Wargame: Ash and Shadows v2.47; ongoing APS update, Yugo upgrade

User avatar
Spectre_nz
Warrant Officer
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed 7 Aug 2013 09:06
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Spectre_nz » Tue 24 Nov 2015 05:09

Cyan wrote:I had a go with a Canadian deck, and noticed that the CH 118 SS 11 and the CH 146 Gunship is nearly the same.
Yes, one has 4 health and is a bit faster and the other has 6 health and is a little slower, but armament is the same. And the price is allmost the same too.

Are they suposed to be that much alike?


Yes, although they look a little screwed up.

The CH-146 should have a speed of 260kph. The prices need a swap, and maybe a nudge down by 5pts.
The cost is higher than what you might expect at a glance since the rocket pods are all [HEAT], and were in the original wargame too.

In wargame, generally, single engine helos are 4hp, twin engine are 6hp or more.

sargken
Private
Posts: 2
Joined: Wed 16 Apr 2014 22:32
Location: United States, Wisconsin
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby sargken » Tue 24 Nov 2015 06:00

Could you rename the F-22 Raptor to just that and remove the Jesus part. It looks more professional.

User avatar
Spectre_nz
Warrant Officer
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed 7 Aug 2013 09:06
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Spectre_nz » Tue 24 Nov 2015 20:07

sargken wrote:Could you rename the F-22 Raptor to just that and remove the Jesus part. It looks more professional.


'Looking professional' isn't currently top of the priority list, I'm more focused on maintaining play-ability and producing a fun, entertaining and eventually somewhat balanced mod.

Besides, why would I want to strip out all traces of whimsy and irreverent humor?

If you read the modding guides, its a change you can make for yourself fairly easily, if it means that much to you.

Suriel
Chief Warrant Officer
Posts: 603
Joined: Fri 18 Oct 2013 11:49
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Suriel » Wed 25 Nov 2015 11:31

Out of curiosity. Anybody playing this online?

Awesomer
Master Sergeant
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed 25 Nov 2015 14:23
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Awesomer » Wed 25 Nov 2015 14:30

Spectre_nz wrote:
sargken wrote:Could you rename the F-22 Raptor to just that and remove the Jesus part. It looks more professional.


'Looking professional' isn't currently top of the priority list, I'm more focused on maintaining play-ability and producing a fun, entertaining and eventually somewhat balanced mod.

Besides, why would I want to strip out all traces of whimsy and irreverent humor?

If you read the modding guides, its a change you can make for yourself fairly easily, if it means that much to you.


Hey Spectre,

I love this mod, and I really like where you guys are going with this! I apologize for the ignorance, but are you or n00b a developer? If so, any chance Eugen could actually use a mod like this for a new wargame, or some kind of expansion? It would be great to get some skins for these awesome units too! I know that would definitely require too much work for a few people.

Anyway, keep up the great work!

Awesomer
Master Sergeant
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed 25 Nov 2015 14:23
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Awesomer » Wed 25 Nov 2015 14:30

Suriel wrote:Out of curiosity. Anybody playing this online?


Yes I am trying to, I normally start a lobby under Ash and Shadow's mod

Awesomer
Master Sergeant
Posts: 166
Joined: Wed 25 Nov 2015 14:23
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Awesomer » Wed 25 Nov 2015 15:01

One thing I did notice, on the RAH-66 Commanche, the stingers have been replaced by an Electronic warfare pod, is that deliberate?

User avatar
Spectre_nz
Warrant Officer
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed 7 Aug 2013 09:06
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Spectre_nz » Wed 25 Nov 2015 16:56

Awesomer wrote:One thing I did notice, on the RAH-66 Commanche, the stingers have been replaced by an Electronic warfare pod, is that deliberate?


No, not deliberate. Ugh, shared instances. Not even sure how this one happened...

but are you or n00b a developer?


Do you mean, am I a n00b or a developer? I'm not part of Eugens actual team, or any software company's team, but I am developing this, so I guess that makes me a n00b developer.

I have no idea of the inner workings at Eugen, so I have no idea if they'd take any of my ideas and make an expansion or a wargame 4.

Besides, most of these units are 'real world', so they could develop something similar all on their own if they wanted without even knowing about A&S.

Out of curiosity. Anybody playing this online?
I've played online with people I know a handful of times, but no public games yet.

User avatar
Brutoni
Colonel
Posts: 2916
Joined: Wed 27 Mar 2013 19:44
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Brutoni » Wed 25 Nov 2015 18:31

Though I would post some suggestions


Spoiler : MBTs :
T-14 Armata: +5 kmph speed / -5 pts. It can achieve a max speed of 80-90 kmph. Which in Wargame terms should be its normal speed. Also it loses to M1A2 which is in the 200+ bracket. Hence the -5 pts

M1A2 SEP +5 points. This is the most effective tank in the game. It handily beats the Challenger 2 CLIP and T-14 Armata in a straight up fight. It is also faster than Challenger 2 CLIP and on balance more armoured than the T-14 Armata

Challenger 2 CLIP -10 points/ add Grenade launcher. 25 front armour is nice however the top armour is weak (important in this game with changes to cluster) compared to T-14 and M1A2 SEP. Furthermore the lower AP means it will lose to the M1A2 SEP in a straight up fight and it is also slower. The Armata vs Challenger 2 CLIP seems to be a fair duel. The Grenade launcher is for the RWS that Challenger 2 has recently been fit with that can take either a .50 cal Machine gun or an AGL.

Challenger 2 LEP -5 points. Why you think this should be the same cost as an M1A2 SEP is beyond me. Is weaker in speed, gunnery, secondary weapons, top armour, back armour and only pulls ahead with 1 more pip of front armour (means very little due to high AP of tanks in the same bracket) and excellent side armour.


Spoiler : SHORAD :
Stormer HVM: +1 helicopter range increment. The LAAD Starstreak MANPAD version has 3325m range. No reason for Stormer HVM not to have the same given it has better targeting systems and uses the same missile.

Rapier FSC 2800m Antihelo range, : No Rapier ever lost the optical targeting capabilities of the Original system in the anti-helo role. I'd suggest leaving FSC at 2800m Anti-helo range.


Spoiler : Helicopters :
WAH 64 Move to Recon, Exceptional optics, . Not sure why it is devoid the Longbow model with the optical package? The British Army only every used the variant with the Longbow Radar and more powerful engines and that was only ever the plan! As for armament. The WAH-64 is getting Brimstone so makes sense in your timeline and I'm not going to complain about 8 Starstreak. The current system is cleared (though it has never been used) for 2 on each wingtip. However no reason a dual launcher couldn't also be made!


Spoiler : Aircraft :
Tornado F.2. Was never cleared for AMRAAM. More realistic would be to simply have the F.3 for this timeline I think. If you want AMRAAM it would be more likely the F.3 to carry AMRAAM with the F.2 retaining your version of Skyflash.


Really good mod. Only just played a few games so will continue to investigate and get back to you :). If anyone is up for an online game then let me know :).
ImageImage

User avatar
Spectre_nz
Warrant Officer
Posts: 454
Joined: Wed 7 Aug 2013 09:06
Contact:

Re: Wargame: Ash and Shadows

Postby Spectre_nz » Wed 25 Nov 2015 20:16

Cheers for the feedback

T-14 Armata: +5 kmph speed / -5 pts. It can achieve a max speed of 80-90 kmph. Which in Wargame terms should be its normal speed. Also it loses to M1A2 which is in the 200+ bracket. Hence the -5 pts


From testing or on paper?
While its difficult to quantify, the ECM sees to it that more shots than you'd expect miss the Armata. The Redfor tank wall is already fairly formidable, so I'm hesitant if this will underprice the Armata. With high speed and an auto-cannon, a skilled player could really get a lot of mileage out of it.
I'll see if Nolan can help me out with some tank v tank trials.

M1A2 SEP +5 points. This is the most effective tank in the game. It handily beats the Challenger 2 CLIP and T-14 Armata in a straight up fight. It is also faster than Challenger 2 CLIP and on balance more armoured than the T-14 Armata

Challenger 2 CLIP -10 points/ add Grenade launcher. 25 front armour is nice however the top armour is weak (important in this game with changes to cluster) compared to T-14 and M1A2 SEP. Furthermore the lower AP means it will lose to the M1A2 SEP in a straight up fight and it is also slower. The Armata vs Challenger 2 CLIP seems to be a fair duel. The Grenade launcher is for the RWS that Challenger 2 has recently been fit with that can take either a .50 cal Machine gun or an AGL.

Challenger 2 LEP -5 points. Why you think this should be the same cost as an M1A2 SEP is beyond me. Is weaker in speed, gunnery, secondary weapons, top armour, back armour and only pulls ahead with 1 more pip of front armour (means very little due to high AP of tanks in the same bracket) and excellent side armour.


These make sense. CLIP and the LEP had their frontal armor dropped from 26 to 25 about a month ago and I didn't adjust their price as a result. (AV 26 screws with the game engine and gives a blindage value of 30; when the game comes to to a damage comparison for HEAT weapons, I think this results in a calculated result of 'zero armor' and as a result, HEAT weapons wouldn't fire at AV 26...)
Previously, everything with KE had to close in an extra 350m (often times more) to get to a range where they could engage that frontal 26. As a result, the CLIP could just sit still and targets would roll in close and die.
I guess this isn't happening as much now that I've fixed the lack of HEAT targeting and reduced front armor by 1.

Stormer HVM: +1 helicopter range increment. The LAAD Starstreak MANPAD version has 3325m range. No reason for Stormer HVM not to have the same given it has better targeting systems and uses the same missile.


Some of my units are using the 2007 upgraded Starstreak II's. I'll have to check that's not happening here with a mis-name.

Rapier FSC 2800m Antihelo range, : No Rapier ever lost the optical targeting capabilities of the Original system in the anti-helo role. I'd suggest leaving FSC at 2800m Anti-helo range.


Sure.

WAH 64 Move to Recon, Exceptional optics, . Not sure why it is devoid the Longbow model with the optical package? The British Army only every used the variant with the Longbow Radar and more powerful engines and that was only ever the plan!

I can bump it up to very-good optics (I downgraded the longbow to very good). Iffy about moving it to recon. The UK and commonwealth are already very light on the ground in the helo tab. Higher optics are going to make it highly effective and swatting Ka-52's out of the sky...

I've made some potentially odd generalizations with regards to recon - given the emergence of radar signature reduction technologies, and thermal masking pigments, I've dropped the optics of a couple of 'exceptional' optics units that relied heavily on radar. A similar move for older units with thermal scopes; while I'm not suggesting that everything has those fancy BAE thermal plates that make an MBT look like a car, or make it invisible to IR, IR reflective and IR absorptive pigments are common enough today that I'd expect that in the A&S setting, using IR disruptive coatings or cloth to mask a vehicle's outline would be as common place as using visually disruptive patterns. No, not making things invisible to IR, but meaning positive ID by thermal alone is slower, and harder to achieve at long range.

Recon infantry, with the capacity to carry recon drones to extend their lines of sight, get their optics boosted. As did several 'new' recon units that could be expected to have received the latest in imaging systems.
I still need to harmonize all these changes across all factions however.

The basic summary of it is; a bunch of abstractions to back up the gameplay decision to not have units that have both exceptional optics, and powerful long range weapons in abundance.

Tornado F.2. Was never cleared for AMRAAM. More realistic would be to simply have the F.3 for this timeline I think. If you want AMRAAM it would be more likely the F.3 to carry AMRAAM with the F.2 retaining your version of Skyflash.


I can juggle those and adjust some prices.
I'm trying to keep every coalition with a high, mid and low tier ASF to use, and the F.2 is filling in the mid-to-low teir slot in quite a few coalitions at the moment. Retired in 2011 I think, so, not out of time frame.
I'll see if I can downgrade the missile load a little and drop the price to push it firmly into the lower cost, higher availability bracket.

Return to “Modding”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests