Bugreporting and whishes for 6.7 final

An place for english questions !
Benutzeravatar
Watchdog1
Schütze
Schütze
Beiträge: 27
Registriert: 22.04.2007, 22:38

Wierd thing

Beitrag von Watchdog1 »

Yesterday I told my US M3 halftrack to shoot at a retreating Puma. The Puma being faster sliped in to the fog of war and the halftack now without a target came to a halt and started sputtering out a rapid wav loop. It only last a couple of seconds. I was in the Winter scheme. Don't know if that's reallitve. :roll:
Benutzeravatar
Matttheoz
Leutnant
Leutnant
Beiträge: 512
Registriert: 03.03.2007, 22:33
Wohnort: Australien

Beitrag von Matttheoz »

You probably know this already, but crewmen can't kill russian Maxim Machinegunners.

Also, I stumbled on these:

http://www.rcexchange.com/MP40.wav

http://www.rcexchange.com/STEN.wav

http://www.rcexchange.com/30CAL.wav

http://www.rcexchange.com/50CAL.wav

http://www.rcexchange.com/AK-47.wav

http://www.rcexchange.com/BREN-MUL.wav

http://www.rcexchange.com/VICKERS.wav

There are more on the site. Don't know if they're loopable or if the quality is good enough, but IMHO the MP40 and the Sten, for example, sound quite good compared to the sewing machines we've got at the moment :wink:

Maybe you can have a look if you get time...

PS - I know, I know...AK47...but it could be a good MP44...

Cheers,
Matt
Benutzeravatar
LT albrecht
Unteroffizier
Unteroffizier
Beiträge: 167
Registriert: 09.04.2007, 23:03
Wohnort: Tadley, hampshire, England

Beitrag von LT albrecht »

I like them :)

And whilst we're on the subject of MGs could we get the man-portable ones from RWG(the ones with two crew that work like ATGs/AAA but are machineguns)?
we shall fight them on the beaches and on the fields, we shall fight them in the streets and we shall never surrender, because there isn't a button for that :-) ) And we wont dig fortifications until SS3 =) or after it because the bastards didn't include it...
Benutzeravatar
Matttheoz
Leutnant
Leutnant
Beiträge: 512
Registriert: 03.03.2007, 22:33
Wohnort: Australien

Beitrag von Matttheoz »

Supply version of the Kübelwagen can drive over barbed wire fences. Questionable. Probably not desired :?
Benutzeravatar
viriato
Stabsunteroffizier
Stabsunteroffizier
Beiträge: 271
Registriert: 05.04.2007, 10:33

Beitrag von viriato »

Great sounds Mat.
Benutzeravatar
Matttheoz
Leutnant
Leutnant
Beiträge: 512
Registriert: 03.03.2007, 22:33
Wohnort: Australien

Beitrag von Matttheoz »

@viriato
yeah I reckon they're good. If you crank the sound up some of them sound pretty chunky and not so 'tinny' as alot of the smg/mgs at the moment.

@Barbarossa
couldn't we maybe have the nice little old american spotter plane back? I mean a P38 as a spotter is a bit overkill and there are already 2 or 3 other P38 variants. They were more of a hardcore longrange spy plane I think, mainly used before and after bombing raids for high altitude target photography, not really the battlefield spotter role. The also don't really fit in the same class as the german Uhu or the biplanes of the british and russians in this role. Just my 2 cents...
Benutzeravatar
LT albrecht
Unteroffizier
Unteroffizier
Beiträge: 167
Registriert: 09.04.2007, 23:03
Wohnort: Tadley, hampshire, England

Beitrag von LT albrecht »

I agree with both points, I know the plane you mean but I can't put a name on it... If we have a P38 as a spyplane then we need a Spitfire PR IX and maybe a BF110 spyplane, not too likely...

And if I'm not becoming a pain in the arse (ass means donkey by the way) I would like to reccomend my "supply carrier" again and propose the following equivalents:
UK) Bren carrier (really used)
DE) SDKFZ250 (really used)
US) M3 halftrack (unknown)
USSR) lend-lease M3 halftrack (unknown)
we shall fight them on the beaches and on the fields, we shall fight them in the streets and we shall never surrender, because there isn't a button for that :-) ) And we wont dig fortifications until SS3 =) or after it because the bastards didn't include it...
Benutzeravatar
For Real WW2 feeling
Fähnrich
Fähnrich
Beiträge: 379
Registriert: 12.10.2006, 13:21
Kontaktdaten:

Beitrag von For Real WW2 feeling »

hi barba

I received this message by error on my fan site.
Off course, I is explained to him that I was not the modder of RWM ;)
and that I was completely in agreement with him... and much more ;)
A new "hardcore realists", fabulous ! ;)
Hello developer of the Real Warfare Mod.

Before i start anything, i would like to thank your efforts in keeping and refreshing this mod, it really has kept the followers of Sudden strike 2 in the game. In the mod though there are some parts of it that i'd like to suggest.

I noticed that in RWM, all of the self propelled artillery units, such as the bishop, hummel and the soviet ISU-122/ISU-152 series lack the ability to long range fire. In reality they were as we know it, self propelled artillery, not just mere guns. Even though they have the ability to fire a short distance further than normal tanks and guns, its a bit of a drag for hardcore realists as me, to see their range being what it is now in the mod. Therefore, i'd like to suggest/request that you (at least consider) giving them ability to fire in Long range fire, as normal artillery pieces, even if shorter ranged than the normal artillery counterparts.

I know sometimes, in multiplayer games the situation sometimes reaches a stalemate when 2 sides dont make any moves with units, but decide to shell each other with the given artillery pieces. But as an experienced player i know that when trying to kill 1 single target with artillery, its usually futile, since the target can move away, artillery is quite inaccurate and you lose valuable supplies when re-arming your artillery pieces. It would be nice to give my attacking units some artillery support. Please consider giving the Self Propelled Artillery units Long Range fire.

Sincerely
Toni Jyrkkänen (nickname: Mannerheim)
Visit a very good RWM SITE (with RWM units tables & many infos & dl...)(UK)
Bild
Benutzeravatar
LT albrecht
Unteroffizier
Unteroffizier
Beiträge: 167
Registriert: 09.04.2007, 23:03
Wohnort: Tadley, hampshire, England

Beitrag von LT albrecht »

I don't think LR fire for SPGs is possible, unless you do it the JWL way and give them a long direct-fire range and lower accuracy...
we shall fight them on the beaches and on the fields, we shall fight them in the streets and we shall never surrender, because there isn't a button for that :-) ) And we wont dig fortifications until SS3 =) or after it because the bastards didn't include it...
Benutzeravatar
Matttheoz
Leutnant
Leutnant
Beiträge: 512
Registriert: 03.03.2007, 22:33
Wohnort: Australien

Beitrag von Matttheoz »

Hey Albrecht. It is possible (ballistic fire fore SPGs). Atleast the Priest and the ISU had it in 6.6 and the Hummel and the Long Tom still have it. Unless I'm going delusional :)
Benutzeravatar
Suka
Obergefreiter
Obergefreiter
Beiträge: 84
Registriert: 01.05.2007, 23:10

Beitrag von Suka »

As i understand it u cant add both indirect and and indirect fire options to the tank:one or the other only....
So maybe albrechts idea is worth looking into?
And i think its little complicated with ISUs cos well they used different ammo for indirect fire and they could also be good tank hunters but i am not sure about it...
Benutzeravatar
LT albrecht
Unteroffizier
Unteroffizier
Beiträge: 167
Registriert: 09.04.2007, 23:03
Wohnort: Tadley, hampshire, England

Beitrag von LT albrecht »

I just said that it was a solution. But I don't favour it, it's complicated and upsets balancing of MP maps... It seems we could either turn all of RWM's artliiery "LRM style" (automatically fires because attack is used AS WELL AS LR fire for arty) or we can have a minor 'historical devation' (or assume that no ballistic ammo has been issued...) I personlly prefer the 'deviation' as althoug LRM arty is OK it does lack that realistic feeel of having to order it to open fire.
we shall fight them on the beaches and on the fields, we shall fight them in the streets and we shall never surrender, because there isn't a button for that :-) ) And we wont dig fortifications until SS3 =) or after it because the bastards didn't include it...
Benutzeravatar
Matttheoz
Leutnant
Leutnant
Beiträge: 512
Registriert: 03.03.2007, 22:33
Wohnort: Australien

Beitrag von Matttheoz »

Yup, I agree the ISU should be direct fire as it was used at Kursk etc (ie- in the 'Animal Killer' tank destroyer role). The russians never really got into the whole SP artillery thing. However, I seem to remember the ISU having both direct and ballistic fire in 6.6 :? . Could be wrong though...

But guns like the Priest were first and foremost ballistic artillery pieces. No question.
Dateianhänge
priest battery.jpg
priest battery.jpg (30.12 KiB) 6150 mal betrachtet
Benutzeravatar
Matttheoz
Leutnant
Leutnant
Beiträge: 512
Registriert: 03.03.2007, 22:33
Wohnort: Australien

Beitrag von Matttheoz »

The fw190 jabo turns pink :shock: sometimes just when leaving or just when returning to its hangar position...think it has a personality complex :D
Lamafarmer

Beitrag von Lamafarmer »

Matttheoz hat geschrieben:The fw190 jabo turns pink :shock: sometimes just when leaving or just when returning to its hangar position...think it has a personality complex :D
Never seen the movie with the pink submarine? ;D STRATEGY MY FRIEND!
Antworten

Zurück zu „English Sudden Strike Forum“