Steel Panthers MBT

[Paul Lakowski]

Originally posted by John T:

If you please make you input in a format that corresponds to the current armour model I can guarantee that your data will be seriously considered.

 

 

Cheers

/John T

 

 

John if my tone seems abrasive its because the assumption is that the SPCAMO group is the only people doing work....we all are...ever time we debate discuss etc these tanks/armor/penetration....years of work and we get suat for that!

 

As to format I'm confused...the original 'rules' required documentation and as much fact as possible. When I did this I was told by Dale 'don't waste your time' , while Bill says its interesting but useless I present it in proper formate??? seems the requirements are contradictory?

 

whats formate ?

 

I still think its a great game and it grows on you like SPWW2v5 does...even though there are numerous errors on that too

[Hercules]

I'm gonna have trouble downloading this with my 56Ker, has anyone got any suggestions? Is it likely to be on a PC magazine demo disc perhaps?

[MrOuija]

- .30 and .50 cal MGs are too weak. .50 cals should kill BTRs with ease, but never seem to penetrate or do damage.

I can't comment on .30's but I have gotten quite a few kills with my .50 cals on light armor, especially from side and rear shots.

 

- Tank coax MGs less accurate than AAMGs. Huh?

 

This is weird because iv'e got results from both sides. Usually the coax is more accurate for the first initial shots, but then is surpassed by the AAMG's..

 

- AI artillery use not so swift

 

How so ? The only real differences I noticed from SP2 are that the AI now targets your probable deployment areas on the opening turn, and the weapons themselves seem to be more lethal. Higher rate of fire, etc.

[Dan Weaver]

I was firing at BTRs and BRDMs at point-blank (250-400 m) range and had about a dozen .50 cal hits bounce off, hits that ran the gamut from front hull to side turret. .50 cal hits at that range should completely shred those vehicles no matter where they're coming in from. It's not like this really affected the outcome of the game, but I could see places where it might. Heck, I thought that light armor like BTRs, BRDMs, and M113s were even vulnerable to 7.62mm MGs in the real world.

 

To balance out the complaining, I'll say that the addition of dust trails behind fast-moving vehicles is excellent! It brings a whole new dimension of sneakiness to the game.

[Hercules]

Has anyone got this working on windows XP?

[Stargrunt6]

On the system I've got it on, I've got a few problems:

 

1) Too fast

 

2) The right and top of the screens are cut-off (as if the game screen was shifted to the right and up).

 

3)Screen resolution stinks.

 

That's it.

 

Peace,

 

MCab

[Hercules]

Is still downloading at the moment(now thats a suprise!) so i'll have to check the readme and see if the game runs ok or not. I'll catch ya later.

[nyati]

Originally posted by Hercules:

Has anyone got this working on windows XP?

 

It works okay on my Windows XP Pro machine. The mouse is sluggish, but manageable, and the action sequences can go too quickly sometimes (except when a shot is taken, then it is reasonably timed). All in all, very playable on XP.

The screen resolution is kind of bad, just because the basic program is so old. There is no resolution adjustment (as far as I know)

 

Jeremy

[abradley]

Originally posted by MCab:

On the system I've got it on, I've got a few problems:

 

1) Too fast

 

Andy <<<Check in the game's manual install section-shows how to use 'moslo' and where to get it.

 

2) The right and top of the screens are cut-off (as if the game screen was shifted to the right and up).

 

Andy <<<Not sure but the the section on vidio set up may help on this

 

3)Screen resolution stinks.

 

That's it.

 

Peace,

 

MCab

 

Best

Andy

[alamaniac]

Well I got windows 98 and xp, so i installed it on the 98 one, works perfectly. Great game, World at War V5 is old now, its version 7. Anyway, I been having some trouble, no aircraft seeming to be shot down by me or the AI. I have yet to see the animation of an aircraft going down . Cool OOBs, but shouldn't they have the T90 in the game? And since there is a scenario in Kabul, maybe there should be one in Somalia?

[Sardaukar]

I did post some of my observations to Wargamer discussion board.

http://www.wargamer.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi

 

I like it, though

 

Cheers,

 

M.S.

[Tony Evans]

The squad/vehicle scale makes this a good infantry simulation as well. Fire and maneuver actually works. For example, those "worthless" 60mm mortars save a lot of casualties by keeping the enemy's head down while you walk right up to blast him at point blank-range. Also, you get to see why RPGs are so popular the world over, and why they are likely to remain so.

 

Try the Cassinga scenario for some real good fun. You get a paratroop battlion dropping at basically the four points of the compass surrounding the objective. While the AI won't allow your drops to miscarry as badly as they did in real life, you can get neat little surprises like your company commander landing in or near a trench full of the enemy.

 

[Edited by Tony Evans (24 Jun 2002).]

[tankkid85]

Why is it that my Bradley's M242 25mm chain guns dont do a damned thing againstpretty mucha anything, the only kill i have gotten againsta BMP with the cg was at 350 meters so it was a close range kill. Anyone else have this problem, i can hit the targts but nothing penetrates even BRDMs which I have killed with a 50. cal SLAP, the Leclerc's 50 caliber also killed BRDM's. OCSW's take out BRDM and BMP's with ease.

 

As for the editor, does anyone know how to givea unit ARENA, I want to make the Turkish M1A2 and give it ARENA, the Turks asked for it at one point, I believe the russians said no when GLDS asked them.. Also, can you reasign weapons from different countries to new countries? I want to give the USMC Hellfire B but al they have is the UAV Hellfire B

 

Steve

[Paul Lakowski]

Remeber guys this is not a simulation but a game, so things won't work the way they do in real life.

[Paul G]

Heck I've had BMP1's take multiple hits from 120mm HEAT rounds "NO EFFECT". Somtimes I wonder about the kill calculator.

[Tony Evans]

Originally posted by Paul Lakowski:

Remeber guys this is not a simulation but a game, so things won't work the way they do in real life.

 

I would say it is and it isn't. It's a mediocre simulation of the technical aspects of armored warfare. But it's a good (I'm almost tempted to say superior) simulation of infantry vs. infantry and infantry vs. armor tactics. For one thing, the way troop quality now works, it illustrates in painful detail one of the tanker's biggest doctrinal blind spots. Against Third World yo yos, tanks can pretty much disregard enemy dismounts, as long as they proceed cautiously. But against well trained and/or highly motivated infantry, tanks are in for nothing but headaches. The tagline for this game should be "Why good infantry is essential to battlefield success."

[Al]

It's a mediocre simulation of the technical aspects of armored warfare...

 

I never really did get the hang of, or develop a liking for the Steel Panthers system in general. Just one of those things. In your, or anyone else's opinion for that matter, just what IS the best simulation of armored warfare on this (single tank/squad) level?

[abradley]

Originally posted by Al:

I never really did get the hang of, or develop a liking for the Steel Panthers system in general.  Just one of those things.  In your, or anyone else's opinion for that matter, just what IS the best simulation of armored warfare on this (single tank/squad) level?

 

Modern? Tacops

 

Post-modern? The HPS series 'PitS', ToP2 ect

[Paul Lakowski]

Originally posted by Tony Evans:

I would say it is and it isn't. It's a mediocre simulation of the technical aspects of armored warfare. But it's a good (I'm almost tempted to say superior) simulation of infantry vs. infantry and infantry vs. armor tactics. For one thing, the way troop quality now works, it illustrates in painful detail one of the tanker's biggest doctrinal blind spots. Against Third World yo yos, tanks can pretty much disregard enemy dismounts, as long as they proceed cautiously. But against well trained and/or highly motivated infantry, tanks are in for nothing but headaches. The tagline for this game should be "Why good infantry is essential to battlefield success."

 

I should have put a smilie in there I had this debate with the SPCAMO group and that was the conclusion....that there was no point in trying to improve the accuracy of techical aspects of the game cause its not a simulation its a game so have fun!

 

Personally I aggree with you Tony and I'm sure I could take sledge hammer to the game and make it into a half descent Sim....Its all about the law of diminishing returns,They set the bar at there level and thats the end of it!

[John T]

Originally posted by Stuart Galbraith:

I think we all here are supportive of what you guys are trying to do, and as it stands it IS a major improvement on sp2. Certainly after doing my own sp3 british battleset im familiar with some of the problems. But there is nothing wrong with us calling for a more sophisticated armour model, especially when i suspect harder things have already been done.

 

Of course the game system is open for debate the thing I do object is that Paul Lakowski makes himself a spokesperson for others in a negative way.

 

Originally posted by Stuart Galbraith:

When a chieftain plugs way 3 times at a btr70 at 400 metres without killing it you know it needs some work. That isnt a fault of the sp mbt team, its a holdover from ALL of the sp games.

 

I not shure of your exact setup.

I can't belive that three round in a row did hit but not made any damage, in such case I need the unit name and see if there is some typing error in that unit/weapon (like Warhead =0)

 

Note that my %-ages are nothing scietific but just simple examples.

 

I did a quick test with static vehicles and Cheiftan mk9's scored on an average 2 kills per gameturn.

To switch taget costs accuracy in the game so first target had a Kill Probability >80%. Second target less, roughly 50% on first shot and 75% on second.

 

To make a chieftan miss three times in a row looks to me as a radomytical event, It does happen but not very often.

We all have stories when you threw 12-12 in ASL

 

If the vehicles did move a lot then it is some real possibility that you miss even at 400 meters. (0.5*0.7*0.8= 0.28 ) So that will happen every third time.

 

So if there is a problem here I believe that is in the effect of stabilisers.

 

 

Originally posted by Stuart Galbraith:

Personally my greatest annoyance was killing a brdm2 with a rear shot from my L8 7.62 co ax gun....

That should not happen in a reproducable way,

can you get that result again?

 

SP works with a number of random factors so it does sometimes act strangely. OTOH you'll find a instance in history where a Tiger where killed by the 37mm richocette penetrating the belly.

(I have heard that story, is it true?)

So bottom line is freak things happens but very infrequent.

 

Cheers

/John T.

 

 

[Edited by John T (25 Jun 2002).]

[Al]

SP - simulation or game? I try to keep a little perspective with wargames. I've never seen one claim to be an exact duplication of real war events. Some games do a better job than others & from reading here & on other forums the SP series in general does a pretty good job. From looking at the wargamer download site as of yesterday over 10,000 people had downloaded the game. SPCAMO must be doing something right & I applaud their efforts. After all guys, it's free!

[John T]

Sorry for not answering earlier but midsummer is a BIG holiday in my part of the world.

 

Originally posted by Paul Lakowski:

John if my tone seems abrasive its because the assumption is that the SPCAMO group is the only people doing work....we all are...ever time we debate discuss etc these tanks/armor/penetration....years of work and we get suat for that!

Of cource not the only ones who knows anything but The game has to be consistent for all units in all OB's and that is a problem in it self.

 

SP-Cammo solved this by assigning this work to two men

to create the framework for Penetration and Armour and then implement that data over the line of OB's.

 

Either there is small change that just affects some units or you have to redo the work from scratch.

 

The other side of consistency is sources.

You distrusted Zaloga ?

The the eternal question is here again "Who to belive?",

when we all know that the actual values are classified. (AFAIK?)

 

Originally posted by Paul Lakowski:

As to format I'm confused...the original 'rules' required documentation and as much fact as possible. When I did this I was told by Dale 'don't waste your time' , while Bill says its interesting but useless I present it in proper formate??? seems the  requirements are contradictory?

 

whats formate ?

To me an SP:MBT OB with sources that claims your differences is good enough.

Or if your old SP2 files are up to date that is a start.

But don't expect anyone to look too closely before vacations,

this is our hobby and time is always scarce.

 

 

Originally posted by Paul Lakowski:

I still think its a great game and it grows on you like SPWW2v5 does...even though there are numerous errors on that too 

 

Yes, the day I find the perfect software I'll retire

[John T]

Originally posted by Paul Lakowski:

<snip>

Personally I aggree with you Tony and I'm sure I could take sledge hammer to the game and make it into a half descent Sim....

 

So long you can stay with the current model The tool is Mobhack and it is fueld by hard work.

 

If you think it needs a new formula that is harder to achiev,

sledgehammer and debugers are one way ...

 

Originally posted by Paul Lakowski:

Its all about the law of diminishing returns,They set the bar at there level and thats the end of it!

 

That is way *you* say, the level is not set for anything but that most of us in the SP-Cammo team needs a good vacation.

We might be much more persistent than you belive, but we are doing it as a hobby and then turnaround times might get long.

 

Cheers

/John T.

[Mekhazzio]

Originally posted by Al:

In your, or anyone else's opinion for that matter, just what IS the best simulation of armored warfare on this (single tank/squad) level?

 

Steel Beasts

[EchoFiveMike]

So far it's a fun game, but I have some bitches about the match up of Russian vs Western stuff. So far I've been doing the mid-50's and 60's stuff, and I have a couple problems. I like the fact that the M103 is included, but they ought to include the M102A2, whcih was the definative version with the HEAT round and the better FCS. Also the Soviet block stuff is way over rated in kill power, as well as armour. T-10's with 40 frontal rating? 100mm guns on the T-54 with a 38 penetration rating for HEAT? While at the same time the M103A1 is rated at 25 front turret and 22 front hull? Any way to numerically adjust the numbers, rather than just plugging in adjustment factors? S/F...Ken M