Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.11

Forum for the strategy game set during the 2nd War for Armageddon.

Moderators: Slitherine Core, BA Moderators, WH40K Armageddon moderators

nexusno2000
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 206
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:15 pm

Re: Suggestions and bug reports for version 1.11

Post by nexusno2000 » Mon Nov 13, 2017 10:00 am

deranzo wrote:Mission select bug is a known bug. Trying to fix.
Btw I did a compare in the strings and brief fields, but co see no changes from vanilla, so it seems to be an .exe issue.

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Suggestions and bug reports for version 1.11

Post by deranzo » Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:14 pm

For older downloaders having campaign mission selection bug, download this and extract it to your game folder and it will be fixed: https://www.dropbox.com/s/poqinumjst64x ... e.rar?dl=0
it is a good day to die

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Suggestions and bug reports for version 1.11

Post by deranzo » Mon Nov 13, 2017 12:16 pm

nexusno2000 wrote:
deranzo wrote:Mission select bug is a known bug. Trying to fix.
Btw I did a compare in the strings and brief fields, but co see no changes from vanilla, so it seems to be an .exe issue.
I have fixed the issue nexusno2000, please see it through the head of topic
it is a good day to die

nexusno2000
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 206
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:15 pm

Re: Suggestions and bug reports for version 1.11

Post by nexusno2000 » Mon Nov 13, 2017 2:17 pm

deranzo wrote:
nexusno2000 wrote:
deranzo wrote:Mission select bug is a known bug. Trying to fix.
Btw I did a compare in the strings and brief fields, but co see no changes from vanilla, so it seems to be an .exe issue.
I have fixed the issue nexusno2000, please see it through the head of topic
Ok. I'll test it later when I'm done at work.

nexusno2000
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 206
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:15 pm

Re: Suggestions and bug reports for version 1.11

Post by nexusno2000 » Mon Nov 13, 2017 5:19 pm

deranzo wrote:
nexusno2000 wrote:
deranzo wrote:Mission select bug is a known bug. Trying to fix.
Btw I did a compare in the strings and brief fields, but co see no changes from vanilla, so it seems to be an .exe issue.
I have fixed the issue nexusno2000, please see it through the head of topic
Issue may have been fixed, but it's hard to tell:

I now get a dialog box stating a need a full copy installed. Which I have. Never was an issue before this fix.

Mod feels a bit messy ATM. It may add a few features, but it completely breaks the game.

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Suggestions and bug reports for version 1.11

Post by deranzo » Tue Nov 14, 2017 10:31 am

Issue may have been fixed, but it's hard to tell:

I now get a dialog box stating a need a full copy installed. Which I have. Never was an issue before this fix.

Mod feels a bit messy ATM. It may add a few features, but it completely breaks the game.
By saying mod, do you mean my mod or this new version?

That security check is integrated with new version, not after latest fix. Try to run it as administrator.
it is a good day to die

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by deranzo » Fri Nov 17, 2017 1:39 pm

I have added 2 new cheats to version 1.11. These are:
- "give attack" command: This cheat gives you 1 extra attack action. To disable it you must write it again or you will have unlimited attack actions.
- "give move" command: This cheat gives you 1 move action by unit's actual movement. For example if a unit moves 2 hexes by its actual movement, this cheat will give you 2 hex movement. To disable it you must write it again or you will have unlimited move actions.

New cheats included exe (all previous fixes are included): https://www.dropbox.com/s/fj5y9qawyn6df ... e.rar?dl=0
it is a good day to die

Parallax
Twitch Fidelity Award 2017
Twitch Fidelity Award 2017
Posts: 111
Joined: Thu Jun 04, 2015 12:22 am

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by Parallax » Mon Dec 25, 2017 5:53 am

I have an idea for new units and new unit mechanics. Apothecary - new unit, which restores HP (not models) to adjacent not mechanical units (new mechanic). Similar to leadership units but restores not morale but hp. And Techmarine, wich restores hp to adjacent mechanical units

nexusno2000
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Sergeant - 7.5 cm FK 16 nA
Posts: 206
Joined: Mon Feb 24, 2014 5:15 pm

Re: Suggestions and bug reports for version 1.11

Post by nexusno2000 » Sun Dec 31, 2017 12:16 am

deranzo wrote:
Issue may have been fixed, but it's hard to tell:

I now get a dialog box stating a need a full copy installed. Which I have. Never was an issue before this fix.

Mod feels a bit messy ATM. It may add a few features, but it completely breaks the game.
By saying mod, do you mean my mod or this new version?

That security check is integrated with new version, not after latest fix. Try to run it as administrator.
I meant the new version.

But with the latest fix it seems everything is in order. So disregard this.

Bonzarion
Private First Class - Opel Blitz
Private First Class - Opel Blitz
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Jan 18, 2018 8:33 am

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by Bonzarion » Thu Jan 18, 2018 8:44 am

Is there a way to increase the maximum distance a direct fire weapon can shoot? It would've expanded modding options greatly. I'm currently in a making of a rebalance mod but max distance of 4 is sooo resticting.

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by deranzo » Tue Jan 30, 2018 8:40 am

Bonzarion wrote:Is there a way to increase the maximum distance a direct fire weapon can shoot? It would've expanded modding options greatly. I'm currently in a making of a rebalance mod but max distance of 4 is sooo resticting.
You can modify weapon range however you wish. For example base game unit Deathstrike has 7 hex range but you can modify values in unit editor. And I think 7 hex is well enough for anything.
it is a good day to die

MartiusR
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:43 am

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by MartiusR » Tue Feb 13, 2018 8:51 am

Hello Deranzo!

First of all - thanks a lot for your voluntarily made updates, you totally deserve for Emperor's grace and military decoration from Sebastian Yarrick himself!

I'm not sure if mu suggestions can be considered as "doable", but since you're much more responsive than developer (who is isually simply not responding), as well as very kind and polite, I'd like to ask you about possibility of implementation of two things:

1."Reparing" hot-seat mode - despite announcement from developer, there wasn't initially present hot-seat mode at all. Now - it's ridiculous, because it requires to be online and log into adequate service to "host" the game and "join" to your own game. The same idea of being online and logging into anything to play in hot-seat mode is prepasterous. I understand that it may be out of your reach to make "separate" hot-seat mode, but how about adding possiblity to create "offline" multiplayer game and join to it? Is it possible?

2.Range of fire - I admit that one of the aspects which are up to this moment for me a bit troublesome is range of fire of our units. Yeah, I can always check in unit description, but it would be much more comfortable to see some "view" directly on the map. Maybe different color of "range fields" would allow to deal with the issue with multiple weapons for one squad. And once again - is it somehow "doable"?

I'm not aware how much "tinkering" would it require to fullfill those suggestions (and if it's possible), but I'm guessing that it won't hurt to ask. Thank you in advance for reply! And thanks for your valuable effort and influence on WH40k: Armageddon!

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by deranzo » Fri Feb 16, 2018 12:28 pm

MartiusR wrote:Hello Deranzo!

First of all - thanks a lot for your voluntarily made updates, you totally deserve for Emperor's grace and military decoration from Sebastian Yarrick himself!

I'm not sure if mu suggestions can be considered as "doable", but since you're much more responsive than developer (who is isually simply not responding), as well as very kind and polite, I'd like to ask you about possibility of implementation of two things:

1."Reparing" hot-seat mode - despite announcement from developer, there wasn't initially present hot-seat mode at all. Now - it's ridiculous, because it requires to be online and log into adequate service to "host" the game and "join" to your own game. The same idea of being online and logging into anything to play in hot-seat mode is prepasterous. I understand that it may be out of your reach to make "separate" hot-seat mode, but how about adding possiblity to create "offline" multiplayer game and join to it? Is it possible?

2.Range of fire - I admit that one of the aspects which are up to this moment for me a bit troublesome is range of fire of our units. Yeah, I can always check in unit description, but it would be much more comfortable to see some "view" directly on the map. Maybe different color of "range fields" would allow to deal with the issue with multiple weapons for one squad. And once again - is it somehow "doable"?

I'm not aware how much "tinkering" would it require to fullfill those suggestions (and if it's possible), but I'm guessing that it won't hurt to ask. Thank you in advance for reply! And thanks for your valuable effort and influence on WH40k: Armageddon!

I will do anything in my knowledge and skill MartiusR, thank you.

Also new minor update: Now AA weapons only attacks flyers, not ground units. And ground based weapons such as tank's cannons, bolters, artillery etc. can't attack flyers. Thus, WH40K Armageddon is more realistic game now.

Note: I didn't added this option directly into the game because maybe some players prefer old attacking mechanic. So it's optional. If you want to apply it, just download the file and put it into your base game folder and overwrite. You can find it in here: http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 35&t=79526
it is a good day to die

DocDesastro
Corporal - Strongpoint
Corporal - Strongpoint
Posts: 51
Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2013 8:01 am

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by DocDesastro » Mon Feb 19, 2018 9:58 pm

As requested, I will share my thoughts here, deranzo.

Comparing the boardgame with the computerized version there have been some...oddities. I shall try to point out a vision here of the game I would like to have. I started playing the tabletop some 20 years ago and consider myself somewhat familiar with the weaponry used and the mechanics on the boardgame.
First, one must take into account, that 40k is a d6-based game, while armageddon is a d100 - or if you like - a percentage system. So one needs to care about different to-hit-numbers depending on faction.
To flesh out a bit more what I mean is: Astra Militarum units are made of standard issue guardsmen. In the tabletop, they have a 50% chance to hit anything (4+ on a d6). So...I do not get, why infantry has a lower accuracy than tanks - same guardsmen are manning them. Experience should have an impact on this value as veteran units hit more often. A small buff to accuracy with each XP skull earned would be appreciated mechanics-wise - like +3% per level of experience which will cap at 80% which is fair. So the main demand I make here is make guard have a base accuracy of 50% and only meke exceptions for certain cases like ratling snipers or very accurate weapons. Orks mostly hit on 5* making it a 33% chance of hitting anything but they are much better in melee. Ther minor brethren, the gretchins hit at 4+ and suck at melee so I would assume 33% for ork-manned units and 50% for gretchin manned units with ranged attacks. Space marines hit on 3+ which translates to 66% base to-hit chance. They are superior...period.

Synopsis:
demanded base accuracy numbers independant of unit type:
Astra Militarum: 50% ranged/50% melee
Orks: 33% ranged/66% melee
Gretchins: 50% ranged/33% melee
Space Marines: 66% ranged/66% melee

Also, I understand, that unit numbers depict 'real' numbers of tanks, men etc.
According to that logic, an infantry platoon should have about 35 units with one HP: a command squad of 5 and 3 squads of 10
Ork mobs come in lots of about 40
Gretchins may field even more like 50 to 70
Space Marines are 10 per squad, 5 per terminators and 3 per centurions but fight a lot better. (improved armour/toughness must be reflected)
Guard tank squadrons are mostly 4 tanks: 1 command tank and 3 others
How an ork armoured mob would work I need to look up.

It is paramount not to over-balance the units - the factions are assymetrical after all. Orks units should be cheaper than marines but fight worse in head-to-head unless they go melee.
Picking the right weapon and right terrain should win you a game.

Toughness of units is important, too. In the main game, a weapon's power and the defenders toughness are compared to determine the to-wound-roll.
In this game, 50% of each hit wounds improving with a better strength-toughness-ratio.
Basically, I would think of toughness translated into Armageddon in increments of 10%.
This would mean, that a standard guardsman, who has toughness of 3 in the main game have a defence value of 30
A lasgun would wound a guardsman in 50% of all hits as it has same strength. So I would demand a strength of 30 for it. In accord to the game mechanics the formula for the to-wound roll is 50%-(DEF-STR)
An ork has toughness 4 which would translate to DEF 40 so the lasgun would wound at 40% of all hits. 50%-(40%-30%)
A gretchin only has whimpy toughness of 2 so we have DEF 20: A lasgun would wound at 60%. 50%-(20%-30%) which is 50%-(-10%) whih is 50%+10%=60% (simple math)
A tank should have a defence of at least 80 to render it immune to small-arms fire which is the way things go usually. Infantry take the objectives but tanks beat infantry and: the very idea of a tank: a vehicle immune to small-arms. Mind that it is still possible to lower morale by being attacked. (Some thing also done in Epic 40k - incoming fire reduces a units overall effectiveness regardless of taking casualities. The very iea of suppressing fire)

We need to translate weapon strength from the main game into Armageddon mechanics.

Also, another game value is needed to depict quality differences betweeen weapons: armour value.
Units of the 40th century wear various types of armour protecting them from attacks.
I would try and implement them like this:
As we most likely will not have a saving throw mechanic implemented, we could go like armour being a bonus to defence, which can only be negated by weapons with the piercing trait.
Let us also implement armour in increments of 10% and get practical using an example:
A gretchin wears no armour and is hit by a Bolter for which I assume the following stats: STR 40; P -20%.
In the real game, a bolter negates armour types like flak armour but will be negotiated by carapace or better.
I suggest the formula: 50%-(ARM-P)-(DEF-STR)
Gamewise the chance to wound is 50%-(0-20%)-(20%-40%), which is 70% per hit. Mind, that the first term in brackets cannot become negative. If there is no armour to be negated, then piercing will have no further effect.
A Space Marine with DEF40 and Armour 35% is hit by a Lasgun, which has STR 30 and no P. We will get:
50%-(35%-0%)-(40%-30%) = 50%-35%-10%=5% which is a result I would totally understand. Only 5% of the Marines will be affected by the imperial flashlights. Which is somewhat in accord with how Space Marines feel, striding upright through enemy small arms fire and raking the enemy ranks with bolters.
We could translate this to tanks as well:
Imagine a Sentinel with DEF60% and ARM 30%. It will be immune to lasgun fire as combined 90% will drop 50% to 0% which is fine. In the game it is the same. Lasguns cannot hurt him.
Firing a Bolter, however would give: 50%-(30%-20%)-60%-40%)= 50%-10%-20%=20% so a Bolter can crack open a Sentinel...which it can in the board game as well. Mind, how piercing and strength work together.

While in the current game piercing just works a bonus strength, which is wrong, it should be used to negate armour which will protect from certain weapons.
We could imagine other values for more sturdy vehicles like DEF70/ARM70% for a Leman Russ MBT. You would need a high-power, piercing weapon like a Lascannon to hurt this which could come at STR90/P50% so a Lascannon hit will wound a LR in 30% of all cases which is somewhat about the same if fired in the tabletop. Firing the same Lascannon at a grot will result in a single dead grot - which is fine with me. So pick the targets for your weapons wisely.

Another important piece would be the possibility to use non-integers numerically. This will make possible to build squads with special weapons whilst emulating, that not every trooper is equipped equally. The engine should allow this and round mathematically. I will make my point with the following hypothetical unit:

Steel Legion Platoon with Flamers
Unit size: 35 (1 command squad+3 10-men squads)
Health: 1
Accuracy 50% ranged/50% melee (guard standard value)
DEF 30
Armour 15 (flak armour)

Weapons:
Lasgun short range Range 1 STR 30 P 0% Shots 2.4 Accuracy 100/100
Lasgun long range Range 2 STR 30 P0 Shots 1.6 Accuracy 100/100
Flamer Range 0 STR 40 P10 Shots 0.8 (0.2x4) Accuracy 200/200 TERROR
Sidearms Range 0 STR 25 P0 Shots 0.8 Accuracy 100/100

This will represent the following: Every 5th soldier is equipped with a flamer which is a weapon that hits automatically and inflicts 3.5 hits on the average (median of a d6) which is rounded up to 4 times the 0.2 which means only every 5th soldier carries one. It has a minor piercing effect and renders ork armour almost useless unless we have mega armour or 'ard boys. The other soldiers use sidearms like pistols and bayonets. 0.8 means that 4 of 5 soldiers will use this attack. The accuracy of 200 is needed to represent the auto-hits of the flamer template in the game. The lasgun is buffed to represent an officer present in the command squad using the first rank - fire, second rank - fire! command which grants an extra shot for rapid fire weapons like the lasguns

Compare this to this hypothetical conscript squad:

Steel Legion Conscripts
Unit size: 50 (1 mob of recruits)
Health: 1
Accuracy 40% ranged/40% melee (nerfed guard standard value)
DEF 30
Armour 15 (flak armour)

Weapons:
Lasgun short range Range 1 STR 30 P 0% Shots 2 Accuracy 100/100
Lasgun long range Range 2 STR 30 P0 Shots 1 Accuracy 100/100
Sidearms Range 0 STR 25 P0 Shots 1 Accuracy 100/100

This platoon has no officer, so lasguns are nerfed. Rapid fire weapon rules apply granting extra shots for close range.
In my book, implementing this is a must to make units with special weapons.
[to be continued]
Last edited by DocDesastro on Tue Feb 20, 2018 9:45 pm, edited 4 times in total.

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by deranzo » Tue Feb 20, 2018 10:31 am

@DocDesastro
This information will be great for improving the game even more.
I liked strength, defense and weapon values. If other people would agree to this, I will start working on immediately.
it is a good day to die

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by deranzo » Sat Mar 03, 2018 7:37 pm

I have created a small mod which balances units and weapons for new AA mechanic. Check it out in here: http://www.slitherine.com/forum/viewtop ... 26&t=82954
it is a good day to die

MartiusR
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:43 am

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by MartiusR » Sat May 12, 2018 8:53 pm

deranzo wrote:
MartiusR wrote:Hello Deranzo!

First of all - thanks a lot for your voluntarily made updates, you totally deserve for Emperor's grace and military decoration from Sebastian Yarrick himself!

I'm not sure if mu suggestions can be considered as "doable", but since you're much more responsive than developer (who is isually simply not responding), as well as very kind and polite, I'd like to ask you about possibility of implementation of two things:

1."Reparing" hot-seat mode - despite announcement from developer, there wasn't initially present hot-seat mode at all. Now - it's ridiculous, because it requires to be online and log into adequate service to "host" the game and "join" to your own game. The same idea of being online and logging into anything to play in hot-seat mode is prepasterous. I understand that it may be out of your reach to make "separate" hot-seat mode, but how about adding possiblity to create "offline" multiplayer game and join to it? Is it possible?

2.Range of fire - I admit that one of the aspects which are up to this moment for me a bit troublesome is range of fire of our units. Yeah, I can always check in unit description, but it would be much more comfortable to see some "view" directly on the map. Maybe different color of "range fields" would allow to deal with the issue with multiple weapons for one squad. And once again - is it somehow "doable"?

I'm not aware how much "tinkering" would it require to fullfill those suggestions (and if it's possible), but I'm guessing that it won't hurt to ask. Thank you in advance for reply! And thanks for your valuable effort and influence on WH40k: Armageddon!

I will do anything in my knowledge and skill MartiusR, thank you.
Hello Deranzo

Did you had any chance to take a look at "possibility" (of implementiation) of those suggestion?

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by deranzo » Thu May 17, 2018 5:30 pm

MartiusR wrote:
deranzo wrote:
MartiusR wrote:Hello Deranzo!

First of all - thanks a lot for your voluntarily made updates, you totally deserve for Emperor's grace and military decoration from Sebastian Yarrick himself!

I'm not sure if mu suggestions can be considered as "doable", but since you're much more responsive than developer (who is isually simply not responding), as well as very kind and polite, I'd like to ask you about possibility of implementation of two things:

1."Reparing" hot-seat mode - despite announcement from developer, there wasn't initially present hot-seat mode at all. Now - it's ridiculous, because it requires to be online and log into adequate service to "host" the game and "join" to your own game. The same idea of being online and logging into anything to play in hot-seat mode is prepasterous. I understand that it may be out of your reach to make "separate" hot-seat mode, but how about adding possiblity to create "offline" multiplayer game and join to it? Is it possible?

2.Range of fire - I admit that one of the aspects which are up to this moment for me a bit troublesome is range of fire of our units. Yeah, I can always check in unit description, but it would be much more comfortable to see some "view" directly on the map. Maybe different color of "range fields" would allow to deal with the issue with multiple weapons for one squad. And once again - is it somehow "doable"?

I'm not aware how much "tinkering" would it require to fullfill those suggestions (and if it's possible), but I'm guessing that it won't hurt to ask. Thank you in advance for reply! And thanks for your valuable effort and influence on WH40k: Armageddon!

I will do anything in my knowledge and skill MartiusR, thank you.
Hello Deranzo

Did you had any chance to take a look at "possibility" (of implementiation) of those suggestion?
Hot Seat mode is beyond my existing skills, sorry :/

For range of fire; you can see always see without entering unit details screen which weapon can fire at enemy when you hover over it as red font as unavailable and green as avaliable for fire. I didn't understand what you want exactly?
it is a good day to die

MartiusR
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Corporal - 5 cm Pak 38
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Sep 03, 2017 11:43 am

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by MartiusR » Sun May 20, 2018 12:40 am

Sure Deranzo, I understand. I was keeping in mind from the beginning, that "hot-seat case" may be indeed extremely hard to implement, thanks anyway for taking a look into it!

Regarding range - yes, I know that by default game is showing those red circles as units, which may be attacked by your currently selected unit.

BUT - it's missing quite vital thing, with which weapon(s) your unit can hit marked enemy? It's quite important especially for units with multiple weapons (tanks, titans etc.). It's probably very well visible if you ever had situation with artillery unit, let's say basilisk, which had come too close to enemy - you have then enemy marked with red circle, but it's only because the basic machine gun is capable of attacking enemy, artillery cannon is "out of minimal range".

Yeah, I know that in every unit's description there is mentioned range of weapon, but I feel that it would be more comfortable (and intuitive) if there would be somehow marked what weapons will use our unit during attack on chosen enemy's squad.

deranzo
Warhammer Designer
Warhammer Designer
Posts: 159
Joined: Wed Mar 22, 2017 12:53 pm

Re: Fixes, minor additions, suggestions, bug reports for 1.1

Post by deranzo » Thu May 31, 2018 6:41 pm

MartiusR wrote:Sure Deranzo, I understand. I was keeping in mind from the beginning, that "hot-seat case" may be indeed extremely hard to implement, thanks anyway for taking a look into it!

Regarding range - yes, I know that by default game is showing those red circles as units, which may be attacked by your currently selected unit.

BUT - it's missing quite vital thing, with which weapon(s) your unit can hit marked enemy? It's quite important especially for units with multiple weapons (tanks, titans etc.). It's probably very well visible if you ever had situation with artillery unit, let's say basilisk, which had come too close to enemy - you have then enemy marked with red circle, but it's only because the basic machine gun is capable of attacking enemy, artillery cannon is "out of minimal range".

Yeah, I know that in every unit's description there is mentioned range of weapon, but I feel that it would be more comfortable (and intuitive) if there would be somehow marked what weapons will use our unit during attack on chosen enemy's squad.
Sorry MartiusR, I haven't been around for days.
Can you please show a representitive picture about what you want?
it is a good day to die

Post Reply

Return to “Warhammer® 40,000® Armageddon™”