This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - tpcoughlin
1
« on: April 14, 2011, 06:51:57 AM »
Id be willing to help with a guide if anyone wants to do one
more importantly i think we need to gather all the stats for the units and do like a cohstats.com mock up
If y'all can provide stats I'll compile them in a spreadsheet for you.
2
« on: April 14, 2011, 06:43:21 AM »
What Relic needs to do is make another expansion with a North African campaign and Sicily/Italy campaign. And hire the Eastern Front developers as well
I am with you 100% on North Africa. Graziani in HQ with the Italians,Rommel with one of those bedford Mammoths As T4 from OF and a Vampire HT for a T3.
3
« on: April 14, 2011, 01:09:47 AM »
like deploy marksman? yeah that would be pretty awesome . Done a little research and it turns out Canadian infantry squads consisted of 7 privates with lee en fields led by a corporal with a Stein gun (overall 8 man squad), the corporal also carried mills bombs (which shall be an upgrade ) there was an LMG element in the platoon made up of 2 men (Lance corporal and private) the lance corporal had a mills bomb and a machete! and a big thanks to tigerclawstyle for providing me with information
Don't think about 7-8 man squads: Amis Rifle Sqdm30G(6M6R) or Brits Rifle Sqdenfield(5M5R)take your pick. Its a matter of scaling and compatiblity. I suppose so
Post Merge: April 13, 2011, 09:21:36 PM
Who will do this job??? And guys how you bloody making this mods??? I have downloaded mod studio but I cant understand nothing!!! Its all Chinese to me! (not Greeks> I am a Greek ) Can you bloody help me??? I want to add some mods with EF mod
to be honest mate I'm not sure how I'm gonna do this seeing as it's my first mod
I am a game designer. I joined the EF_community in January 2011. It took me until March to get a handle on how the DevTeam is approaching EF_Ostheer. I came on board too late to participate in the Ostheer project, (you don't change horses in the middle of a stream), Many of my game design ideas are good but not consistent with the concepts Dragon93 is working on for Ostheer. I don't wish to "rock the boat".
WTF is this guy talking about?
Y'all want to make a faction. how are you going to implement your unit ideas into a CoH style game? The answer is to design a series of GUI's, (Graphic User Interface(s)). What's a gui you say? In the lower right hand side of your game screen are two matrices, a 1x6 matrix to allow you to access the different HQ's and a 3x4 matrix to give you access to: units (=game pieces), strategies; (panzer assault, panzers support, switches); call-ins,(2 pz5 battle group), etc. the lower right corner of each gui is the staging point. it is common to all 3x4 gui's in the game, (except for the T5 auxiliary HQ. a special case). The location of the staging point is (3,4) or (3,D) in the 3x4 gui matrix; always! capische?italian (=understanding). If someone will assemble a list of proposed units using: the "insert list" function in the: Post Reply page, (where you write your reply's), toolbar; we can get started on Canadian_factionmod.
If Y'all would like my assistance in developing a Canadian Factionmod, It has to be a historical simulation. If You want to do your own mod you need to put together a development team. You can design a mod on your own but it is a bitch. I've done it. The worst part of doing a mod on your own is you lose your sense of perspective, you get blindsided and things don't turn out like you planned. You need BetaTesters, That's us for EF BTW. You Need coders,artists .model makers etc. So you want to do a mod Step One: Write down a Mission Statement: Clearly state what you want to accomplish with your mod. Step Two:....................................... to be continued,Go to The EF DevTeam page and see how this project is organized EF_Barbarossa will probably be complete and ready for sale in a year or two. That's right a year or two! Its all ready taken about a year and a half to get this far. "On to Berlin"USCW day 2: The siege of Fort Sumter continues.
4
« on: April 13, 2011, 02:06:28 PM »
The entire RMC faction is a reward unit. Therefore, no separate doctrine tree. Not that it needs one
I pretty much agree with this Statement. The RMC doesn't need a separate doctrine tree. But inclusion of at least one doctrine might forward EF's development efforts. From what I glean from Ostheer A6.0 Rizz's Aprilfools imbroglio was not such a red herring as most people think. Lots of good data in Ostheer A5.5 to chew on. We could only wish he had vetted that "mouse" crap=trap, with Lord Rommel first. (and the igoogle translator /dictionary is so easy to use): http://www.google.com/webmasters/igoogle/translate.html#source=tlha&utm_campaign=en&utm_source=en-ha-na-us-sk&utm_medium=ha&utm_term=german%2Fenglish%20translatorAnyhow. I have been thinking about how the game mechanics of the doctrine trees work IE: RHT combat effective unit call-in when 4CP have been spent. The Ostheer 5.5A and 6.0A indicate Axis Minor Power Allies are being considered for use in EF. The random squad call-in concept has some merit. Only the Italians have any unique and credible AFV's, (The Romanian Tanks < Pz3j (which is the neutral 0 Ost MBT), and the proposed CP cost/buff obtained has not yet been fully thought through. The Canadian faction thread is not really viable as a Faction, (not enough unique units to fill the roles); but: 1ssf Can\role airbourne; ghurka Ind\role death sqd ability: infiltration\sneak; Filipino Scout: role\Elite inf. scout; Legion Estrangee French?\ role: Elite CA=storm trooper ...... I'm sure you get the idea. The doctrine could be inserted in place of the intelligence doctrine. (I don't think there are enough players, sophisticated enough to appreciate or use this doctrine. http://easternfront.org/forums/index.php?topic=5616.0;topicseenAlso Please consider: http://easternfront.org/forums/index.php?topic=5532.msg62377#msg62377 as serious suggestions for Axis Minor Power Allies Call-ins.
5
« on: April 13, 2011, 08:43:03 AM »
Well of course, but my ears are better than my eyes
I agree. I have neurological problems in my hands too many data entry errors. Being able to cue on sound is most helpful.
6
« on: April 13, 2011, 08:00:32 AM »
Gotcha. Granted flamers and incendiaries target the ground why then does the damage to elite armor increase when attacked by fire? It works well enough against explosive and penetration attacks. There is some attribute I.m not accounting for here.
7
« on: April 13, 2011, 05:33:09 AM »
smoke decreases the accuracy and suppression of anything passing through it, this does not include indirect weapons however, which includes flamethrowers
and a barrage ability for the mortar would be a good idea just to help time your shots and find the maximum range, and it wouldnt increase the rate of fire or anything
10/4 on the barrage ability. 1. When you are saying "indirect weapons", do you mean indirect fire = IdF weapons? If so what other non-artillery, weapon systems are in the the IdF class? or 2. 1. When you are saying "indirect weapons", do you mean "non fired, ie guns" weapons like grenades,booby traps, FTs? I never quite got understanding of how smoke rounds/grenades worked
do you want to throw smoke in front of your troops? or in front of the guns/mgs that are potentially shooting at you
Think of smoke as cover, probably Green + . Your troops must be inside the cover to take advantage of it. I've tried using smoke to screen movements of other units as the Amis, I was not satisfied with the results. That may be due to LOS/LOF rules though. Its not easy to tell If other enemy spotters have you in a LOS that does notpass through your screening smoke. Apparently The Sharpshooter ability: smoke breaks suppression on itself only but also provides cover for other friendly units in the smoke. I do not deploy my sharpshooters as snipers per se. and not generally with other friendly troops. Of course I use them as snipers. I prefer to them as artillery spotters for IDF weapons. IE to create LOS and reduce the fog of war. Thanks that will help . i dont use mortar often.
Try using your mortars on AFV's. There is an inreased chance of engine Critical Hits when you shell the top of the AFV. It works very well on Lt AFVs (like Pumas), in the game. It might even work on the bigger critters I don't know. BTW once you get an engine critical hit, switch to another target. I have seen multiple critical hits on a target where there are no repair capabilities available; but I've never seen a destroyed engine Critical from mortars at least.
8
« on: April 13, 2011, 03:21:13 AM »
Ok I have an idea, Command squad can be upgraded with: battalion radio operator (gives squad arty barrage ability) Piper (heroic Charge) thats what I've thought of just now but I need one more hope you like those 2 suggestions
It would be easyier to give the ComSqd(3m sqd:2r1p): Upgrade: " The Piper"(4m Sqd:2r1p): (ability: morale, hold ground, fear, (have you ever been woken up by a nube piper at 5:30 AM? I have).
Ability: Artillery call-in as a veterancy 1 buff. Ability: break suppression, vet 2. buff.
Were Canadian commandos used during the St Nazaire Raid? Guys I can see this as a Company Commander Doctrine choice sub-faction! for use with the RMC...... bonus faction allready in existance. 4CP call in Canadien Task force, 1 Com squad,2 inf squad, 1 M4 (didn't the Cdns have their own variant to the Sherman 2CP call in: 1SSF(5m sqd)...infiltration....upgrade: Johnson . 3cp Dudlley Do Right, a boone crockett class sniper hunter .... this one might take some work, maybe just a sniper.
9
« on: April 13, 2011, 02:40:06 AM »
My pants are desert dry..
I can lobby for addition of a reward unit, if the convo turns into king tiger versus all so be it
Sure you can, but please without using unnecessary insulting expressions.
1
Calm down dude , i don't see anything to be "pissed off". Let's just return to topic.
Gentlemen. Tempers are rising here. I think as much because of honest differences of opinion; as because of national or ethnic pride. The discussion of Soviet and American Tank developments during the Last part of WWII is fascinating. I think we might all benefit by moving this part of the discussion to the history forum.I don't think anyone involved in the current discussion is trying to slur or insult anyone. I think what we have here is called a passionate debate, The KT (if properly commanded/Crewed) would almost assuredly beat the IS3 toe-to-toe. Although rare, many of the last remaining elite tank units were given glorious amounts of APCR Panzergrenate 40 ammunition. Not to mention the fact that KT crews, while fairly inexperienced with the tank they operated (as the KT served for what, 8 months?), they were seasoned veterans of tank combat--new crews would NEVER be trusted with a Tiger or panther, let alone a KT--nor the Jagdtiger/Jagdpanther; a might rarer and in the latter's case, more deadly (that speed IRL was a killer). Though if an IS3 was able to waltz up to a KT, yeah, it'd win from -900 or so meters. I'm not so keen on it, as if it replaced the IS2 it would blow, and it coultnt replace the ISU152 (it'd be blatantly OP). Atm, swapping the KV-85 for the T34/85 (or maybe the gloriously underused and under discussed SU85/SU100 (idea: the 'SU100' upgrade would just replace the SU85 with the KV-85, instead of just upgunning the SU?)
TheVolskinator raises many good points Here that relate to game design in EF. 1."The KT (if properly commanded/crewed)"...If this means experienced commanders and crews it is a veterancy issue. ..... if on the other hand it refers to: 4 or 5 man tank crew sizes, and 1 or 2 man gun turrets this is a consideration for the model designers. 2. "glorious amounts of APCR Panzergrenate 40 ammunition".... I question the validity of this Statement. In the US army APCR ammunition was issued to American Armor elements in July 1944. Patton for one was opposed to this ammo, (I don't remember why). Tungsten = Wolfram Ger was in rare supply during WWII. (I suspect the Sovs had the most ready access to it). American tanks seldom had more than 6 rounds available. In September? The US prioritized the T 2 APCD ammo for use in the Tank destroyer Elements. Use of APCR and Pz.Granate 40 ammo in Coh/EF should have a high muni cost to it. modification of this cost should be used for play balance only. I don't know what kind of APCR ammo the Soviets had or used In WWII, is suspect they had the same availability as the Amis. Use of Sov APCR ammo should not be a global upgrade. it should have a per use type of muni cost. The suggestion to replace the T34/85 with the KV85 has merit. It is do-able within the constraints of the EFv1.3.1 T4HQGUI. In fact the KV/85 was shown in Ostheer A5.5. DevTeam has yet to announce what the Neutral MBT is contemplated for EF_Ostheer. I'm betting on the BT_7M_fast_tank. I was very pleased to see the BA10M AC is being considered for the AC role. The BA64[/] AC[/] shown in Ostheer A5.5 is a good choice, but the BA10 has such classic lines. It is possible to get the T34/75, T34/85, KV85 and BT7M into the T4HQ GUI, but either the LT tanks or the Tank Killers would have to be moved to the Sov T3HQ GUI1. Ah but "Thyme, it is a precious thing".WTF! If you don't understand the last paragraph Just read the Bold Type and google on (wwii "navaho code talkers"). Is the SU76 an ATG or indirect fire CS AFV? BTW today April 12, 2011 is the 150th anniversary of "the first shot fired on Fort Sumter", the outbreak of fighting in the US Civil War. E. Ruffin of Virginia fired it. Footnotes 1. If you need help I can do the GUI layout and macro logic. I don't code. Sure wish I had a better handle on the Insert Table fcn.
10
« on: April 12, 2011, 06:07:24 PM »
Do you support the IS-3, ghost? or the maus for that matter?
I do not support the mouse. was a prototype that was developed on the orders of Hitler and against the advice of Guderian. It should never, never, never be used in EF' The ISU 3 was not produced in quantity, (compare with 1000 T34's per month), during the war, but would be a useful addition to EF for play balance. IE If some model screws up the game The ISU3 could be added to the game, as a patch to fix this. IMHO the ISU3 is much prettier than the ISU2. (Tovarich it is 12 noon as I write this, lunch time. Get back to me on PM) i couldn't find any data about is-3 armor so i can't say how good it was . in all sources i found is-3 had the same 122mm gun as the is-2 which was inferior to the 88mm gun so the tiger II had an advantage as it could knock out the IS from bigger range. but you are right, let's end this discussion
about the numbers built: only ~350 IS-3 were built until the end of the war with intact russian industry...and is-4 came even later.
and the status of reward/regular/one-time call-in is not only dependent on how many were built but also a matter of balance. in vcoh we have regular units like ostwind (43 built) or bergetiger (3-8) which were rare and a more common tiger (1350) has a limit of 1 (just like the pershing with 8-20 vehicles)...only because of balance.
The Germans sold the machinery used to build: Heavy IE thick, curvilinear armor, That is so characteristic of the ISU2 IsU3 designs; to Russia when they were still allied with the Soviets. They didn't think they would ever need such heavy armor. Boy were they wrong! The BergeTiger is a special case in CoH. It was not used for its historical authenticity but to fill a role IE all other factions have a bunker. In EF the SovBunker is the outpost. In OF\PE The BergeTiger is a fancy rolling MG bunker, with a vehicle recovery option. Beware the BTiger_ it is subject to the White Tank Bug.
11
« on: April 12, 2011, 03:58:19 PM »
I am a game designer. I joined the EF_community in January 2011. It took me until March to get a handle on how the DevTeam is approaching EF_Ostheer. I came on board too late to participate in the Ostheer project, (you don't change horses in the middle of a stream), Many of my game design ideas are good but not consistent with the concepts Dragon93 is working on for Ostheer. I don't wish to "rock the boat".
WTF is this guy talking about?
Y'all want to make a faction. how are you going to implement your unit ideas into a CoH style game? The answer is to design a series of GUI's, (Graphic User Interface(s)). What's a gui you say? In the lower right hand side of your game screen are two matrices, a 1x6 matrix to allow you to access the different HQ's and a 3x4 matrix to give you access to: units (=game pieces), strategies; (panzer assault, panzers support, switches); call-ins,(2 pz5 battle group), etc. the lower right corner of each gui is the staging point. it is common to all 3x4 gui's in the game, (except for the T5 auxiliary HQ. a special case). The location of the staging point is (3,4) or (3,D) in the 3x4 gui matrix; always! capische?italian (=understanding). If someone will assemble a list of proposed units using: the "insert list" function in the: Post Reply page, (where you write your reply's), toolbar; we can get started on Canadian_factionmod.
If Y'all would like my assistance in developing a Canadian Factionmod, It has to be a historical simulation. One Killer ZombieCanuck-lumberjack super-Sniper suggestion and I'm done with the concept. I can do it using EFv1.3.1 game mechanics but I am not interested. Weird concept though.....Ehh![/]
BTW relative to kilts and the western desert; There is a famous picture of Churchill, A British commander, (Wavell, O'Connor)? and a group of Tommies frolicking in the Mediterranean Sea, on R&R. No swimming suits for Tommies or anyone else. They are all wearing Bonnetsbrit =headgear appropriate to their roles. Churchill is shown wearing only a bowler hat and a stogie of course......
13
« on: April 12, 2011, 07:01:37 AM »
They are currently under review. I can't say any more than that.
Penal squads would certainly be worth it if the unsuppressability worked properly at the moment. Not being able to be suppressed for 50MU 15FU is very good.
Well, it works in the internal beta !!
I hope the non-suppression ability works well too. Makes the penal sqds more usefull as support troops. Don't forget the upgrade also gives your existing consripts that lovey incendiary cocktail; makes them more useful in urban combat, And they can hit and run!
14
« on: April 12, 2011, 06:51:32 AM »
They had moar of them then anyone. But I think it's okay as it is. This massive arty bombardment is far enough. I'm not sure about damage dealt though, because I don't play propaganda so much. I rather blow stuff with 152mm ISU-152
The katushkyas were rocket artillery and had a nasty spread. I playtested on Coh's N13 map. 3 batteries didn't kill all of armor at the traffic jam, but it ate up the ATG;s and pioniers repairing The armor. Also they seemed very effective against buildings. Remember though fire and run.
15
« on: April 12, 2011, 06:38:26 AM »
I think the 1SSF was independent of both the Canadians and USA armies. Thet Probably reported to SHAEF, if they reported to anybody: they were an unruly lot. Many Armies used American equipment during WWII, Thats what Lend Lease was all about. In Ef even the Sovs have a LL Sherman. Although mostly the US sent the Russians Trucks. This allowed the Sovs to concentrate on tank production. 1000 T34s a month!
1ssf: give 'em fire-up and call-in infiltration ability.
|