Jump to content

Tontoman

Members
  • Posts

    60
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

Tontoman's Achievements

Member

Member (2/3)

0

Reputation

  1. Haven't followed battlefront that closely as RL got busy and haven't liked lots of the latest games (didn't like TOW's feel for example) but have been waiting for YEARS for CMC. Got a TOW3 notice in the mail and suddenly CMC popped into my head, haven't checked on progress in a looonnnngggggg time..... And so I log in to see this. Man CM was my number one game for so long, and I love strategic warfare also. I had lots of fun with CloseCombat 2 and it's dual style even though it was very simple. So CMC was going to be pure gold.... Oh man it hurts.
  2. Oh yes, sorry if I hadn't mentioned it enough in my post but I agreed with your tank spotting point entirely, it is too much. Periscopes while they work basicly are a tool of last resort, there's a very valid reason so many tank commanders rode with their heads outside the hatch (and the drivers). One of the best things you could do is to get tank to button up as it hugely cut down their spotting capabilities. My points were more just on how effect such a change would show up in a full game due to ToW real time orders... and if even a 'fix' will be done because of that. T.
  3. Yep, but as soon as you get other spotters on the map, the two cases I mentioned kick in and you're back with the same problem anyway. Remember if you can instantly pause and tell the tank to turn around an kill sneaky inf, the AI should also be able to do it. With LOS being so easy and concealment undercoded, I don't see much luck for now. Would be impossible to tell if it's the tank uber spotting or some other unit... which is maybe why it wasn't picked up on and we have uber tanks. FYI in case you hadn't spotted it, I read in another thread that a moving tank doesn't get a spotting penalty either unlike CM (not sure if that's confirmed or not). I guess they had head straps to tie their heads to those viewing slots as they bounced around T.
  4. As PFMM said, it's always a problem with strategy games and CM had it. Even if it didn't apply to units (inf sees AT inf, but tank doesn't get informed) it still applies to you as you're the eye in the sky seeing all and can issue orders right away. I believe when they talked about CM2 (new engine, not SF) it would partly be taken care of by making the unit you ordered to still undergo spotting checks before direct fire. Eg. Tank doesn't see inf in trench and bushes 300m away, close by inf does spot them.. but as in rl can't instantly tell tank. But you do order tank to fire on them as you can see everything. Tank rotates but only 'area fires' until it successfully spots the target and then does direct fire. This issue does bring up a drawback of the real time game system. What's the difference between - a tank spotting the inf, turning around and killing the inf - another unit spotting the inf which means you also do, then you pausing the game (or just quickly clicking) and telling the tank to kill the inf. At least in CM there could be 60 seconds of an ambush on your troops before you could do anything, now it's always instant. As soon as an AT inf or anything is spotted, you can call everything around onto them, in CM you had to sweat that time. Ambushes, rushes or flanking are going to be harder in general. BTW jh_morneau, 'nads' is short for 'gonads' (you can google that ). 'nade' is short for grenade. I never heard nade being used vocally, I think it got used in text chat due to the speed of typing T.
  5. TOW needs lots of work before it get to CM level. On top of the minor (major?) things like tank AI (no reverse), spotting/suppresion/LOS balance, troop micromanagement due to AI quirkyness etc. you got some major things like smoke and enterable buildings to get done. Hell the whole house to house combat aspect is missing. I loved the demo charge, flamethrower or heavy house busting direct fire arty to clear houses Or the MG setup truck I used to do, a quick truck run with 2 HV MGs to get them setup quickly in heavy houses.. muahahaha. In a close view individual troop game like TOW you would think that would be priority, it would look so cool. But as it isn't, and how tanks see to rule/spot so easily, it makes it feel more like a tank orientated game like CC3 and on (as 3 was when the tank uber spotting started). T.
  6. I'd go even further and say that in the vast majority of scenarios, infantry is unneeded. Go ahead and try this in any scenario where you get some armor: park your infantry in the rear and order them to 'Hold Position'. Finish the scenario without your infantry, only using your armor. You can nearly always manage just fine without the infantry, even when assaulting hamlets and villages. Your uberpanzerinfanterielazer can handle any enemy grunts that venture into LOS. Seriously. At least this solution does away with having to micromanage infantry (one of my pet peeves). And before someone gripes and says that I need to spend more time with the game, I have spent many hours playing it, trying out differenct tactics, hoping that I'm missing something here. The learning curve really isn't that steep once you realize that rapid pausing and micromanagement of orders can get you the results you are seeking. The game really isn't that difficult, guys. The fact that you can beat many of the scenarios with a few tanks shows the flaws in the game balance. IMO, reducing the spotting ability of tanks and the ability of infantry to take advantage of cover and concealment would go a long way towards fixing the imbalance - and restore a lot of the fun that I can see lurking beneath the surface of this game. This game is so close to actually being fun that it's frustrating. So much potential squandered... </font>
  7. Cool discussion. The only way I can see a HEAT round being less effective due to range is the angle to the armor. At short range it's going to be a flat trajectory and maybe more chance of deflection or the charge not being so effect due to the angle. At longer range with the arc of the shot you actually get a better angle on sloped armor and the reduction in velocity (due to the range) is not a problem as it would be with an AP shot. T.
  8. I think HardRock, that part of the problem is not the fact that they don't understand the explantion, it's that they don't like it. ToW was marketed a bit like a tactical war game from the first person view, hence the camera angles, the individial units and stats, prerelease vids etc. So to find it doesn't work that way is disappointing, maybe not to you but to some. Just personnal taste. I find it a little similar to CM for me because it's not first person. I kinda looked forward to the idea of individually hiding ATGs and such for a more close in combat to CM, but only to find it doesn't really work that way. That and the non enterable building. T.
  9. Yeah, there's a line between realism and gameplay. But the comms issue they talked about sounded pretty good for the next gen CM engine (it that's still around). Basically if one unit spots an enemy, he gets marked on the map like usual. But if the player targets that enemy with another unit, the targeting unit has to respot the target (with an increased chance) before engaging. Make it more of a "there's an enemy 50 M ne of your pos" instead of a "there's an inf hiding behind the fourth bush from the left" type comms. Or you can do an area fire right away also. So a dose of realism without making the game more complicated or less playable, but also reducing gamey tactics like the suicide scout. Anyone who has been swamped by 4+ jeeps in CM know all about that, added realism for added enjoyment. T.
  10. Err.....nothing to stop anyone from marking with a filttip pen on the screen though. </font>
  11. Why standard issue carrier pigeons, of course. </font>
  12. Just for the sake if nit-pickiness, how is it done instantly (as chazman already pointed out)? It's not like we see a grunt run back to the radio man (where are the radio men anyway) tell him the report, the radio man transmitting it, all the receiving radios call in their men to pass the news and then these guys going back to the field and engaging the new targets . I think most of us have read WWII battle accounts and know that getting orders out was hard enough, individual spotting like that was much more rare. Buddy to 20m away buddy, or inf to tank using the tank comms maybe, but not squad to squad for picking out individual targets. So he's got a point But it's the same problem CM had, you the player are god in the sky as anything your trooper sees, you see, and thus instantly all your troopers see since you order them. Remember all the jeep zerging with people sacrificing jeeps to charge the line to insta-scout the enemy. They talked about that in a new CM engine where if one unit spotted it, you could targeted it with another unit but it's hit % would be low until it aquired the target itself. The fact that one unit spotted it didn't automatically apply to all units. T. [ May 02, 2007, 09:54 AM: Message edited by: Tontoman ]
  13. Hehe, I know I know, just lazy as most of the people don't bother to differentiate between the two and 'cover' is shorter to type T.
  14. No prob Elvis . A LOS tool could easily include the scouting ability but I don't think it really has too. And I don't think that most people will be annoyed if they don't find units even where they have LOS, any combat game vet is used to spotting being involved just as there was in CM, ATGs and inf being the most easily hidden (we all remember those Pfaust, bazooka teams ). Also used to reduced spotting if moving fast, if in a tank or inf under suppression... it's all old news. And if anything, it's the fact there is too much spotting, not too little. You've seen the 'can't do ambushes', 'how could I be shot behind that' comments. Well, some might and have been complaining about not spotting units in LOS, but they're rookies and will have to learn like we did for CM and other games. Seeing cover effecting LOS with a tool should make people more happy. But still won't fix the disconnect between what you see in game and the LOS results which is a pity and my disappointment. Cheers T. [ May 02, 2007, 01:25 AM: Message edited by: Tontoman ]
  15. Yep, Dudes got it. No painted crosshairs in the middle of the screen that shows where the bullet going to go even with the weapon at your hip while you move (usually then just an increased dispersion around those crosshairs, eg. DoD), have to use iron sight of the weapon or the scope if you've got the sniper rifle. T.
×
×
  • Create New...