.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
World Supremacy- Save $9.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPMBT
Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old September 28th, 2011, 01:58 PM
iCaMpWiThAWP's Avatar

iCaMpWiThAWP iCaMpWiThAWP is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Brazil/France/Somewhere over the Atlantic
Posts: 660
Thanks: 21
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
iCaMpWiThAWP is on a distinguished road
Default No Building rubble

In the save game attached, buildings destroyed show the graphic of a destroyed building, but the terrain isn't shown as building rubble, it's recognised as: "Building - Hole" or just "hole" even though there was a building that got destroyed in the hex.

IIRC the buildings were destroyed by russian 122mm arty and rockets.

Nations concerned are France and Russia.
Date is Oct 2013.
French Delay/Russian Advance.
I manually changed map gen settings.
Check Hex 33.48 and the surrounding ones for example.
Attached Files
File Type: rar Saved Games.rar (95.1 KB, 68 views)
__________________
I am not responsible for any damage your brains may suffer by reading the text above
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old September 29th, 2011, 02:46 AM
RightDeve's Avatar

RightDeve RightDeve is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Yogyakarta, Nusantara
Posts: 468
Thanks: 99
Thanked 104 Times in 65 Posts
RightDeve is on a distinguished road
Default Re: No Building rubble

Wow I guess that's how a destroyed building is always depicted in WinSP all this time? Those with "rough + hole" are usually buildings which are completely demolished (like when you ram it with heavy vehicles, "collapsed"). Those with "stone building + hole" are destroyed buildings but they're not yet collapsed. As far as I know there's no "rubble" terrain in SP.

Destroyed buildings and collapsed buildings have their own graphic representation, but not so clear and distinctive. You may confuse the two, best way is to look at the red bar on top of screen to know whether they're collapsed or destroyed.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old September 29th, 2011, 07:00 AM
iCaMpWiThAWP's Avatar

iCaMpWiThAWP iCaMpWiThAWP is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Brazil/France/Somewhere over the Atlantic
Posts: 660
Thanks: 21
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
iCaMpWiThAWP is on a distinguished road
Default Re: No Building rubble

Quote:
Originally Posted by RightDeve View Post
Wow I guess that's how a destroyed building is always depicted in WinSP all this time? Those with "rough + hole" are usually buildings which are completely demolished (like when you ram it with heavy vehicles, "collapsed"). Those with "stone building + hole" are destroyed buildings but they're not yet collapsed. As far as I know there's no "rubble" terrain in SP.

Destroyed buildings and collapsed buildings have their own graphic representation, but not so clear and distinctive. You may confuse the two, best way is to look at the red bar on top of screen to know whether they're collapsed or destroyed.
Ugh, there's actually a difference betweed destroyed and collapsed?
Btw, i must have ignored this for really long lol...
__________________
I am not responsible for any damage your brains may suffer by reading the text above
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old September 29th, 2011, 11:35 AM

Gurachn Gurachn is offline
Private
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 45
Thanks: 9
Thanked 3 Times in 3 Posts
Gurachn is on a distinguished road
Default Re: No Building rubble

Quote:
Originally Posted by iCaMpWiThAWP View Post
Ugh, there's actually a difference betweed destroyed and collapsed?

I'm curious about the distinction as well.
Is a destroyed building still basically standing, but somehow uninhabitable?
A collapsed one has pancaked, but not to the point where you would consider it destroyed?


Are their differences in movement costs or cover values?
????

I must say I haven't actually noticed the distinction either.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old September 29th, 2011, 11:54 AM
RightDeve's Avatar

RightDeve RightDeve is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Yogyakarta, Nusantara
Posts: 468
Thanks: 99
Thanked 104 Times in 65 Posts
RightDeve is on a distinguished road
Default Re: No Building rubble

Yes, there's actually a difference. Might better lower your in-game text speed in the preferences screen and you'll see this message ***Structure Collapses*** on the bottom of the screen if you have a building smashed completely by heavy arty or bulldozed by heavy or engineer tanks.

Try playing scenario number 17 "South of Beirut", there's a couple of zionist bulldozers you can use to "collapse" some buildings.

I don't know exactly which one is better for cover, "collapsed" or "destroyed/damaged" buildings but I have a feeling that collapsed ones are less capable of offering covers due to their being completely smashed off already. There's still a good deal of movement cost required to traverse either type be it vehicle or infantry. But there's one difference: your tanks or any vehicles will not be immobilized if you go through collapsed buildings, unlike those damaged buildings.

"Damaged" buildings I think are those which have received some damage to their structure but still standing and hence the rubble coupled with the still standing structure create a maze perfect for cover. "Collapsed" ones are those completely smashed off to the ground and may incur casualties to any units experiencing the collapse inside.

AFAIK

Last edited by RightDeve; September 29th, 2011 at 12:15 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old September 29th, 2011, 10:07 PM
Mobhack's Avatar

Mobhack Mobhack is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dundee
Posts: 5,929
Thanks: 441
Thanked 1,855 Times in 1,219 Posts
Mobhack is on a distinguished road
Default Re: No Building rubble

Quote:
Originally Posted by iCaMpWiThAWP View Post
In the save game attached, buildings destroyed show the graphic of a destroyed building, but the terrain isn't shown as building rubble, it's recognised as: "Building - Hole" or just "hole" even though there was a building that got destroyed in the hex.

IIRC the buildings were destroyed by russian 122mm arty and rockets.

Nations concerned are France and Russia.
Date is Oct 2013.
French Delay/Russian Advance.
I manually changed map gen settings.
Check Hex 33.48 and the surrounding ones for example.

If a building hex is destroyed the building symbol is removed, being replaced with damaged buildings symbol, and the terrain type is marked as rough + shell hole and terrain type "Building" is removed.

There is a "building collapsed" message if you e.g. drive a tank into such a hex and bring the building down, which may be the source of your confusion?. (Vehicles may stick if they enter a built up hex).

There is no such terrain type as "rubble". A collapsed building becomes rough (good protection - may cost more MP) + shell hole (+more good protection - but costs MP to traverse).

The game is doing what it has always done, i.e. no "bug".

Andy
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Mobhack For This Useful Post:
  #7  
Old September 29th, 2011, 10:30 PM
RightDeve's Avatar

RightDeve RightDeve is offline
Second Lieutenant
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Yogyakarta, Nusantara
Posts: 468
Thanks: 99
Thanked 104 Times in 65 Posts
RightDeve is on a distinguished road
Default Re: No Building rubble

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobhack View Post

A collapsed building becomes rough (good protection - may cost more MP) + shell hole (+more good protection - but costs MP to traverse).

Andy
So Mobhack, do collapsed buildings offer more cover and protection than those merely damaged? I mean, is "rough + hole" better than "stone building + hole" ?
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old September 30th, 2011, 04:26 AM
Mobhack's Avatar

Mobhack Mobhack is offline
National Security Advisor
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Dundee
Posts: 5,929
Thanks: 441
Thanked 1,855 Times in 1,219 Posts
Mobhack is on a distinguished road
Default Re: No Building rubble

Quote:
Originally Posted by RightDeve View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobhack View Post

A collapsed building becomes rough (good protection - may cost more MP) + shell hole (+more good protection - but costs MP to traverse).

Andy
So Mobhack, do collapsed buildings offer more cover and protection than those merely damaged? I mean, is "rough + hole" better than "stone building + hole" ?
I have no idea - the code is spaghetti, not table driven. I have absolutely no desire to hand navigate through several different incestuous functions for a man-day or so, just to figure out.

Probably though, rough + shell hole is the better of the 2. (We added the rough about 10 years back in the DOS days, IIRC it was only a shell hole in the original SSI code. Rough is a very good defence terrain, esp for stationary infantry/guns/teams and I vaguely recall doing that so that collapsed buildings were of some use defensively).

Also depends if you are a vehicle or infantry, against direct fire or indirect etc...

Andy
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old September 30th, 2011, 12:54 PM

Griefbringer Griefbringer is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 385
Thanks: 1
Thanked 75 Times in 67 Posts
Griefbringer is on a distinguished road
Default Re: No Building rubble

Rough terrain is certainly safer in the sense that there is no danger of it collapsing on you. Infantry units can get hurt quite badly if they are located on a collapsing building. Then again, any attack that can cause a building to collapse also means bad news for infantry.

I did a quick experiment with placing 12 infantry squads into wooden buildings and then using engineering tanks to collapse those buildings. In this case, units in the collapsing buildings took 0-4 casualties from the collapse, but did not suffer any suppression from it.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old September 30th, 2011, 02:00 PM
iCaMpWiThAWP's Avatar

iCaMpWiThAWP iCaMpWiThAWP is offline
First Lieutenant
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Brazil/France/Somewhere over the Atlantic
Posts: 660
Thanks: 21
Thanked 30 Times in 19 Posts
iCaMpWiThAWP is on a distinguished road
Default Re: No Building rubble

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mobhack View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by iCaMpWiThAWP View Post
In the save game attached, buildings destroyed show the graphic of a destroyed building, but the terrain isn't shown as building rubble, it's recognised as: "Building - Hole" or just "hole" even though there was a building that got destroyed in the hex.

IIRC the buildings were destroyed by russian 122mm arty and rockets.

Nations concerned are France and Russia.
Date is Oct 2013.
French Delay/Russian Advance.
I manually changed map gen settings.
Check Hex 33.48 and the surrounding ones for example.

If a building hex is destroyed the building symbol is removed, being replaced with damaged buildings symbol, and the terrain type is marked as rough + shell hole and terrain type "Building" is removed.

There is a "building collapsed" message if you e.g. drive a tank into such a hex and bring the building down, which may be the source of your confusion?. (Vehicles may stick if they enter a built up hex).

There is no such terrain type as "rubble". A collapsed building becomes rough (good protection - may cost more MP) + shell hole (+more good protection - but costs MP to traverse).

The game is doing what it has always done, i.e. no "bug".

Andy
Oh, yes, my mistake, thanks for the clearance.
__________________
I am not responsible for any damage your brains may suffer by reading the text above
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:23 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.