Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Moderator: Content Developer
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Currently it's like that: (most) everyone rushed AA guns forward at the start of the game, where they get killed a lot. Then, when the planes actually start to appear, some bases lack AA cover. The fact AA guns don't get built midgame much should tell they aren't THAT good.
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
├É┼©├æÔé¼├É┬©├É┬▓├É┬Á├æÔÇÜ ├É┬▓├æ┬ü├É┬Á├É┬╝,
Glad to hear that IK, at least, is really liking the build.
As for the rest of you, thank you for taking the time to criticize. Have some designer (la de da look how fancy I am, I'm a designer!!111!) blather for your trouble:
I figured guns were probably over-nerfed, and that was fairly intentional. I didn't have time (when I say, "I didn't have time" I mean I uploaded the final version of this build about 6 hours before getting on a plane to Russia for 10 weeks) to get them in a really good place confirmed by loads of playtesting, and I tend to agree with baczek that the game -really- sucks when it descends into "arty line stalemate" syndrome.
Point about the commandos is a good one, I didn't have time to devise a decent solution to that one. I'd like to avoid simply restricting AA guns from firing at around - at the moment they fire at ground targets with a vastly smaller range and smaller burst, to emulate the fact that an AA gunner would primarily be concerned with saving that ammo for defending against the highly nasty things that could descend from above. However, AA guns were -very- often used against ground targets, both for purely defensive reasons, and in more widespread roles (T-60 and german 250 halftrack both use adapted versions of the aircraft 20mm gun) because a cannon that fires 20mm HE rounds at a high rate is useful in most situations involving soft targets.
AT guns certainly need looking at. In general I think guns are perhaps the hardest class of units to balance and integrate effectively - they are essentially defensive units that cost way less than comparatively armed offensive units, and often outrange/have bigger guns to boot. Making them powerful and useful tools while also not skewing the balance of the game towards the defensive has been a long and ongoing challenge. AT guns in particular are very tricky, because tanks are MEANT to be one of the 'game breaker' units that start forcing outcomes, but AT guns are MEANT to be cheap counters to allow a player who lacks the money for tanks to deal with the armored behemoths storming down his/her throat.
As for plane speeds in general: personally I hope to integrate a system into the radar unit for controlling them before we nerf their speed way down. I was figuring something a bit like CA's factory controls on the side of the screen, but instead you get a button there for each active mission (just selects all members of that mission). That said, I'm not really looking to make it possible to micro around air defenses. If you find a gap through which they can run a straight line, great, but there shouldn't be any hawk-like dancing to avoid stuff, I think. They're very powerful weapons that are generally really hard to counter - making them difficult to precisely control is a part of keeping them from being an expensive "win button." Which it seems they're being treated as anyways, which is sad, but something for us to work on.
Stukas only shoot at tanks and vehicles - they're carrying twin 37mm cannons with AP rounds only under their wings. Accordingly, they're much faster to deploy and cost less than the explosive rocket armed ground attack missions. Also they have loads more ammo than a rocket plane. Consequently, a stuka mission will utterly devastate an enemy tank group that's giving you trouble - 2-3 hits to the roof of the tank will gib it, and a single tank is usually about 2/3rds of the stuka mission.
Sorry for the sound errors, Zerg fixed them at one point, maybe I didn't include the most recent version of his fixes. If its annoying you severely, just disable the "S44 Airplane Sounds" gadget. No more cool doppler style sounds, but also no more errorspam.
Recon planes: I'm happy to bump up their cost, but I'm a fairly firm believer in the availability from the HQ. Aggressive placement of AA is a great way to deny current information from someone who's relying on those recon missions, because they go down from pretty much any attention from AA. It is a problem for bases, where a single mission can swoop in and give you placement of the buildings for arty/whatever. I'll think about it at some point when I'm not busy speaking russian or wandering around Moscow. Or maybe (hopefully!) more active devs will have a solution for you sooner.
Plane costs requiring immediate storage is a matter of how they were coded. I'm not too fussed by it personally - they're meant to be expensive game changers (which force the player using them to slow down production elsewhere, giving the other player a bit of breathing room if they can survive the epic destruction wrought by the planes).
Sorry for the megapost. Thanks for the feedback, hopefully people start moving more towards IK's stance once they get used to things.
Glad to hear that IK, at least, is really liking the build.
As for the rest of you, thank you for taking the time to criticize. Have some designer (la de da look how fancy I am, I'm a designer!!111!) blather for your trouble:
I figured guns were probably over-nerfed, and that was fairly intentional. I didn't have time (when I say, "I didn't have time" I mean I uploaded the final version of this build about 6 hours before getting on a plane to Russia for 10 weeks) to get them in a really good place confirmed by loads of playtesting, and I tend to agree with baczek that the game -really- sucks when it descends into "arty line stalemate" syndrome.
Point about the commandos is a good one, I didn't have time to devise a decent solution to that one. I'd like to avoid simply restricting AA guns from firing at around - at the moment they fire at ground targets with a vastly smaller range and smaller burst, to emulate the fact that an AA gunner would primarily be concerned with saving that ammo for defending against the highly nasty things that could descend from above. However, AA guns were -very- often used against ground targets, both for purely defensive reasons, and in more widespread roles (T-60 and german 250 halftrack both use adapted versions of the aircraft 20mm gun) because a cannon that fires 20mm HE rounds at a high rate is useful in most situations involving soft targets.
AT guns certainly need looking at. In general I think guns are perhaps the hardest class of units to balance and integrate effectively - they are essentially defensive units that cost way less than comparatively armed offensive units, and often outrange/have bigger guns to boot. Making them powerful and useful tools while also not skewing the balance of the game towards the defensive has been a long and ongoing challenge. AT guns in particular are very tricky, because tanks are MEANT to be one of the 'game breaker' units that start forcing outcomes, but AT guns are MEANT to be cheap counters to allow a player who lacks the money for tanks to deal with the armored behemoths storming down his/her throat.
As for plane speeds in general: personally I hope to integrate a system into the radar unit for controlling them before we nerf their speed way down. I was figuring something a bit like CA's factory controls on the side of the screen, but instead you get a button there for each active mission (just selects all members of that mission). That said, I'm not really looking to make it possible to micro around air defenses. If you find a gap through which they can run a straight line, great, but there shouldn't be any hawk-like dancing to avoid stuff, I think. They're very powerful weapons that are generally really hard to counter - making them difficult to precisely control is a part of keeping them from being an expensive "win button." Which it seems they're being treated as anyways, which is sad, but something for us to work on.
Stukas only shoot at tanks and vehicles - they're carrying twin 37mm cannons with AP rounds only under their wings. Accordingly, they're much faster to deploy and cost less than the explosive rocket armed ground attack missions. Also they have loads more ammo than a rocket plane. Consequently, a stuka mission will utterly devastate an enemy tank group that's giving you trouble - 2-3 hits to the roof of the tank will gib it, and a single tank is usually about 2/3rds of the stuka mission.
Sorry for the sound errors, Zerg fixed them at one point, maybe I didn't include the most recent version of his fixes. If its annoying you severely, just disable the "S44 Airplane Sounds" gadget. No more cool doppler style sounds, but also no more errorspam.
Recon planes: I'm happy to bump up their cost, but I'm a fairly firm believer in the availability from the HQ. Aggressive placement of AA is a great way to deny current information from someone who's relying on those recon missions, because they go down from pretty much any attention from AA. It is a problem for bases, where a single mission can swoop in and give you placement of the buildings for arty/whatever. I'll think about it at some point when I'm not busy speaking russian or wandering around Moscow. Or maybe (hopefully!) more active devs will have a solution for you sooner.
Plane costs requiring immediate storage is a matter of how they were coded. I'm not too fussed by it personally - they're meant to be expensive game changers (which force the player using them to slow down production elsewhere, giving the other player a bit of breathing room if they can survive the epic destruction wrought by the planes).
Sorry for the megapost. Thanks for the feedback, hopefully people start moving more towards IK's stance once they get used to things.
-
[Krogoth86]
- Posts: 1176
- Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
My problems with the AA guns is this (I leave it up to your mind to think of a situation where the vehicles would even have to turn their turret first and how much cars could be killed until this has happened):
http://www.file-upload.net/download-155 ... E.avi.html
Of course they can die fast & stuff but you don't build them up in the middle of a big flat plateau to get that strong effect I'm talking about. I especially experienced that strength when I put them next to my arties which quite normally were on a hill and I was amazed by their strength in killing jack...
I guess lots of the situation is made up by getting three of em with the HQ now. I have the feeling that's a bit just to give Russia some raiding defense as pretty much everyone said: Planes are for the lategame. So why should you get them right from the start? Doesn't make that much sense to me. Maybe replace them with unit squads or whatever you come up with...
Another comment to the turn in place change:
While the movement now is rather nice it sucks hard at the same time. Giving like some arty trucks a command to go somewhere in a line will keep you pretty much always having one or two of em driving in circles. In order to fix that you really have to send them away and back again and the best guess is really to have an eye on him because the pathfinding sorta tends to send them in not exactly and so they start driving circles again. I also see that behaviour for the armored cars very often. It kinda sucks when you e.g. ordered them somewhere to wait for an incoming enemy and you find them driving around making the turret aiming quite impossible. It's not a really serious issue but I'd vote for changing things back as it annoys you with a "Oh no, not again - now just move there and hold it!" situation every game (safe bet)...
http://www.file-upload.net/download-155 ... E.avi.html
Of course they can die fast & stuff but you don't build them up in the middle of a big flat plateau to get that strong effect I'm talking about. I especially experienced that strength when I put them next to my arties which quite normally were on a hill and I was amazed by their strength in killing jack...
I guess lots of the situation is made up by getting three of em with the HQ now. I have the feeling that's a bit just to give Russia some raiding defense as pretty much everyone said: Planes are for the lategame. So why should you get them right from the start? Doesn't make that much sense to me. Maybe replace them with unit squads or whatever you come up with...
Ok but still I wouldn't call this a major argument - fun should come before realism. I don't have a perfect solution right now either but I'd definitely either rethink them being given for free with the HQ or the vs. ground behaviour. Maybe they shouldn't fire at infantry making them way more weak plus giving Commandos a chance again...Nemo wrote:However, AA guns were -very- often used against ground targets, both for purely defensive reasons, and in more widespread roles (T-60 and german 250 halftrack both use adapted versions of the aircraft 20mm gun) because a cannon that fires 20mm HE rounds at a high rate is useful in most situations involving soft targets.
Another comment to the turn in place change:
While the movement now is rather nice it sucks hard at the same time. Giving like some arty trucks a command to go somewhere in a line will keep you pretty much always having one or two of em driving in circles. In order to fix that you really have to send them away and back again and the best guess is really to have an eye on him because the pathfinding sorta tends to send them in not exactly and so they start driving circles again. I also see that behaviour for the armored cars very often. It kinda sucks when you e.g. ordered them somewhere to wait for an incoming enemy and you find them driving around making the turret aiming quite impossible. It's not a really serious issue but I'd vote for changing things back as it annoys you with a "Oh no, not again - now just move there and hold it!" situation every game (safe bet)...
-
Evil4Zerggin
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 16 May 2007, 06:34
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
I've not gotten sound errors since rewriting the widget; could you give steps to reproduce?
Stukas actually doesn't have much more ammo than rockets--apparently they only carried 6 rounds per gun (i.e., 12 total), versus 10 or so rockets on rocket-armed planes. You do get three per sortie, though, as opposed to only two for the other attack fighters.
Stukas actually doesn't have much more ammo than rockets--apparently they only carried 6 rounds per gun (i.e., 12 total), versus 10 or so rockets on rocket-armed planes. You do get three per sortie, though, as opposed to only two for the other attack fighters.
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Sound errors are observed when some (not sure which one) type of plane enters the map - game complains about missing sounds:
As for Commandos, I personally found Soviet RPG-43 troops to be much superior. They can sneak, they kill tanks in 1 shot more often than not and they can demolish some important structures in the base in seconds.
Code: Select all
no such sound: sounds/engine/spitfireb-0.wav
no such sound: sounds/engine/spitfireb--1.wav-
1v0ry_k1ng
- Posts: 4656
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
I'm all for reverting the new turning, it created way more annoyance than it solved
the hq aa guns need to be immobile because otherwise the early game revolves around them, which is a bit lame
krogothe its perfectly logical to have AA spawn with the HQ (check other WWII rts, like blitzkreig.) in RL AA guns were quite effective VS inf and armour, hence their power here. they can dish out ok damage but they cant take it, at all.
the biggest problem is vehicle and armour balance is fuxxed. t60 now kings all light vehicles in head on fights and is resistant to flak where the others get gibbed.
on the vehicular level, mobile howitzers now seem to cost the same as their fixed equivalents- only with mobility, more armour, no ghosting on the map, no icon when it fires and in the case of the isu-150, completely owning everything. the big tabula game broke down into entirely isu-152 spam, because those things instakill almost anything at huge range, totally resist howitzer fire and only cost a little more than a howitzer in the first place! Im also thinking its still alot more sucsessful to rush heavy tanks than use mediums
the hq aa guns need to be immobile because otherwise the early game revolves around them, which is a bit lame
krogothe its perfectly logical to have AA spawn with the HQ (check other WWII rts, like blitzkreig.) in RL AA guns were quite effective VS inf and armour, hence their power here. they can dish out ok damage but they cant take it, at all.
the biggest problem is vehicle and armour balance is fuxxed. t60 now kings all light vehicles in head on fights and is resistant to flak where the others get gibbed.
on the vehicular level, mobile howitzers now seem to cost the same as their fixed equivalents- only with mobility, more armour, no ghosting on the map, no icon when it fires and in the case of the isu-150, completely owning everything. the big tabula game broke down into entirely isu-152 spam, because those things instakill almost anything at huge range, totally resist howitzer fire and only cost a little more than a howitzer in the first place! Im also thinking its still alot more sucsessful to rush heavy tanks than use mediums
-
Evil4Zerggin
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 16 May 2007, 06:34
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Yeah, my thought process during that game was pretty much:
My infantry are getting owned by their infantry, better rush light veh.
My light veh are getting owned by their AT inf and arty, better rush tanks.
I could build T-34, which would get owned by AT, or I could spam ISU-152... hmm.
Also T-60 has tank-type armor, unlike armored cars/halftracks.
My infantry are getting owned by their infantry, better rush light veh.
My light veh are getting owned by their AT inf and arty, better rush tanks.
I could build T-34, which would get owned by AT, or I could spam ISU-152... hmm.
Also T-60 has tank-type armor, unlike armored cars/halftracks.
-
[Krogoth86]
- Posts: 1176
- Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Well I still don't really accept "RL" as a strong argument as it's about a game. Doing jack because other games did also is no good approach imo. My argumentation is that planes show up very late in the game (in most games I played they also only occured rarely) so giving them as start bonus doesn't make too much sense to me. In addition to that three flaks kill planes like hell plus if every enemy player has three of em the planes easily will face multiple player's AA. Well there is one reason I can come up with for giving the flaks: The scout plane. I'm not too fond of that being available from the HQ but with this decision AA from the start makes at least a bit sense...1v0ry_k1ng wrote:krogothe its perfectly logical to have AA spawn with the HQ (check other WWII rts, like blitzkreig.) in RL AA guns were quite effective VS inf and armour, hence their power here. they can dish out ok damage but they cant take it, at all.
Your idea of making them a special immobile unit might be a solution. Another idea might be just giving one flak and sort of attaching it to the HQ plus eventually making it AA-only (so Commandos make some sense again)...
Yeah - when getting a tank depot I always upgrade it once immediately. The tank killers with their high ranges are simply fantastic...1v0ry_k1ng wrote:Im also thinking its still alot more sucsessful to rush heavy tanks than use mediums
-
1v0ry_k1ng
- Posts: 4656
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
the reason the AA guns come with the HQ is to stop HQ sniping; rushing bombers in big games and sending them straight at the enemy hq. I also like that they make base rape a little more challenging, because atm if you can be bothered to get partisans, at troopers or other cloaked units into an enemy base, youve pretty much won if they have moved their AA guns (and even then, partisans can deal with 1 or 2 lone guns)
tank cost with power is linear at the moment; I guess its going to have to increase expodentially to make lighter tanks worth using
tank cost with power is linear at the moment; I guess its going to have to increase expodentially to make lighter tanks worth using
-
[Krogoth86]
- Posts: 1176
- Joined: 23 Aug 2007, 19:46
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
So what does AA help here? For me two bombers of the right kind always kill the HQ in their first approach anyway so it's not a really big protection...1v0ry_k1ng wrote:rushing bombers in big games and sending them straight at the enemy hq.
In terms of e.g. giving the Russians a bit more protection of their start zone - well infantry squads would do the same job plus with flaks you now always have the issue that this entire satchel charge deployment thingy just doesn't work anymore. I also think if someone managed to sneak in e.g. Partisans he deserves to cause some havok - especially as the russian infantry tends to suck anyway they currently pretty much have lost much of the Partisan advantage...
It sure isn't a simple issue to solve as there are numerous approaches but still this needs some major reevaluation imo...
-
1v0ry_k1ng
- Posts: 4656
- Joined: 10 Mar 2006, 10:24
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
AA guns die instantly to partisan firebombs, flamers, commandos, AT troopers. as long as you have 1-2 per gun they pose no threat
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Nope, I tried to kill one with a flamer last game and the flamer could barely start firing... It decloaked to fire and was immediately instagibbed by the AA gun.
EDIT: tested a bit and indeed flamer only wins 1v1 vs AA gun when AA gun has no experience at all and when the flamer has a fair bit of luck. Once AA gun has killed one flamer it eats flamers for breakfast.
With regards to AT guys you are right tho, they instagib AA even when it has experience and they don't even take damage from the AA gun.
(This test was with all US units; e.g. M1 Bofors AA gun)
EDIT: tested a bit and indeed flamer only wins 1v1 vs AA gun when AA gun has no experience at all and when the flamer has a fair bit of luck. Once AA gun has killed one flamer it eats flamers for breakfast.
With regards to AT guys you are right tho, they instagib AA even when it has experience and they don't even take damage from the AA gun.
(This test was with all US units; e.g. M1 Bofors AA gun)
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Test with Russian AT inf vs some AA guns (not sure which nation's, probably GBR) reveals that in 1:1 if the grenade hits the gun (~75% probability), the gun dies instantly, but still it has enough time between soldier uncloaking and the actual explosion to kill the grenadier, so most often they both die. Sometimes grenade overflies the gun or falls short, in that case the soldier is killed and the gun survives. AT weapon misses vs stationary targets are probably USSR-only thing though.
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
i played this the first time the other day and it was fun! will host again, gj 
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Great release! Played two quick games. Quick because in spite of my efforts to survive against the C.R.A.I.G controlled Germans, it ended up with him ripping my base apart. Sure, second try went better than first one, so perhaps the next game I actually manage to take him out.
Nice things:
A dangerous and aggressive AI! Yay!
Performance is all ok, even in situations which were moderately spammy regarding units. I don't know if I survived long enough for any "very spammy" situations to actually occur
but it is an improvement compared to earlier releases. FraPS stayed high even at times of action, no more "slideshow" rate on the FraPS as I've seen a bit into the game in earlier releases.
I liked the scout plane. Heck, if they are a problem, let AA and fighter aircraft keep them away from sensitive areas.
Regarding balancing things, maybe the notes above are right regarding arty. The US 75mm PAK were a bit shortranged, but maybe it always have been.
Anyway, KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!
(Things I never tested: fighting in FPS mode, using airplanes, playing against friends over internet, in my case, ca 20 to 30 ms delay as everyone is with me here in Sweden)
(My system specs: GPU Intel 965GM, 4 GB Ram, Dual Core centrino with whatever clock speed, Linux Redhat 5 with xorg-server 1.6.0, Mesa 7.4 (the latter fresh directly from the oven!) and Intel X11 video driver 2.6.3. )
Nice things:
A dangerous and aggressive AI! Yay!
Performance is all ok, even in situations which were moderately spammy regarding units. I don't know if I survived long enough for any "very spammy" situations to actually occur
but it is an improvement compared to earlier releases. FraPS stayed high even at times of action, no more "slideshow" rate on the FraPS as I've seen a bit into the game in earlier releases.I liked the scout plane. Heck, if they are a problem, let AA and fighter aircraft keep them away from sensitive areas.
Regarding balancing things, maybe the notes above are right regarding arty. The US 75mm PAK were a bit shortranged, but maybe it always have been.
Anyway, KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK!
(Things I never tested: fighting in FPS mode, using airplanes, playing against friends over internet, in my case, ca 20 to 30 ms delay as everyone is with me here in Sweden)
(My system specs: GPU Intel 965GM, 4 GB Ram, Dual Core centrino with whatever clock speed
, Linux Redhat 5 with xorg-server 1.6.0, Mesa 7.4 (the latter fresh directly from the oven!) and Intel X11 video driver 2.6.3. )Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Lag in S44 does not come with unit counts, but rather with specific units. Try for ex. firing a few Nebelwerfers at once and see what the framerate will become. Other units to watch out for lag: Soviet Katiusha, US flamethrower inf.
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
The lag I were referring to were not really related to any specific unit type. There were quite few units, there were no combat but suddenly the FraPS went to 1 or less.
But as said, now the situation is different, the gameplay is smooth (but yeah, once the Nebelwerfers and Co starts to fire, the FraPS probably will drop, but they ARE extreme graphics wise ). Probably it is a combination of improvements in Spring44, the Mesa 3D library, the X windows server, the intel X video driver as well as the spring engine itself that has alleviated the situation.
Maybe I'll give it a shot tonight... I'm a bit annoyed that C.R.A.I.G beats me and I want vengeance.
But as said, now the situation is different, the gameplay is smooth (but yeah, once the Nebelwerfers and Co starts to fire, the FraPS probably will drop, but they ARE extreme graphics wise
). Probably it is a combination of improvements in Spring44, the Mesa 3D library, the X windows server, the intel X video driver as well as the spring engine itself that has alleviated the situation.Maybe I'll give it a shot tonight... I'm a bit annoyed that C.R.A.I.G beats me and I want vengeance.
-
Evil4Zerggin
- Posts: 557
- Joined: 16 May 2007, 06:34
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Eventually I'll get around to optimizing particle counts, but probably not for a while (I don't have too much time, and I think I've become one of the major LuaRules devs as well.)
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
Woo... had yet another skirmish against C.R.A.I.G and got my bottom flattened again!
(I'm playing on 'Levels 2', with my US base at mid bottom and a German base at mid top of map, if anyone cares).
I got slightly further along the road of a sensible economy, but one thing I wonder is this: once I got a towable anti tank gun built and I move it into the position where I want it... how do I control the facing of the deployed gun? I got it pointing 90 degrees away from the chokepoint it were supposed to cover with it's arc of fire so it were not that much of a help (not that he would have saved me but still ).
Thanks in advance!
BTW, it gets slightly non-smooth when I zoom in on heaps on infantrymen and tanks that are moving around... but that's just life with a lower end integrated graphics card
.
New attempts to beat C.R.A.I.G will follow.
(I'm playing on 'Levels 2', with my US base at mid bottom and a German base at mid top of map, if anyone cares).
I got slightly further along the road of a sensible economy, but one thing I wonder is this: once I got a towable anti tank gun built and I move it into the position where I want it... how do I control the facing of the deployed gun? I got it pointing 90 degrees away from the chokepoint it were supposed to cover with it's arc of fire so it were not that much of a help (not that he would have saved me but still
).Thanks in advance!
BTW, it gets slightly non-smooth when I zoom in on heaps on infantrymen and tanks that are moving around... but that's just life with a lower end integrated graphics card
.New attempts to beat C.R.A.I.G will follow.
Re: Spring: 1944 "Operation Luettich" (v1.01) Released!
click deploy, left click on map. it'll show you the facing while you move the mouse around. you can also shift-queue deployment orders.IllvilJa wrote:Woo... had yet another skirmish against C.R.A.I.G and got my bottom flattened again!
I got slightly further along the road of a sensible economy, but one thing I wonder is this: once I got a towable anti tank gun built and I move it into the position where I want it... how do I control the facing of the deployed gun?