river and wait.

I guess I'm focusing on the AI, not in terms of execution but in terms of initial set-up/purchase. Also, the set-up often doesn't take into account the victory objectives. Can some 'routine' be coded to help the AI for set-up? It could be very detailed but even a few simple 'common-sense' changes would go a long way for those of us who are stuck playing the game solitare.

As a last thought for more scenario options: (1) Could some generated scenarios involve "Destruction of enemy forces?" You could make victory hexes for the AI to execute on but make them worth 1 point so the goal would be points garnered by KIA's.
(2) Breakthrough battles where the VP hexes are on the last hexrow and/or units must be exited for VP's.
(3) All the delays seem 'unprepared.' How about prepared delays (ie. entrenced/ready defenders). Conversely, unprepared defenders in an assault.
(4) Scenarios with only some or no units to start but they randomly (perchantage chance as well) appear on various entry points along the borders (back and/or side!). You could have a small defending force with a few bunkers that get reinforced for example.
(5) City battles other than the standard here is the map covered by Stalingrad battle where the AI buys all tanks again?!
(6) I always seem to get (I'm playing german as example) 2 polish battles follwed by one french and one brit in Europe before going to North Africa. Can this be randomized more so perhaps one is forced to play X number of battles per month or year(More battles-longer WW2 campaigns!) I'd like to believe there are more European battles in 39-40 to play some of the equipment that often gets neglected. The end also seems to go quickly too (Very few 44-45 battles)
Just some ideas to spice up the scenario generation selection.

These are not bugs Warrior! LOL!

Dont know if its bug, but what about when using air units and opponent can see your ground units sametime...? is this gonna be fixed?

Guys (the last two posters), you need to read a little higher on the thread. There ain't gonna be anymore patching or coding. SPWaW has pretty much come to it's fruition, it's zenith, it's nadar, it's OK Corral. Got it?

v7.0 is the final show.

At least that's what we've come to understand from various Matrix personnel's postings.

I have yet to visit a post for a game that wasn´t full of "BUG"-reports and request of inzane magnitude. But most of the time the people posting falls into one or more of a few categories: The Concerned Hardcore-gamer, The Annoyed First-time palyer, The Cool 13yr Old Antagonist etc.
I guess the easiest way to go would be to fold over like a frenchman at war (sorry, just a bad joke) and shut the f**k up then <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
I think we´d be pretty ignorant if we thought that the feedback we give Matrix on SPWaW wouldn´t be used to fine tune their comming releases, but it´s pretty typical of people not to read all posts in a thread. Try to get someone to read your post on page 2/3 <img src="wink.gif" border="0">
I care about this game and upcoming ones out of respect for the product and the people behind it, I´m not here to tick people off, or for your amusement (well, I like to amuse, but who doesn´t).
I play SPWaW with great joy and pleasure, and if it wasn´t for this forum, the small faults that the game shows, would have stayed with me <img src="tongue.gif" border="0">
BTW, I always write long post, Iguess I don´t want people to read em...