View Full Version : Bioeditor and Modeling
How exactly does TOAW model infantry? If you use bioed to make single infantry, would they just be treated like squads?
Also, does shell weight affect the performance of artillery, ships, etc?
How exactly does TOAW model infantry? If you use bioed to make single infantry, would they just be treated like squads?
They would just be treated like squads. If you want to represent the single infantryman you'll have to adjust all values of all other equipment i think. Afaik noone has done that yet, or has gone public with something like this. Intensive testing may be required.
Also, does shell weight affect the performance of artillery, ships, etc?
Yup. Shell Weight is used to determine 'dis-entrenchment' during attacks.
So, if a 400mm gun has a shell of weight of 900 (lbs. or kg?), then a 1000mm gun with a shell weight of 10,000 will be massively superior against trenches?
So, if a 400mm gun has a shell of weight of 900 (lbs. or kg?), then a 1000mm gun with a shell weight of 10,000 will be massively superior against trenches?
Yes.
Low AP rating for Guns with higher calibres is due to their lower Rate of Fire.
Shell weight is in Kg in BioEd. If you use data from whatever source i suggest to use the most commonly used HE ammunition's weight for a certain Gun and adjust range accordingly. This may vary as Wars progress.
What I always wondered is why artillery does not have any AT capabilities. Surely a 16 pounder gun could blow up a Pz. II?
What I always wondered is why artillery does not have any AT capabilities. Surely a 16 pounder gun could blow up a Pz. II?
Yup - depends. There has been some discussion over at the Matric Forums recently. Can't recall the thread, look for everthing started by Vahauser in Scenario Design and/or the War Room.
Yup - depends. There has been some discussion over at the Matric Forums recently.
Hmmm...didn't knwo they'd changed their name...Not sure if I like it...:clown:
Hmmm...didn't knwo they'd changed their name...Not sure if I like it...:clown:
:laugh:
Hehe..maybe I should change my name.. Typomar..or Typomore..:clown:
Heldenkaiser
07 Nov 07, 11:30
He who types much will typo much ... :laugh:
If I may ask, what is the meaning of your (present) user name?
If I may ask, what is the meaning of your (present) user name?
Good question.
He who types much will typo much ... :laugh:
If I may ask, what is the meaning of your (present) user name?
If it ever had a meaning i can't recall; it's a remnant of old fantasy RPG days so to speak.
If we are at it and drifting off topic, why Heldenkaiser..? I mean, Held (Hero), Kaiser (Emperor).. i don't get it.
Heldenkaiser
07 Nov 07, 11:49
If we are at it and drifting of topic, why Heldenkaiser..? I mean, Held (Hero), Kaiser (Emperor).. i don't get it.
A tongue-in-cheek reference to a favorite historical subject of mine. "Unser Heldenkaiser" ("our hero-emperor") is the label that historian Wilhelm Oncken tried to pin on Emperor Wilhelm I of Prussia-Germany in a hagiographic prachtschinken published for his 100th birthday in 1897. Other contemporary honorifics were "Wilhelm der Große" (" ... the great") and "Wilhelm der Siegreiche" ("... the victorious"), but none of those "stuck". I have occasionally written or lectured on Wilhelm I ... in my opinion he is an underrated historical subject, certainly as interesting as his grandson Wilhelm II who usually gets all the attention because he started first a bluewater navy and then a world war. A professional soldier who becomes king and then emperor ... a unique situation even in Prussian history where monarchs were always supposed to be soldiers as well. Wilhelm I was the other way round.
A tongue-in-cheek reference to a favorite historical subject of mine. "Unser Heldenkaiser" ("our hero-emperor") is the label that historian Wilhelm Oncken tried to pin on Emperor Wilhelm I of Prussia-Germany in a hagiographic prachtschinken published for his 100th birthday in 1897. Other contemporary honorifics were "Wilhelm der Große" (" ... the great") and "Wilhelm der Siegreiche" ("... the victorious"), but none of those "stuck". I have occasionally written or lectured on Wilhelm I ... in my opinion he is an underrated historical subject, certainly as interesting as his grandson Wilhelm II who usually gets all the attention because he started first a bluewater navy and then a world war. A professional soldier who becomes king and then emperor ... a unique situation even in Prussian history where monarchs were always supposed to be soldiers as well. Wilhelm I was the other way round.
Interesting. What is your occupation, Held?
Heldenkaiser
07 Nov 07, 15:39
I am a historian specializing in the 19th and 20th century. :)
I am a historian specializing in the 19th and 20th century. :)
Awesome. Does that pay the bills? Do you publish to make a living...?
Heldenkaiser
07 Nov 07, 17:53
Awesome. Does that pay the bills? Do you publish to make a living...?
Actually in our job one pays to publish. :OHNO:
I have the good luck to get paid just for my research for another two years from now ... afterwards, who knows? :rolleyes:
I couldn't find any such thread by Vahauser - the closest thing is infantry AT modeling.
Interesting signature, Heldenkaiser.
Actually in our job one pays to publish. :OHNO:
Bummer.
I have the good luck to get paid just for my research for another two years from now ... afterwards, who knows? :rolleyes:
That's awfully nice. What, specifically, are you currently researching, and what is it for? If you don't mind me asking.
I couldn't find any such thread by Vahauser - the closest thing is infantry AT modeling.
Interesting signature, Heldenkaiser.
Hm..there's been some little discussion in one of these threads, it's not a seperate thread.
But note that 10% of AP fire will be applied against armour in normal combat, so there is a chance for artillery to kill tanks even without AT rating. Of course you're free to add AT values to certain artillery pieces, but it depends also on what kind of HEAT ammo was available if at all to that force, in what amounts was it delivered to the units, what's been the doctrine of that army? It's rather a scenario design issue and I think it can vary by year, conflict, theatre, nation/force etc..
Ditto about the second. :)
Heldenkaiser
08 Nov 07, 15:54
What, specifically, are you currently researching, and what is it for? If you don't mind me asking.
I don't ... I have my mind on writing a comparative analysis of colonial warfare in the last 500 years. But since even reading the existing books on the subject will take me about a hundred years I don't quite see what my employer thinks I can achieve in but two. :laugh:
I don't ... I have my mind on writing a comparative analysis of colonial warfare in the last 500 years. But since even reading the existing books on the subject will take me about a hundred years I don't quite see what my employer thinks I can achieve in but two. :laugh:
One would guess that it's all about what 'the employer' wishes to see in the final doc, eh? IE: how deep does the read need to go vs What the employer is trying to prove, pro, con, or otherwise.
Employer parameter would be the question, eh?
I don't ... I have my mind on writing a comparative analysis of colonial warfare in the last 500 years. But since even reading the existing books on the subject will take me about a hundred years I don't quite see what my employer thinks I can achieve in but two. :laugh:
HAHAHA! Aye, good freakin' luck. Well, I must admit I envy you. To have a job studying historr would be the greatest!
HAHAHA! Aye, good freakin' luck. Well, I must admit I envy you. To have a job studying historr would be the greatest!
Could only be better if one was doing research for a game designer!
SWEET! :yummy:
Heldenkaiser
09 Nov 07, 07:44
HAHAHA! Aye, good freakin' luck. Well, I must admit I envy you. To have a job studying historr would be the greatest!
As everything you do for money, after a while (for me, I've been doing this for 12 years now) it tends to be just work. I am still interested in history, obviously, but more the kind of history I don't have to write about ... I prefer history I only have to wargame. :laugh:
As everything you do for money, after a while (for me, I've been doing this for 12 years now) it tends to be just work. I am still interested in history, obviously, but more the kind of history I don't have to write about ... I prefer history I only have to wargame. :laugh:
Ah, yes, a very true and tellign point.
That's right. If you did history for a job, then what would you do for a hobby?
That's right. If you did history for a job, then what would you do for a hobby?
Smokin' Hot Girlfriend - need I say more....:smoke:
Smokin' Hot Girlfriend - need I say more....:smoke:
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! True.
vBulletin® v3.7.4, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.