OOBs way out of whack?

[chuckfourth]

Hi Mobhack
As always happy to produce the altered OOBs for you, or do any other work that may be helpful. I know you are a busy man.
Best Regards Chuck

[Deputy]

PanzerBob said:
Good Day, Deputy

First off Sir, I hope I didn't come off as insulting to you. My comments were meant generally. Even though you have 12 years on me your gaming background sure seems similar to mine, BoB being my first game I owned and then in to succession of AH games, then into ASL and my last obsession being MBT when Steel Panthers appeared.

I just read though everything again, and I just don't seem to have these problems. OR Maybe I'm working around them without a second thought these days, I play SPWWII a lot. I generally have my own SOP's for use of Infantry Weapons, MGs I expect suppression only, Rifles and AR's I try to limit them to no shots before 300m and even then I will try to wait until the enemy closes, Long Range AT, half range closer if possible. Infantry also try to make sure they in position several turns before having to engage. These SOP's are only Plan A of course. Just a glimpse of my tactics.

As mentioned I've increased MG42's to HE 10, decreases PIAT's to 100m, Bazookas and Panzershrecks to 200m. I decreased these two because of historical engagements ranges and the AI seems to use them like AT Guns instead of close in crewed AT rocket launchers.

Does this shed any light in your dilemmas?

Prosit!

Nahhh... no offense taken.
The changes you made pretty much line up with what I plan on doing. Is there a thread or a file posted where people have made similar changes? Is the OOB a single file where if someone sent me theirs I could overwrite what I have to see how theirs works?

Really, the only big problem I have is with the Preferences adjustments. If I set one side at maximum, and one side at minimum, there should be MAJOR changes in the destructive power of one side over another. I don't see this happening. For armored vehicles, the changes seem to work well. But for Infantry, the changes don't seem to be as noticeable.

Dep

[DRG]

Deputy said:
Really, the only big problem I have is with the Preferences adjustments. If I set one side at maximum, and one side at minimum, there should be MAJOR changes in the destructive power of one side over another. I don't see this happening. For armored vehicles, the changes seem to work well. But for Infantry, the changes don't seem to be as noticeable.

Dep

If you don't see it then you don't see it. I don't think any amount of "discussion" on the issue will change what you perceive even though others DO see a change when the preferences are altered the way you altered them.

FYI, I ran three AI vs. AI games using the preferences numbers you provided with the US side set to the bottom and the Germans set to the top and all three resulted in massive German victories and NONE of the battles had, in ANY way, ANYTHING even CLOSE to "Even with those changes in the preferences, the US Infantry appear to be supersoldiers." or anything else you described when you altered the preferences. What it sounds like is you were playing the US side at the maximum not the other way 'round. When you change the preferences you change the settings for player 1 or player 2 not specific nations

Game 1--meeter

Score.............Germany-2434..........US 52
Casualties.......Germany-32 men.......US--106


Game 2 German Advance

Score.............Germany-3035..........US 27
Casualties.......Germany-18 men......US--285


Game 3--US advance

Score.............Germany-3317..........US 101
Casualties.......Germany-33 men......US--281

All games were infantry heavy using 900 points as the base for P1


Don

[Deputy]

DRG said:

If you don't see it then you don't see it. I don't think any amount of "discussion" on the issue will change what you perceive even though others DO see a change when the preferences are altered the way you altered them.

FYI, I ran three AI vs. AI games using the preferences numbers you provided with the US side set to the bottom and the Germans set to the top and all three resulted in massive German victories and NONE of the battles had, in ANY way, ANYTHING even CLOSE to "Even with those changes in the preferences, the US Infantry appear to be supersoldiers." or anything else you described when you altered the preferences. What it sounds like is you were playing the US side at the maximum not the other way 'round. When you change the preferences you change the settings for player 1 or player 2 not specific nations

Game 1--meeter

Score.............Germany-2434..........US 52
Casualties.......Germany-32 men.......US--106


Game 2 German Advance

Score.............Germany-3035..........US 27
Casualties.......Germany-18 men......US--285


Game 3--US advance

Score.............Germany-3317..........US 101
Casualties.......Germany-33 men......US--281

All games were infantry heavy using 900 points as the base for P1


Don

Well I've been using scenario #99 for my testing. I would expect that the Soviet tanks in that scenario would be blasted to pieces as soon as they show up. For the most part...THEY WERE. But even with concentrated fire from multiple tanks on an infantry platoon, the infantry received minimal casualties. And this was with assaulting Infantry in the OPEN...not dug in. The same problem existed with German Infantry vs Soviet Infantry. Minimal casualties. The Soviets DID withdraw. But with nowhere near the number of dead they should have. At this point I'm not sure if it's weapon setting (MG42 and 98K too weak), or Preferences settings not having a big enough effect. I am SLIGHTLY modifying the 98K and MG42 and I will see what happens after that.

Dep

[pdoktar]

Oh please do not modify the stats of Kar98K. All bolt-action rifles of given calibre (or close ballistic performance) have the same acc and range and HE kill, because there are not any huge differences in them, one being much better than other. I understand that you can up the MG42 a bit, since it clearly was the best machinegun there was, but rifle differences as a whole are somewhat redundant in the scope of the game.

[Marek_Tucan]

Kar98 too weak? In the test scen with min/max preferences a single squad's burst of Kar98's wiped out 6 men of the target squad. Good enough for me.

[chuckfourth]

Hi Podoktar
I think the effective ranges of the various rifles do vary a bit, giving them all 10 is OK and I know no one is going to be bothered looking into it and its not worth the bother etc but they arnt all 500m. For example most sites quote the Garands effective range at 400m or 450m rather than the current 500m.
Best Regards Chuck.

[Deputy]

pdoktar said:
Oh please do not modify the stats of Kar98K. All bolt-action rifles of given calibre (or close ballistic performance) have the same acc and range and HE kill, because there are not any huge differences in them, one being much better than other. I understand that you can up the MG42 a bit, since it clearly was the best machinegun there was, but rifle differences as a whole are somewhat redundant in the scope of the game.

Let me give my reasons for upping the 98K to the same levels as the Garand....

#1 First of all, the .30/06 caliber cartridge of the Garand and the 8MM cartridge of the 98K have VERY similar ballistic numbers. So one cartridge is not superior to the other at the ranges thay are used at. Both kill at equal effectiveness.

#2. While the Garand does have more ammunition capacity 8 rounds compared to 5, there is a tendency among shooters to fire those rounds off without taking good aim at their targets. The user of the 98K tends to make the most out of HITTING his target, since he has fewer rounds and it is slower to shoot those rounds. Plus a skilled 98K shooter CAN fire off those rounds quickly and accurately. Consider Lee Harvey Oswald shooting Kennedy. He fired at a MOVING target in a vehicle where all he could see of the target was the head to the shoulders. Yet he managed to operate a beat up old Italian Mannlicher-Carcano bolt action rifle and hit Kennedy with 3 shots.

#3 The Mauser action is probably the strongest, most effective bolt action system of any bolt action rifle. It is still being used today by many countries as the basis for their sniper rifles.

#4 All bolt action rifles are not the same just like all machineguns or semi-auto rifles are not the same. That's just the way it is. The British Enfield rifle has a much "faster" action (it cocks on CLOSING the bolt) and holds 10 shots. I think that rifle is under-rated in the game too.

Dep

[PatG]

Test games June 1945
US vs Germany

I set up a meeting engagement with a random map and VH placement and the AI Picking the forces and deploying each side. The AI fought both sides. All games used the identical save game file the only thing that changed was the settings.

Final points totals

........US 30%....Germany 250%
Game 1..342.......4782
Game 2..158.......5043

........US 50%....Germany 150%
Game 1..706.......4886
Game 2..346.......4936

........US 100%....Germany 100%
Game 1..1330.......4831
Game 2..1271.......4686

........US 150%....Germany 100%
Game 1..5638.......956
Game 2..5834.......391

........US 250%....Germany 30%
Game 1..6020.......248
Game 2..6042.......269

Changing preferences look good to me. If anything the Germans are slightly over-rated but this may be due to the terrain etc. The German points ratings at 150% and 200% seem to be because there were no more points to get. The US was destroyed or routed anf the Germans owned all VHs. At 100% the US was able to give the Germans a bloody nose by killing more kit but couldn't hold the field.

[Deputy]

It's not the RESULTS that I question concerning the Preferences, it's the body count/kill ratio that I find is "off".