Today's 1.2 update!

I still want to know WHEN!!!! But good things come to those that wait. A lot of interesting gameplay changes are comming, we shall see how they play out.

1.2 PATCH UPDATE
Well folks, we're getting down to the wire with our 1.2 patch. We'll be testing the fixes below and if all goes well you should see it soon. The patch will fix the following items:

NETWORK/SERVER FIXES

Server CPU usage improvements
Remote console application is now fixed
Neutral flag/Spawn location bug fixed
Bug causing soldier animation states to be dropped fixed
Reconnection problems fixed
The ASE.dll "Failed to execute ASEQuery_init()" error is fixed
Bound sockets are released correctly
No longer need to reissue the "min.enableRemoteConsole/enableRemoteAdmin" commands when the server restarts
Bocage CTF corrupted data fixed
People playing on a server should no longer be dropped during map-switches
Added feedback when the server registers a weapon hit. Shows with the crosshair flashes
CLIENT FIXES

GAMEPLAY TWEAKS:
Increased jeep's sensitivity to shells (one shot/one kill)
Increased B-17 rate of fire for better carpet bombing
Increased damage for MG42 and Browning vs. infantry
Increased damage caused by airplane machineguns vs. other planes
Increased AA gun damage vs. infantry (1 shot/1 kill in torso/head)
Increased knife damage distance
Increased Tiger tank health by 25%
Slightly increased damage for MP40, MP18 and Thompson vs. infantry
Decreased grenades damage vs. tanks by 33%
Decreased deviation for pistol when running
Fixed M10 being considered as a jeep for splash damage
CHEATS REMOVED:
Cheat: Long View Distance is no longer working
Cheat: Wireframe is no longer working
Cheat: Turning Off Fog is no longer working
SOUND IMPROVEMENTS & OPTIMIZATIONS:
Irregular looping sounds and/or loss of sounds, bug has been fixed
Redundant sound state changes removed
Memory usage optimizations
Physics engine improved, (example: the mine on the sinking jeep issue is fixed)
Improved Security, copy protection, and connection performance
Totally new file structure
AI OPTIMIZATION:
Bots do not jump in and out of vehicles anymore
Bots have improved mobility and behavior while sitting in tank turrets
LINUX SERVER
This is still being debugged. We've got a nasty bug with client connections being detected. Once that's out of the way we'll go into full beta testing with the Linux server.

Sounds pretty impressive!

I wouldn't mind if they reduced grenade damage 10% overall, and made the tiger less bouncy to drive.

Grenade damage is one of my pet peeves. There are too many and they do too much. The ability to grenade spam from ammo boxes irks me too.

In my opinion they could reduce the effectiveness against tanks a bit more, especialy splash damage against tanks considering you don't damage a tank with the splash damage from a tank's main gun why should a grenade?

I agree with you about effectiveness against infantry and I also think there should be a longer reload time for them from ammo boxes so the spam would be spaced out if you are sitting at a box. I would also give troops no more than 2 a piece.

But these are just my opinions. I did not make the game and will play it anyway.

I'm really glad they're increasing plane vs. plane damage; I think it may have been the biggest problem with the game. I have literally hit other planes with 400 rounds or more without even making them smoke. I realize that lag is certainly a factor, but I think the minute plane vs. plane damage is the main culprit. After the patch, plane vs. plane combat will be much more important since, at this time, anti-aircraft guns are the only really dependable way to take down enemy aircraft.

/Nod

I agree with you Pal. I have literaly emptied my ammo as a fighter into other fighters and done nothing. Seems right now if you can't hit the engine you can't damage them.

> Increased Tiger tank health by 25%

Sheesh! Aren't Tigers tough enuf already? :)

No, not really, Moriarity.

http://www.combatmission.com/images/oddball.jpg

If they're going to weaken grenades against tanks, then they should strengthen the bazookas. If your take the anti-tank loadout, you've given up the ability to kill infantry efficiently. You ought to be able to kill tanks.

Under this new patch, the only thing that can really smash a tank is an airplane, which I think is far too effective against tanks. And you don't have airplanes on every map.

Used correctly the bazooka can kill a tank with 1 shot. I think that's pretty realistic.

I watched a History channel show last night, and they had some old German guys talking about German bazookas. They said they would frequently hit tanks with 3 or 4 bazooka shots and they still wouldn't go down - and that's against Shermans.

Besides, this Tiger is a peice of junk! The fuel pump leaks!

http://www.grossdachshund.com/newimages/moriarty.jpg

If you pick your shots as an AT soldier, they can be reasonably effective. I'm happy with the balance from both perspectives.

Shots that hit flat on (90 degree angle) are more effective then shots at shallow angles. Rear shots to the most damage, followed by side shots.

A square on shot to the rear of a light tank (MKIV, Sherman, Chi-ha, T34) will destroy a tank in full health. The heavier tanks will take 2-3 shots in the rear.

Cover favors the AT soldier. If you can stalk a talk, assuming its not driving flat out somewhere, you bide your time and wait for the perfect shot. I've followed tanks for a couple blocks in Stalingrad before taking a shot.

Enough with the negative waves Moriarity!!!! :D

I agree that the bazooka is roughly historically accurate. But if you want to get historical, then the game is totally missing the big danger to WWII tanks: anti-tank guns. Those were the real tank killers.

In fact, when I first started playing BF1942, I just assumed that the AA gun emplacements were AT guns. From the realistic WWII games I've played, especially Combat Mission, the guns on the ground were AT guns and artillery pieces much more often than AA. The AA guns were often light enough to be mounted on a halftrack or tank chassis, while with the heavier AT guns and arty pieces it was more practical to tow them. It seems strange to have no AT guns on a WWII battlefield.

The handheld AT weapons were not the real tank killers; they were only there to give infantry a fighting chance against tanks. BF1942 gives a reasonable idea of what it was like to kill a tank with a bazooka. It worked well in a well-executed sneak attack, but it wasn't something to rely on in a straight-up slugfest. The only big things that are missing are: 1) bazookas had blowback behind the firer, so you couldn't use them safely in confined spaces, and 2) real tank killing is much more of an all-or-nothing affair. Either you penetrate the armor or you don't. If you get through the armor, you'll probably kill a crewman, break a tread, disable the gun, or maybe hit the ammo and set the whole thing on fire.

So I see the AT outfit as not just a bazooka / panzershreck, but also as an AT gun replacement. That's why I don't think it's strong enough. Once they neuter the grenades, the real burden of tank-killing will fall to airplanes. A perfect bazooka shot may take 1/3 off a heavy tank with a long reload time, but a perfect plane attack will take 80% in an instant. Once they do this patch, maps without airplanes will be dominated by tanks.

blowback is an option like friendly fire, default is off.

I think Leo is talking about the back blast from the bazooka rocket.

I would suspect we'll never see that in BF1942.

Leo is talking about WWIIOL there :)

You either penetrate or it bounces off in WWIIOL. I like that. But BF1942 works when I just want to blow stuff up.

Grenades will not be useless against tanks in the next patch, just nerfed a bit.

I also think that bazooka's should deal out more damage to tanks for ballance.

AT guns would be nice as permanent emplacements. Especialy at the permanent, uncapturable facilities as they would make sense there.

The 'coastal defense' guns make excellent anti-tank guns. They're just pointed the wrong way.....

You can use them as such in some maps (Iwo Jima, Wake), but I don't think any maps to date have placed them for the express purpose of blowing up tanks. Perhaps future maps will take advantage of that.

It may just be me, but I think the defguns are too easily destroyed.

I would suggest that they be made much stronger, so as to be an actual defense gun rather than an easily killed target, and in turn have them spawn back in at a reduced rate.

But what do I know?

After tonight's practice, I'm convinced that the plane ruins the game. I thought that a perfect hit could do 80% damage on a light tank. Oh no! It can do 100% on a heavy tank, as Z demonstrated tonight.

It's just silly. There are no AA guns on Guadalcanal. There's really no efficient way to shoot a plane down. I was reduced to firing my rifle into the air.

Thinking about it, I guess that the reason for the machine guns on the light tanks is to shoot planes - to give the tanks a fighting chance against the planes. Maybe, at least on that map, it's a tactic worth trying.

What they really ought to have is a bomber that bombs and a fighter that shoots down bombers. It looks like they were going in that direction and then switched off at the last moment to the fighter-bomber, with the B-17 thrown in.

The fighter bomber thing has confused me too. There have been complaints on other boards that the fighter bombs are just too much.

It has also been speculated that the MG on top of the tank is best for AA work, as it is way hard to fight infantry. But with the fighter able to take out even a heavy tank with one well placed bomb makes trying to shoot one with the MG a bit tough as it would take severl passes for the MG to do a lot of damage. Once air to air machinegunning gets tweaked the effectiveness of air cover may get better since it is very hard to shoot down aircraft from behind right now.

I do think that fighter bombs should be weaker, just to ballance them with the bomber. Would you take a stuka or a 109 at an airfield right now? The stuka has a few more bombs and can drop two at a time but moves slow and turns slow, about as sluggish as the B-17 it seemes. While the fighter is far more agile, about the same toughness maybe (not sure about that), and while it only drops one bomb is as effective on the battlefield. The bomber type planes seem only good for taking out ships which can be of use but not as essential as ground support. Personaly I would go for the fighter and only take the bomber if I wanted to fly and all the fighters were gone.

We shall see how things play out with the next update (grr, I'm getting patch feever here) and in the future they may decide to tone down fighter bombing effectiveness but it may be in line with their vision. Hard to tell.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by [AK]Leonidas
It's just silly. There are no AA guns on Guadalcanal. There's really no efficient way to shoot a plane down. I was reduced to firing my rifle into the air.

---

There are AA guns on Guadal... look again.

And yes, using the tank and halftrack guns against planes works. You just have to hit them in the engine a few times.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by [AK]Widowmaker
It has also been speculated that the MG on top of the tank is best for AA work, as it is way hard to fight infantry. But with the fighter able to take out even a heavy tank with one well placed bomb makes trying to shoot one with the MG a bit tough as it would take severl passes for the MG to do a lot of damage.

---

Don't park your tank out in the open... Use the buildings for cover.

It's not the parking that's the problem. Our tanks died mostly when they were en route from our main base to the village.

Air superiourity rules this game. I'm glad Zorro is on our side. :)

I have more comments on the matter, but they're better suited to the private forum.

According the the EA site, 1.2 is almost done. I'd expect it in a week, hopefully less.