Balancing

[Daniel Von Rommel 0]

go in GameData.ini find the line that says "DrawEntireTerrain". This will solve the problem but will ultimately result in slow-down on lower-end systems, as the game will put the entire level into video memory, which is better reserved for other things.

 

sense=

impossible for more than 2 players :(

 

of course you can rework every single model,and in 1 or 2 hundred years you can resize EVERYTHING,have giant battlefields and no problems.

 

thanks to ambershee for the information

Edited September 12, 2006 by Daniel Von Rommel

[Rattuskid 0]

Italy will be in R4? Damn, you just made me a sad ratty. Canada or even ANZAC had more influence on the outcome of the war than Italy.

[DrShrinker 0]

sense=

impossible for more than 2 players :(

Yeah dude, thats the problem. but the current zoom actually is OK. It's 'pulled back' enough as to not cause much lag. I'd like to see a lot more of the battle field too, but the engine just cant handle it.

 

The homeland side for russia might be kinda weak, but the devs have recognized this and will get a nice buff. But if you play the Hammer side properly, they can indeed destroy anyone.

 

oh, and i have 3 year old ATI 128meg video card. It runs all the games i play just fine, but never at the highest setting. I am saving for a newer one.

[Count von Phoib 0]

I said if you need to make a faction STRONGER you can add some of these units,

these aren't things that i would like to see implemented,I say that if ya need a extra vehicle to balance a faction you can add one of these.

what exactly surprised you?

they are all really existed and used in a decent number

 

you got surprised for the uber soldat?

that's a old idea I have since I played wolfenstein,so you can simply skip it

 

the comprexed air bomb isn't so bad as idea,it has been used in Russia's defence,making great kills.

The Panzer IV's and V's are in from the first release, hell, even in the first few beta's :P

 

Thats what suprised me

[Daniel Von Rommel 0]

LOL!

I don't have blit now,i mean,NOW i have it,not when i posted :)

this makes you a sad ratty?

italy fighted very well for his small resources and a such stupid leader as Mussolini,

Italian pilots was the most corageous in the world

beating normal planes with WW1 vehicles

 

Canada???

what you smoked?!?! ;)

reasons

1)ooohh they made a few tanks by themselves,incredible,but Italy created a full early war army and is much smaller than canada,with a stupid leader,and after only a few years from the very hard WW1,

2)The only things that made canada famous are

the normandy invasion attack to a beach

all the executions they made to deserters of german army

3)and they let USA buy alaska....

now they have a dangerous country right where the sunlight doesn't arrive

4)Canada is and always been rich,dammit.

50% of italian income goes to politician,20% is stolen by politicians,10%goes to burocrats,10% goes to people who migrates in italy(why???)and the other 10% comes to us,

 

wtf is ANZAC???

 

P.S.

why you put the H upgrade (wich is tremendous ugly)

and not the nice F2? it has stile,it's different,much better looking than the H

Edited September 12, 2006 by Daniel Von Rommel

[flyby 0]

Italy will be in R4? Damn, you just made me a sad ratty. Canada or even ANZAC had more influence on the outcome of the war than Italy.

Euh...The point is that you do not have enough unique models for a complete side.

It's not about recreating WWII, it is about making a playable game...

There is no point in adding Canada because they were mainly using American or British material. What's the point of having a side where the only difference with another side is the flag on their HQ ?

[Rattuskid 0]

Fair enough Flyby, but I'd just as soon not see Italy/Canada in the game at all. I mean, yes, they had different military vehicles, but they'd basically play like a lighter-armored Germany, without any of the latewar nice toys. That and why group together the Allies like that in Europe, but leave Italy as an independant side? It makes no sense. Japan plays different, I can see that, but Italy... meh.

 

3)and they let USA buy alaska....

Um, maybe you should actually you know, research that. It might have something to do with Russia (hint).

 

wtf is ANZAC???

 

ITALIANS FIGHTED VERY HARD IN ITALY WITH STUPID LEADER, USING TANKS WITH PIZZA FOR ARMOR. ITALYKIND VERY BRAVE BUT NEVER SMART ENOUGH TO USE GOOGLE.

Edited September 12, 2006 by Rattuskid

[BIGJohnMP 0]

You could just add them as a side in the allied command center like England and USA are now. I'm sure they had enough modified Shermans or something...

[Daniel Von Rommel 0]

OHHHHHHHHH

 

Um, maybe you should actually you know, research that. It might have something to do with Russia (hint).

 

 

WHAT A WONDERFUL MIND YOU HAVE!!!!

IT WAS RUSSIAN I KNOW IT

BUT CANDIANS NOW HAVE AMERICANS RIGHT IN THE YouKnowWhere

IF THEY WERE INTELLIGENT THEY BOUGHT IT

 

STUPID LEADER

 

well,what i sad too,

 

USING TANKS WITH PIZZA FOR ARMOR

 

OHHOOHHHH

HOW OLD YOU ARE??12?max you are 16

The M13-40 was the best tank of it's time,Much smaller,much faster,with decent ammo,good firepower and great resistance,PARAGONABLE TO THE PANZER III,

it was able to fight against every medium-light tank of the war!

(well it is easy flammable....)

AND THE BASOTTO,THE GERMANS USED IT TOO

WHY??THINK!MAYBE BECAUSE IT'S SHIT?NO!!!!!!BECAUSE WAS A GREAT VEHICLE!!!!!!!!

SO LEARN,italians at sart was,for quality of grund vehicles,the best side!

Canada wasn't nothing!

 

AND HOW CAN I THINK TO GOOGLE NOW!WHILE YOU BREAK MY BALLS WITH STUPID FANTASY ABOUT A SIDE NEVER EXISTED!

MADE OF FOREIGN TROOPS FOR 50%

AND OF FOREIGN VEHICLES FOR 95%??

Edited September 12, 2006 by Daniel Von Rommel

[Mehman 0]

Daniel Von Rommel are you on crack or something?

[Daniel Von Rommel 0]

whaa?

why?

I'm simply getting mad with this guy who thinks that canada is better than Italy

(edit:ph34r: it's very late here....)

it's not decent

Edited September 12, 2006 by Daniel Von Rommel

[Mehman 0]

When did he say that? I think you misunderstood him.

 

 

And Daniel here's a histroy lesson:

 

The news of the British North America Act, 1867, was nervously received in Washington, DC. It would create, on July 1, 1867, "one dominion under the name of Canada," and this led to expressions of "grave misgivings on the establishment of a monarchial state to the north" in what Canadians then called "the republic to the south." (See McNaughton's Short History of Canada.) U.S. Secretary of State William Seward thus urged, and the United States Senate thus approved, the treaty authorizing the purchase of Alaska from Imperial Russia for US$200,000 on April 9, 1867. The United States took possession and the American flag was raised over Alaska on October 18, which is commemorated as Alaska Day.

Edited September 12, 2006 by MehMan

[Daniel Von Rommel 0]

well,the sense is that

Italy?!?!why we should add italy??

why we don't add canda too,they have better tanks,they're bigger etc.

and

italy has only tanks made of pizza

 

the sense of this is

 

CANADA--GREAT!!

ITALY------WHAT A PIECE OF CRAP!

 

 

mehman you misundertod ME about alaska

i know russia got it and sold it

i am saying that canada has made an error letting USA buy it

maybe i expressed bad,but that's what i mean

Edited September 12, 2006 by Daniel Von Rommel

[Rattuskid 0]

PARAGONABLE TO THE PANZER III

Um, paragonable isn't a word. I don't even know what you were trying to say. Something between 'comparable' and 'paradigm'? Anyway, let's compare it if you will. The Panzer III wasn't a bad vehicle itself, but it didn't face Panzer IIIs in combat, now did it?

 

From the mailer site on tanks...

 

The M 13/40 was the best known of the Italian tanks used during the war, and along with it's improved version, the M 14/41, was the standard medium tank used by the Italian armored forces. The tank suffered frequent mechanical breakdowns in the desert but it can be said that it faired no worse than the British tanks they faced. The tank did suffer from a very poor power-to-weight ratio which resulted in a very low speed for it's class. The armor was not on par with other industrial nations, being brittle and prone to crack and split when hit. Armament can be said to be on par with the British in Africa. It held it's own against the British cruisers and the US M3 Stuart, but was totally outclassed by the US M3 Lee/Grant.

 

I propose we do add Italy to the game, but only if we include the mighty superpower which they couldn't conquer at all... Ethiopia.

Edited September 12, 2006 by Rattuskid

[Freedom 0]

Wtf? :huh: English much?

[Daniel Von Rommel 0]

Can I suffocate this guy?

well,tell me if italian rifle infantry wasn't the best of the world,i want to see what you have to say about them,the bersaglieri group was the oldest,better trained infantry group of the world,no one of them(well maybe 1 or two,no more)diserted the army,

 

the m13-40 was a fast tank,what are you talking about??

 

the basotto?

 

yes it was comparable... :P

 

totally outclassed by the US M3 Lee/Grant.

-__- you know wha tank are you talking about?

that tank has been used during ALL the war with minor upgrades,one of the bst tanks ever created,it was usually deployed to support pershings,it was stronger than a sherman,and the m13-40 was much faster than it

you're talking about a medium,heavy class tank

and you're comparating it with a medium-light one

[Rattuskid 0]

You'll have to forgive me if I use information based off unreliable internet sites. Instead of a rock solid source, like a tantrum throwing nationalist. So I apologize for that and the sarcasm you obviously won't get.

[Count von Phoib 0]

Rommel, calm down.

 

You have been warned for shouting as well.

[Daniel Von Rommel 0]

sure!

he throws shit on italy and I get warned,this is boring...

I hate usa

if your patriotic stupid sites says that the Grant is a light tank,they are idiots,it wasn't, so don't swim in your illusion of supremacy

in fact,not your stupid papers,the grant was just a bit weaker than the firefly

 

 

P.S.

can i soffucate this guy is a joke,it's obvious i'm not going to travel to USA only to kill him... -_-

Edited September 12, 2006 by Daniel Von Rommel

[Count von Phoib 0]

I don't care why you shouted, I just don't want to see it.

[DrShrinker 0]

so anyhoo. how bout that balance?

 

:P

[Eradicator 0]

Wow, how the hell did I miss out on some good ole Canuck bashing!?

[Biohazard 0]

I dunno, but this Rommel guy is a hoot. I mean, really. At least most of the blowhards here have watched the History channel, I think the only thing this guy's read were comic books on the subject!

[BoB 0]

I think the only thing this guy's read were comic books on the subject!

:lol:

[PsiSoldier28 0]

It's an italian yotta :o