Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !
 

The to-hit number?

If I am cycling round a set of potential targets and one is way ahead of the others then I know to take that one. But then again, if the lower number is say a T-55 and the higher is an APC, the T-55 might take precedence.

But I dont sit there for hours obsessing if I should go for the shot at 12% or the one at 17%... its neither here nor there.

If the shot needs to be taken, then its taken. Simples.

The to-hit chance reported by the T key sequence is only a basic "gunner's guestimate" as it does not have any of the random numbers generated, and its for the slot 1 (primary) weapon. The hit %age displayed on actually firing has had the random effects applied, which can be for the better or worse. If the random numbers were run then users would complain that when they switch away and back, the number shown for target X yo-yos, confusing the end user and so then "wah boo-hoo I found a :bug:"!..

Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !
 

Use occasionaly as a rough guide especialy if changed from WWll to modern era but on the whole you just develop a feel for the unit based on its stats.
Attack helos if they have moved more than a couple of hexes I would need a good reason to use the missile rather than wait till next turn for the shot.

Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2
 

I never take it at face value, in it's current state as a guideline it works fine.

Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !
 

I like using it mostly with less experienced tank/or any other anti tank component. Reason for this is simple, I want to build up those units experience level as fast as possible, especially for a previously badly damaged unit/or a replacement to one of my core units. The driver here for me is the length of my campaigns as discussed already. I will use my more experienced core units to deal the bigger threat T-80's lurking amongst the T-55's. It's simply an aid that I'm not totally bound by as each situation is different, but still probably use around ~75% of the time for the above situation. I find if my core units are intact it's not as big a deal but, either way, I find little to no difference in time savings maybe because like I play Chess, I'm looking 2-4 moves ahead. And I like "overlapping" my units during the initial deployment phase for the above stated purpose and use as well.

I guess that makes me a "technical" player going back to my many years of die cut board playing wargames from Avalon Hill and SPI mostly I guess with many over nighters included. Couple of my favorites from SPI...
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/...tar-white-star
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/8319/sixth-fleet

Regards,
Pat
:capt:

Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !
 

I used to have 'Air Assault on Crete' when I was at school, by Avalon Hill (published late 1970's?)If I remember rightly it had a invasion of Malta game too. If only I knew then what I know now...

Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !
 

Ahhhh yes ... I cut my teeth on Tactics II (mid 1960s).

Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !
 

There were lots of great games, problem was space especially if playing friends over a few weeks.

Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !
 

Yeah, when I was in the service several of us were playing Dunnigan's "War in the East". We got enough room by "paneling" one wall with sheet steel and using magnetic "Counter Clips".

Wound up being rather amusing. Traditionally in the USMC Friday morning is the weekly quarters inspection and more often then not rather then a critique of our cleaning we got one on the current state of the game and suggestions :)

Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !
 

In videorecords we can see that ATGM launch makes far less smoke and flash than tank gun shot. So to spot ATGM vehicle on fire should be harder than tank. But in SP MBT this mechanics is opposite.
Could a separate setting for ATGM fire spotting be developed?

Re: Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !
 

At one point, US doctrine was to immediately fire at the ATGM site because the missile firing was detectable and flew slow enough to be disrupted by making the operator duck. Probably 30 years ago now, but the TOW battery would set off a Claymore mine on either or both sides of the firing position simultaneously with the missile launch to mask the real location. Just bringing it up because someone out there thought the launch was easily detectable.