Ideas how to improve WinSP MBT/WW2 !

[EpoletovSPR]

In winSP need horizontally.
Now, there are complaints from people, it is difficult to distinguish the relief map.


Like this:

[DRG]

That is what the Hex grid is for. Press '.' and the grid appears making this boundaries clearer . Then press '.' and go back to a non hex grid map. I NEVER play without the hex grid...... to each his own but there is NO way we are adding in what you suggest when a quick press of '.' gives you what you want.

As for " Now, there are complaints from people, it is difficult to distinguish the relief map"....... REALLY ?? the map has not changed in over a decade. How could these complaints suddenly materialize now ?


Don

[EpoletovSPR]

Originally Posted by DRG

As for " Now, there are complaints from people, it is difficult to distinguish the relief map"....... REALLY ?? the map has not changed in over a decade. How could these complaints suddenly materialize now ?


Don

Come new players in the Russian-speaking community (S.P.R.).
I bring you their requests and ideas.

http://spanther.narod.ru/

[EpoletovSPR]

My colleague from Russia made a video with their ideas for improving the Steel Pantners.

https://youtu.be/gfsvbQJwPYE

Advanced Scar asked me to say further.
With the last sentence he asks tool to translate the game into other languages.

[Imp]

Advanced Scar asked me to say further.
With the last sentence he asks tool to translate the game into other languages.

Game guide can be run through a translator, wont be perfect.

Units etc. its not straight forward some names do not simply translate as the West calls it something else.

Boring but not hard to edit OOB, if several people pick a country each to change names on & share them would not take that long.

I change the names of some formations in WWII, makes it far easier for me to identify quickly on purchase screen. I don't bother changing unit names though.

[IronDuke99]

For what it is worth I think attack helicopters are a little too good against AFV's and a little less effective than they should be against infantry.

[Suhiir]

I've always had a problem with machineguns.

They're VERY effective at suppression, not so good at actually killing anything. Since their advent machineguns have been the #2 bane (after artillery) of infantry, but in the game they're more of a nuisance.

[IronDuke99]

Agree with Suhiir on MG's

Even a relatively primitive attack helicopters, with MG's, could really wreck an enemy force if they have low training/moral and lack effective AA, such as Manpads.

In terms of something very modern like an Apache go check out some of the YouTube videos of them in action against men on foot, not just the overwhelming firepower, but how much they can see in all conditions...

[Aeraaa]

I actually find the machineguns quite alright and I disagree with making them (or any small arms) deadlier than now.

Remember that what MG have over rifle squads is range. They can engage the latter between 600-1200 meters (more if .50 cal MGs) and not get any return fire. And the reason why they do not mow down infantry is that the latter is always in cover when under fire, even when in open ground (they find whatever small obstacle or ditch there is, they are always in the prone position). And something else. The fact that a rifle squad has been spotted does not mean its members have been spotted. It may sound like an oxymoron, but what may have been spotted is increased activity, a single soldier etc (in that department another game, Combat Mission series is better at simulating this). So the MG (or any other weapon system) may hose an area with few exposed enemies.

My thoughts on the matter.

[IronDuke99]

Attack helicopters, with cannon, should, most certainly, IMHO, be more deadly to infantry, than they are now in the game, SF Machine Guns should, again in my view, make it a lot harder to move than they do now in the game.