Bug/Inconsistency Thread.

User avatar
Mike
More than 10 000 messages. Soldier you are the leader of all armies!
Posts: 12409
Joined: Thu 20 Feb 2014 01:09
Location: Virginia, United States of America
Contact:

Re: Yugo / Finland WRD Patch - Skin and Animation Corrections

Postby Mike » Mon 7 Nov 2016 06:18

There's already a bug/inconsistency thread my man.
Image
Courtesy of KattiValk

User avatar
Narcissistic Black
Major
Posts: 1892
Joined: Tue 14 Jan 2014 01:58
Contact:

Re: Yugo / Finland WRD Patch - Skin and Animation Corrections

Postby Narcissistic Black » Mon 7 Nov 2016 09:20

Awesomer wrote:Hi Eugen and forum,

I am sure you guys or someone on this forum have started a thread on this, but I figured I would do this just in case. I just wanted to note some of the skin/animation inconsistencies that I have noticed within WRD, since the Israel patch. I am sure that there are more than what I have mentioned here, so I would welcome anyone else who can point out some of the other units that need correcting (skin or gun/bomb animation). Just to mention, I am not doing this to be annoying, it is just I really love this game, and I want to see it be the best that it can be - #MakeWargameGreatAgain.

Here is what I found:

- CAN Recce: Sniper animation, fires like a machine gun
- EAST GER Mot-Schutzen: Machine Gun animation, fires like a sniper
- ISR Hapak (command unit): Unit skin does not have a 'radio' like the other command units
- Dutch Staf Eenheid (command unit): Also, unit skin does not have a 'radio' like the other command units
- GER Fernspaher: Incorrect weapon skin; unit does not have the PSG1 sniper rifle skin, nor the M72 LAW skin (only the HKG3s)
- NOR LHV (militia unit) - Incorrect rifle skin; (comes with AG-3 assault rifle, when it should have bolt action rifle skin)
(Not sure if the last two have the correct animations or not).

There are probably more than this. I am hoping that other people can contribute to the list, so that way everything can be sorted out. Hopefully this could be address in the yugo/fin patch?? :D

Thanks again Eugen!! You rock!





viewtopic.php?f=155&t=58396
The First Narcissist
Image
Click signature to see Modification, Alpha Released. Try now.

User avatar
geronimonimo
Sergeant First-Class
Posts: 101
Joined: Mon 3 Feb 2014 18:45
Contact:

Re: Bug/Inconsistency Thread.

Postby geronimonimo » Wed 9 Nov 2016 13:38

Hey hey hey guys!

I've spotted a few inconsistencies:
-The LARO mortar jeep STILL has 10hp despite being a jeep
-The DJAPAS OREV (assuming it's based on the M151) has 100L for 500km unlike its "peers" at 65L for 1000km
-HUMVEEs don't have matching fuel tanks and fuel economy either and I don't what would be correct.
-BTR/SPW-152: the E(ZPTU carriers) have 100L for 500km unlike the rest of them (300L for 550km). I'm not really sure about that one... Could it be because it has a different motorization?
-BTR/SPW-40 & ZZC-55/56: all have 120L for 285km while the BTR-40 PIKUD has 300L for 550km (I also found that it never had more than an M1919 cal 30 machine gun top instead of the M2 in Israeli service... but that's from Wikipedia so...) and finally the ZZC-56 has the same fuel economy as the former (again, correct if I'm wrong there)
-CH'ONMA-HO 5, if compared the the STRV-103D, has a wider deck selection. The STRV-103D is only available in MECHANIZED and ARMORED decks, while the CH'ONMA-HO 5 can be chosen in the MARINE and SUPPORT decks on top of that. Also, I think it's been mentioned already, but I'll say it again just in case... Since it does carry a 125mm gun, the gun can't be named 2A20 since this one is a 115mm. possibly the 2A46 but I can't say for sure
-MOTORIZED decks balance: Since these decks are my speciality, a few tanks may be a tad too powerful (in general, tank prices barely exceed 60 command points to deploy). the CH'ONMA-HO 5 (now 90pts) has already been removed but the ZTZ-85 2A (85) the MAG'ACH 7C (100pts). An exception could be the STRV-103C since it doesn't have a turret but anything above (and not equal to) 70 points should be removed. Also (Yes, as if Israel wasn't powerful enough) but I think its MOTORIZED deck deserves the MAR-240 (napalm sherman) and the LAR-160. Other decks have units such as the BM-24 (same launcher as the MAR-240) and other cluster batteries.

Feel free to disagree with any of these points but be at least as constructive as I am trying to be :p
Image

User avatar
Stillehavet
Sergeant
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu 25 Feb 2016 13:52
Contact:

Re: Bug/Inconsistency Thread.

Postby Stillehavet » Wed 9 Nov 2016 14:18

ISRAEL

Sholef is 10-second(modernized) arty, but can deploy in mechanized deck, unlike M109A6, AS-90, MSTA-S, etc.


Kingdom of Sweden

Kustjagare '90 when firing on an armored target (AT12T) the animation does this machine gun thing instead of looking like a RPG.


Republic Of Korea

M1A1HC and K1 are each UMSC and ROKMC's MBT. But M1A1HC is available in marines deck and K1 isn`t.

Name error: The "Peace Pheasant II" program is only for F-4E. F-4D isn`t Peace Pheasant I Program, just "Peace Spectator" is right. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McDonnell ... outh_Korea
So, F-4D Peace Pheasant I → F-4D Peace Spectator is correct.

And more name errors in ROK.
Spoiler : :
Haebyung → Haebyeong
Gongbyung → Gongbyeong
OH-6 → 500MD (Actually ROK OH-6 and JPN OH-6D are same one, but ROK armed forces never called it OH-6. They call it just 500MD.)
MD 500 I-TOW → 500MD TOW Defender



Kingdom of Netherlands

Stoottroepen '95 and Korps Marinier '95 have AT4, but they don`t pay +5pts for advanced AT weapon.



German Democratic Republic

Leichte Schutzen are shock light infantry, but their PKM don`t have CQC trait.


Democratic People's Republic of Korea

Ch'onma-ho V should be remove from marines deck, like former Ch'onma-ho IV.

F-7B`s Gsh-2-30 isn`t same with Su-25K`s Gsh-2-30.

Name error: Eugen shrank units name odd, now DPRK' shock 15 troops and elite infs' names don't mean origin meaning and mean each sniper force(size between company and battalion), marine's ground fighting force.

And more name errors in DPRK.
Spoiler : :
Juckwidae → Ronongjŏk-widae
Gongbyong → Kongbyŏng
Strela-2 → Hwasŭngchong Strela-2
Igla → Hwasŭngchong Igla
Gongbobyong → Kyŏngbobyŏng
Jeogockdae → Haesangjŏgyŏktae
Yuckjeondae → Hanggongryukjŏndae
SINHUNG → VTT-323 85mm (in real DPRK, Sinhŭng = PT-85)
Chong-Ju → Jŏngju
I'm a Scandinavia player, and my game nickname is #SWE JAS-39 Gripen.
Jag älskar Gripen!

User avatar
Sgt._Pepper
Lieutenant
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sat 15 Jun 2013 10:57
Location: South Tyrol, Italy
Contact:

Re: Bug/Inconsistency Thread.

Postby Sgt._Pepper » Wed 9 Nov 2016 15:05

Stillehavet wrote:Stoottroepen '95 and Korps Marinier '95 have AT4, but they don`t pay +5pts for advanced AT weapon.


The AT4 is very similar to the CG-2 it replaces, which is why they don't cost more. Both Pansarskytte cost 15 points and they have those two weapons.
Image

User avatar
zeeyoo
Corporal
Posts: 38
Joined: Mon 11 Mar 2013 10:15
Contact:

Re: Bug/Inconsistency Thread.

Postby zeeyoo » Wed 9 Nov 2016 16:41

Sgt._Pepper wrote:
Stillehavet wrote:Stoottroepen '95 and Korps Marinier '95 have AT4, but they don`t pay +5pts for advanced AT weapon.


The AT4 is very similar to the CG-2 it replaces, which is why they don't cost more. Both Pansarskytte cost 15 points and they have those two weapons.



Stoottroepen '75 and '95 should be 25pts like other advance AT shock. they both have CGM2 and AT4, right?

Korpsmarinier '75 and '95 should be 40pts each cuz of 15men squad(+5), compare to WG's FJ'90(35pts).

User avatar
Sgt._Pepper
Lieutenant
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sat 15 Jun 2013 10:57
Location: South Tyrol, Italy
Contact:

Re: Bug/Inconsistency Thread.

Postby Sgt._Pepper » Wed 9 Nov 2016 16:43

zeeyoo wrote:
Stoottroepen '75 and '95 should be 25pts like other advance AT shock. they both have CGM2 and AT4, right?


Other CGM2 shock infantry also cost 20pts, like Stormer, Commandos, Canadian Airborne etc.
Image

User avatar
Stillehavet
Sergeant
Posts: 66
Joined: Thu 25 Feb 2016 13:52
Contact:

Re: Bug/Inconsistency Thread.

Postby Stillehavet » Wed 9 Nov 2016 16:47

Sgt._Pepper wrote:The AT4 is very similar to the CG-2 it replaces, which is why they don't cost more. Both Pansarskytte cost 15 points and they have those two weapons.


But Stoottroepen '95 and Korps Marinier '95 aren`t regular class. US Marines '75 (M72, 25pts) to US Marines '90 (AT4, 30pts) pay +5pts.
I'm a Scandinavia player, and my game nickname is #SWE JAS-39 Gripen.
Jag älskar Gripen!

User avatar
Razzmann
General
Posts: 7497
Joined: Fri 7 Mar 2014 15:29
Location: The land of flowing beer and Sauerkraut.
Contact:

Re: Bug/Inconsistency Thread.

Postby Razzmann » Wed 9 Nov 2016 16:53

Last edited by Razzmann on Wed 9 Nov 2016 17:34, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Sgt._Pepper
Lieutenant
Posts: 1422
Joined: Sat 15 Jun 2013 10:57
Location: South Tyrol, Italy
Contact:

Re: Bug/Inconsistency Thread.

Postby Sgt._Pepper » Wed 9 Nov 2016 17:25

Stillehavet wrote:
But Stoottroepen '95 and Korps Marinier '95 aren`t regular class. US Marines '75 (M72, 25pts) to US Marines '90 (AT4, 30pts) pay +5pts.


AT4 is mucg better than the LAW(much more AP, acc, range). CGM2 is more accurate and only has 1 AP less, but AT4 fires twice as fast. The difference is bot that big.
Image

Return to “Wargame : Red Dragon”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 39 guests