![]() |
SUBSIM: The Web's #1 resource for all submarine & naval simulations since 1997 |
|
View Poll Results: Which version of TSWSM are you looking forward to? | |||
Version 1 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
156 | 20.72% |
Version 2 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
79 | 10.49% |
Version 3 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
29 | 3.85% |
Version 4 |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
77 | 10.23% |
All of them |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
490 | 65.07% |
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 753. You may not vote on this poll |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
![]() |
#11 |
Weps
![]() Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 359
Downloads: 43
Uploads: 0
|
![]()
Darkfish - agree - 3rd aa gun setup is very confusing. I guess if we both use a method that works, that's the most important thing.
Quick update - Fiji (Colony Class Cruiser) completed. Am running out of ships (UK & German). I could always start on the stock US ships, but these are not needed for release 1 right ? On another note ... I am STILL looking for someone to help work on armour value balancing. Anyone want to / or feel they can contribute. Am going to do some testing this week to try and work out how it can be done. One test I need to get out of the way is - do the SH4 armour penetration capabilities reduce with increased range ? If not then the balancing exercise becomes more difficult as all the data I've found on penetration values varies substantially with range, therefore which range do we use as a baseline to apply to game i.e. gun x shoudl be able to penetrate armour thickness Y at x range. This may sound like a bit of a ramble but some research on the web combined with an understanding of shells.dat will confirm what I'm saying. Oh and Darkfish - good luck with the exam ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|