When will the south African and Angolan army lists be done, seem to have been waiting ages for these

Quote from: Lordhay on 01 March 2023, 09:00:29 AMWhen will the south African and Angolan army lists be done, seem to have been waiting ages for these

Those are scheduled for batch 5 so it's probably going to be sometime in the summer, possibly towards the end of the year for those.  We've got to get the Korean War supplement done first and then we can start looking at new lists again in May/June time.

It has gone quiet on the list front. We need more lists

Quote from: flamingpig0 on 08 June 2023, 05:00:13 PMIt has gone quiet on the list front. We need more lists

With the Korean supplement done now, we can shift attention back to Cold War and some more lists.

Hi Leon

How do you indicate if an army list has been updated?  I suggest you put the date to the right of the list name above whenever you update a list, so we can easily spot if there have been any changes

Regards

Chris

Quote from: Lordhay on 01 March 2023, 09:00:29 AMWhen will the south African and Angolan army lists be done, seem to have been waiting ages for these

YES

At the moment, all CWC list drafting effort/energy/brainpower is being focused on what I'm calling the 'continuity project'.  Which is about ironing out some of the easily identified errata - from the launch list errata thread - and also ensuring that all the stats across all the lists are consistent. So a BTR-40 in one list is pretty much the same across all lists by way of its stats and points costs. That will then be fed into the new CWC army list calculator.

The reason this has taken priority over any new lists (at present) is that currently I'm just compounding the 'continuity issue' when producing any new lists, and that is especially so where I'm introducing 'new' or more 'exotic' vehicles.
However, I/we are not that far off completing all the 'continuity project' issues - I am just wading my way through all the various Soviet designed ATGWs  but I am getting there (slowly).

There is also a whole batch of new lists included in the 'continuity project' - these include what I refer to as the Southern NATO lists and other European states.

Once the continuity project is done, all the lists will be updated & republished (online) and the CWC army list calculator will also be launched. Then I can look at the Southern African lists.

Cheers
Mark

Hi Leon.

Are the army lists updated at intervals to correct Errata etc? How will we know when a list has been updated?

It would be useful if you could add the following text after the list name "last updated on (date)" whenever a list is updated. Then we will know if we need to download it again.

Rgds
Chris

Quote from: Superscribe on 23 February 2024, 10:35:05 AMAre the army lists updated at intervals to correct Errata etc? How will we know when a list has been updated?

It would be useful if you could add the following text after the list name "last updated on (date)" whenever a list is updated. Then we will know if we need to download it again.

None of the lists have been updated with Errata as yet, but when they are there will be a note at the end to say what's been changed.

 

Hi Leon

Munitions seem to have been omitted for aircraft and off-table artillery on the British, Bundeswehr and Belgian Army Lists. Can you please update asap

Regards

Chris

All are being updated as part of the Continuity Project. Which is progressing well.

Cheers
Mark

Hi Mark

Any estimated timescale for completion of the Continuity Project?

Rgds
Chris

Quote from: Superscribe on 28 March 2024, 12:58:29 PMAny estimated timescale for completion of the Continuity Project?

The master spreadsheet is complete now so it's a case of transferring all of the revised data into the PDF army lists.  That's quite a task so it'll be something for after Salute.

Great!

Can I ask if the Continuity Project master spreadsheet is being checked by some independent volunteer proof-reader/fact-checker? 

I'd hate for all this work to be done and pdfs published for individual countries, and yet again we find various continuity errors or nomenclature slip-ups marring the finished product.

Quote from: dylan on 31 March 2024, 08:05:44 PMGreat!

Can I ask if the Continuity Project master spreadsheet is being checked by some independent volunteer proof-reader/fact-checker? 

I'd hate for all this work to be done and pdfs published for individual countries, and yet again we find various continuity errors or nomenclature slip-ups marring the finished product.

The advantage of publishing lists on-line is that any minor errors (& there will always be some) can easily be corrected.

To put this project into context - there are over 5,000 unit stats and 12 columns per unit that have been reviewed and checked. It has taken over 6 months to go through these line-by-line and cross-reference each against each-other. There is also a huge amount of subjectivity in a lot of the factors, as a lot of the information is often contested or unconfirmed - even with vehicles that you'd think are pretty commonly known.

TBF the very best form of cross-checking and proof-reading is going to be the wider CWC II player community, who will (no-doubt) be the first to review their favorite list and send in comments 

Happy Easter

Going off the book rather any already released errata:

I presume the T-10 tank has been corrected, currently it is an uber-tank more akin to the Is-7, certainly not better than the Conqueror; and the British towed artillery being manhandled 50cm......

Oh yes, before I forget, the Vigilant ATGW has a range of 1375m, which is 65cm, not the current 185cm (!)

I'm not sure why Malkara has 10D6 versus infantry in the open compared to 5D6 against a tank. I know it's a monstrous 8" HESH warhead but if it was that good agin' soft targets everyone would have had one.

Quote from: sultanbev on 02 April 2024, 09:01:46 AMI'm not sure why Malkara has 10D6 versus infantry in the open compared to 5D6 against a tank. I know it's a monstrous 8" HESH warhead but if it was that good agin' soft targets everyone would have had one.

Its MCLOS so  wouldn't hit anybody

Quote from: flamingpig0 on 02 April 2024, 10:57:07 AMIts MCLOS so  wouldn't hit anybody

Its large wings were a great disadvantage as well...

Quote from: flamingpig0 on 02 April 2024, 10:57:07 AMIts MCLOS so  wouldn't hit anybody

ATGW cannot be fired at INF: units only vehicles - so the effect is what would happen if it hit a Truck or a 4x4