Manual for Graviteam Tactics ??

[chashka17]

Gloriously liberated

I agree, I often wonder "wtf were they thinking" taking back the Crown in 1660, a sentiment curiously frowned upon during Jubilees... 

Labour - from Middle English.
Laboratory - shortening of Latin laboratorium.  People got tired of saying-um at the end of every noun. 

-tray ??  There is no accent on the final 'e' if that is what you are referring to.

Consider - the most taboo modern English expletives are just every-day Saxon nouns.  P**s being French doesn't have quite the same type of condemnation as f*** or c*** -  a legacy of the Normans & refugee nobles from 1797 that still affects all English speakers. 
I recall being told 'c***' was fighting talk Stateside, in the UK that isn't always the case.  Still some Saxon peasants about. 

[Dane49]

Yeah,the invading Romans,Danes and Normans all left their mark on the English language,wonder what the language would sound like today if the Spanish Armada had defeated the English navy in the 1500's and were able to successfully invade England from the Spanish Netherlands.

[Flashburn]

Yeah,the invading Romans,Danes and Normans all left their mark on the English language,wonder what the language would sound like today if the Spanish Armada had defeated the English navy in the 1500's and were able to successfully invade England from the Spanish Netherlands.

1 generation and they would call themselves Englishman.......

[Tanker]

Gloriously liberated

-tray ??  There is no accent on the final 'e' if that is what you are referring to.

Consider - the most taboo modern English expletives are just every-day Saxon nouns.  P**s being French doesn't have quite the same type of condemnation as f*** or c*** -  a legacy of the Normans & refugee nobles from 1797 that still affects all English speakers. 
I recall being told 'c***' was fighting talk Stateside, in the UK that isn't always the case.  Still some Saxon peasants about. 

There may not be an accent on the e but re does not sound like er to me.

Being referred to as a c*** makes some women upset but if the shoe fits, wear it I say.  Sometimes that particular shoe fits to perfection.

[chashka17]

Remaining wildly off the topic of manuals
@ Dane - Off the top of my head, Spanish seems to have been quite successfully marginalized in GB EN, nearest common usage comes from food & cheap holidays.  Check out the 'comedy' show "Benidorm" to see the horror of it all! 
English sailors are apparently responsible for the Spanish term 'Gringo', as they sang 'green grow the rushes oh' whilst working/rigging their ships.  Spanish speakers hearing this endless chant picked the refrain as a suitable label for the creators of the dreadful row. 

@ Tanker - sounds like vs looks like, this reminds me of the classic movie parodies of Brooklyn girls 'mis-pronunciations', how we expect things to be vs our familiarity with what they might be.  [Not that I'm saying you are a girl &/or from Brooklyn.] 
Speaking languages other than English helps I think, learning French will cure you of accenting re by default.  Cajun could be a first step
Then you can thank the Normans for providing you with the appropriate expletives. 

& on topic
Translating Russian to English is an interesting task.  Creating a good manual that is able to be updated as the game develops is clearly no easy job.  I can see why GT have struggled with that side of things.  Volunteers seem to be needed...

[Tanker]

Lack of familiarity with French was not the reason centre was changed to center in the American colonies.  Maybe it was changed due to the French being our foes in the French and Indian War.  But I suspect the real reason is that it does not make sense phonetically.  While many spellings don't make sense phonetically in English to this day, at least we got this change right. 

I tell my Spanish wife that it is how we tell who the foreigners are when she complains about the spelling and sounding inconsistencies of English.  That is why it is much more difficult to learn to speak English as an adult.  An adult will intellectullay question why the combination of the same letters, bow for instance, when pronounced one particular way means the prow of a ship but the same combination of letters pronounced differently means a pretty knot tied on a gift box.  Children just accept through repitition that pronunciation in English is often context based.

Way off topic but interesting, at least to me.

[Dane49]

Noah Webster was the chief architect and reformer in changing the way Americans spell English words.


"Noah Webster was struck by the inconsistencies of English spelling and the obstacles it presented to learners (young and old alike) and resented that American classrooms were filled only with British textbooks. The spelling reform featured in his first dictionary, A Compendious Dictionary of the English Language, was based on the author's combined vision of logic and aesthetics. He changed the –ce in words like defence, offence, and pretence to –se; abandoned the second, silent "l" in verbs such as travel and cancel when forming the past tense; dropped the "u" from words such as humour and colour; and dropped the "k" from words such as publick and musick. The "publick" readily accepted many of these changes and just as readily rejected some of the others. "

[wodin]

I can not recommend this game anymore..it was a tough job after all the complaint son how hard APK43 was to play..now a newbie really wouldn't have a clue. Shame.

[Dane49]

Yeah,I'm sure it's just as easy to fire up a Combat Mission game and start playing with no experience.

What seems to be your problem lately with this game Wodin?

Is it because it's not like Combat Mission or is it because you aren't seeing the DLCs you would prefer?

[Beelzeboss]

Most people find that in-game help system is not enough, it don't solve all questions and it even makes more new ones. Most players wants the manual. I think there is nothing more to say

[Flashburn]

Most people find that in-game help system is not enough, it don't solve all questions and it even makes more new ones. Most players wants the manual. I think there is nothing more to say

I WOULD not say most players want manuals.........  I would say alot of old timer war gamer sorts about.  AND THEY want manuals.     Krabb is working hard on his wiki.  ANd anyone can add info in.................  Its something NOW for community.  PLus maybe some stuff on various tactics.  GT/apos stuff........well you CAN do alot of legit real world things both in turn based movements and in the actual fights.  Some real evil sneaky stuff! And it works!  Just like it reality more than not.   

[andrey12345]

The manual does not have to disclose all aspects and features of the game, or lose an important and interesting part - investigation by player. It is desirable that for the beginning did not have anything to read. We have also game, not a visit to the library.
I hope that sooner or later there will be no need for the manual is almost completely, even in the form of gaming assistant. Work at least we will make every effort to this.

[Shadrach]

I am not sure I agree that a (good) manual does not have to document every aspect of the game and its features. However, I fully understand that lack of resources and time is a limitation here.

And yes, part of the fun is sometimes learning stuff on your own I remember the artillery system seemed like some kind of black magic for me, but I managed after a while to figure out the basics. With a little help from the forums I learned even more - but there is still things that are "greek" (should I say "cyrillic"??) to me about the use of artillery.

The in-game help, while helpful, is kind of limited though, I would much prefer some kind of simple text with images pointing out the important things and what icons mean etc.

I would love to contribute to some kind of wiki as well, making screenshots etc.

[chashka17]

Andrey is correct in his plan as far as I'm concerned.  + There is a lot to be gained by just experimenting as a newcomer.   Just gotta keep banging away. 
Hard copies vs on-line help which can be dynamically updated is a no-brainer.  'Modern' gamers also seem to prefer in-game help (e.g. IMO Civilization V has a great help system, AP/GT could benefit from that encyclopedic approach.)
*
I know many newbies are put off when there is no clear instruction/manual, I found APK43 impenetrable at first esp. as I was so used to other RTS games, then it all started to fall into place. I would now not go back to the 'fixed positions' of cast in stone manuals & C&C type game logic.  I'd be bored way too fast.

My position is that a serious wargame requires effort to see the beauty of the code & simulation, as long as there is something to get me started & a forum where grogs can assist I think a learning curve that allows for software development is achievable.  Just like a real war.

There seem to be quite a few newbies who gave up at first then returning months later realized what a great game AP is.  If that first impression could be tempered more effectively it would be a win/win for GT & the community.



OT
@ Tanker - reason I mentioned FR & Cajun was due to the French presence in the 'early' period. (Louisiana etc).  To some extent the choice of spelling might have gone either way.  Speaking French alters expectations of symbol <-> sound in the case or re & er. 

The actual change as Dane pointed out was down to local efforts (Webster et al).   I think the distancing from the GB influence via language was necessary for American self-determination.  Removal of French influence would also be part of that distancing I presume.  I doubt John Adams would have objected to ditching the French influence after his time in France. 

GB English underwent a similar move in the 1700s with Samuel Johnson & his dictionary.  Local (Sub) cultural influences were quite deeply attacked leaving only local people to use what effectively became ethnic & officially 'frowned upon' words.  e.g GB English has a quite clear South vs North language divide reified in part through this.

IMO Learning English is tough not just because of irregular spelling but because it is irregular in format.  Compared to Latin based languages there is no consistent format with regular verbs etc. 

I feel the question of sound vs symbol is a whole other can of worms. Take English <-> Chinese, multiple schools of possible transcription, some of which work better than others subject to the individual.

[sandman2575]

The important point is getting lost here in quibbling over what constitutes a proper "manual" or not.

The essential point is:  Graviteam isn't doing enough to provide clear explanations and illustrations of the game's constantly evolving features and mechanics.

As others have said, the in-game Help tutorial is not nearly deep enough to explain a lot of these features. 

I am a big believer in 'learning by doing,' so I understand in part the idea that 'you won't learn by a manual anyway, just play and figure it out.' 

However, when the learning curve is as steep as it is in GTOS --even for players familiar with similar titles like Combat Mission or Theatre of War -- the 'just figure it out on your own' approach doesn't really work.  It's a recipe for scaring new players off.  Andrey's idea that it's desirable that a new player "have nothing to read" is idealistic but in the case of a game as complex as GTOS, completely unrealistic.

I've played Achtung Panzer Kharkov '43 since it was first released.  I've kept up with these games enthusiastically.  But when I start playing the 5.81 version, I was completely confused.  Some things about the new C&C have become clearer to me, but a lot is still pretty mysterious.  And this for someone who knows the game really well.

Unless something is done to make the game's (A) installation and updating procedure clear, including an explanation of what the different components are ("wait, this says "Game update 4.02" but ingame is says "5.81" ) and (B) what the detailed features of the game are, the audience for this game is going to get smaller, not larger.  Maybe it will take a Wiki to do that.  But I am tired of Graviteam's always defensive response to player criticisms that the game is confusing, which always boils down to "It's all in the game. Just figure it out on your own."  They refuse to get the message:  actually, it's not all clear, and it's only getting harder and harder to 'figure it out on your own.'  Please help us out.

[Aces]

Hi,

Broadly speaking I agree with you. Although I've worked out how to work some of the new features there's still many that I either cannot find or aren't, IMO adequately explained in the in-game help system or have been cryptically explained through Russian to English translation. I've actually found the piecemeal help here kindly posted by other users much more helpful that the in-game help but there's still much that I simply don't understand.

Kind regards

Aces

[Tanker]

Most people find that in-game help system is not enough, it don't solve all questions and it even makes more new ones. Most players wants the manual. I think there is nothing more to say

I WOULD not say most players want manuals.........  I would say alot of old timer war gamer sorts about.  AND THEY want manuals.     Krabb is working hard on his wiki.  ANd anyone can add info in.................  Its something NOW for community.  PLus maybe some stuff on various tactics.  GT/apos stuff........well you CAN do alot of legit real world things both in turn based movements and in the actual fights.  Some real evil sneaky stuff! And it works!  Just like it reality more than not.   

Most people taking the survey in this post do Flash.  Third party work is great but it is the developers' obligation to adequately document their games.

[Tanker]

The manual does not have to disclose all aspects and features of the game, or lose an important and interesting part - investigation by player. It is desirable that for the beginning did not have anything to read. We have also game, not a visit to the library.
I hope that sooner or later there will be no need for the manual is almost completely, even in the form of gaming assistant. Work at least we will make every effort to this.

Andrey, the reason for books, libraries and history is so we can learn from the mistakes of others rather than waste time and effort repeating them ourselves.  That's basically what you are saying to us.  You are telling us to stumble around in the dark, asking the same questions that others before us have asked, when those questions could be answered in a manual, or FAQ, call it what you will.  You are trying to cloak that as a wonderful adventure of discovery.  That is disingenous.  You've already explained that you don't want to do a manual due to financial and resource constraints. 

If I wanted to work out puzzles I'd go play Myst.  What I want is a clear explanation of what the game symbology is telling me and mechanically how the game works.  I can then apply that to winning the military battle.  That's where the important and interesting part of the game is.

[lavish]

The manual does not have to disclose all aspects and features of the game, or lose an important and interesting part - investigation by player. It is desirable that for the beginning did not have anything to read. We have also game, not a visit to the library.
I hope that sooner or later there will be no need for the manual is almost completely, even in the form of gaming assistant. Work at least we will make every effort to this.

This approach is definately the best for user interface or command system that needs to be clear and intuitive.

However, player should also know the game rules, which can only be done in the form of manual, I guess:

- Game mechanics. For example: How the game calculates territory ownership after a battle? How do you calculate victory points? What happens to lost vehicles that aren't destroyed?

- Simulatated features. For example: Do ground type and weather affect movement speed of units? Does temperature affect bullet ballistic? Does ground type affect explosion/shrapnel effectivity?

Without telling these somewhere (in the game or in the manual), player can't know what the game rules are (mechanics and simulated features).

p.s. I don't meant to ask those questions, they are just examples what need to be told to the player.

[andrey12345]

This approach is definately the best for user interface or command system that needs to be clear and intuitive.

Yes, and so it is to this need and seek, but not to write manuals

However, player should also know the game rules, which can only be done in the form of manual, I guess:

For this thing do not need a manual, it explains and displayed perfectly in-game.

- Game mechanics. For example: How the game calculates territory ownership after a battle? How do you calculate victory points? What happens to lost vehicles that aren't destroyed?

Its displayed and explaned in game. Not need in manual.

- Simulatated features. For example: Do ground type and weather affect movement speed of units? Does temperature affect bullet ballistic? Does ground type affect explosion/shrapnel effectivity?

All of this questions have a simple answer - yes. Not need a manual.

Without telling these somewhere (in the game or in the manual), player can't know what the game rules are (mechanics and simulated features).

As I showed up for anything, it does not need a manual, all you can see right in the game, in the process of its mastering.