Jump to content

Tank Hunter

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Tank Hunter

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 05/02/1980

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location:
    Northern Hemisphere

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Damn, that video raises sooo many questions.. What's a lone tank doing out there without any kind of support? What's a lone APC doing out there? What are the chances of a rebel drone catching all that? I'm skeptic, too many odd and crazy things in that video to make it truly believable, a good portion of my brain screams staged.
  2. One way to surprise players with enemy forces is to add probability of appearance. A scenario/campaign maker could deploy all possible forces on a map and then set chance of appearance on group level, some formations would have 100% chance of appearing while others would maybe have only 20% or even less. That would add a form of randomization making scenarios re playable. You could even do this for reinforcements just to add some additional randomness into the chaos. You could even add those two Tigers with 2% chance of appearing... Of course for this to work BF would have to add this to scenario editor as a changeable value on force selection screen.
  3. This is worrying. Personally I always avoid playing urban battles because I think that the current engine does not simulate urban battles in a satisfactory way. Hopefully we can see some changes in how the urban warfare is simulated as we move along on the eastern front with upcoming families. I also hope the map makers get a lot more objects to play with so that urban maps can be more "alive" than they are today.
  4. Great job Worg, looking forward to it.
  5. Man, BF should hire you as a texture consultant. I wish you would redo textures for all the other CMX2 titles. Great job.
  6. Outstanding. Looking forward to the finished package..
  7. I know it's RT but can we have this version of the Armata in the game. https://www.rt.com/news/340142-super-tank-armata-robot/ Autonomous with a built in UAV and a 152mm gun. ☺
  8. Also don't forget the CTRL+1/2/3 command to create groups. You can then use ALT+1/2/3 to jump between the groups quickly.. These are unfortunately not saved if you reload the game so you have to recreate your groups every time. Maybe BF can fix this in upcoming engine upgrades.
  9. Thanks for the tips. I broke through on the left flank and rushed the beaches and few other objectives. Resulted in a major victory for me which I suppose is good enough. Had they had more troops in the back I would have been in deep trouble but it worked out. Mission 3 is a big one, we'll see how it turns out. As for Russia today I usually manage it with care and caution
  10. Being WEGO player for years I recently started playing Real Time due to having much less time to spend in front of the PC. I started playing the Russian campaign and the first mission went fine but I'm struggling with the 2nd, there is only some 35 min left and I'm not even close to the beach objectives. It seems like even if I would run for them it would still be hard to achieve. Do you have any tips for playing RT? How do you manage time and troops? Do you pause a lot? I occasionally pause to evaluate the situation. What I struggle with is not having some kind of notification tool that tells you if your forces are under attack. I might micromanage one flank when coming under attack only to have the other flank slaughtered just because I did not pay enough attention. This often leads that some of the forces are just standing still while I manage whoever is involved in combat at the moment. I would appreciate hearing from some other RT players on how you deal with the time constraint.
  11. Worghern you just sold me the game! Great Job!
  12. Here you have a map editor that is much more intuitive and it's made for FPS. So it doesn't have to be complicated.
  13. I never said that. Please re-read my post, I never claim that these things made the game less playable for me. I have all of CMx2 games and enjoy them very much, I know where they lack and I still think they are good games that give me a lot of enjoyment but that doesn’t mean that they are perfect in every way because they are not. If we are not allowed to criticize in a constructive way then there will never be any improvement. I only reacted to the review which I think is bad since it’s not properly done. In my opinion every review has to break down the game in areas such as Mechanics – how does the game represent mathematically what it is intending to do? Are game objects interacting in a good way? Are you finding results weird or bad? Graphics and Sound – how does the game present the results to the player? By text only or fancy graphics or just sound or everything combined? Are you immersed into the game? Replayability – is this a 20 hour play and throw game or are you challenged in different way every time you play it? Single Player – how much content is in there for single player and how is the AI Multi Player – is there any and how easy is it to find a game online? Are games good or riddled with kids that rage quit as soon as they lose their first tank? All of these above should be judged by comparing to the current leader in that segment with the game you are reviewing. The segment in this case would be strategy games representing individual soldiers and vehicles. The final score should be based on scores in all these segments. Then it is up to the reader to decide if this game is something they want to invest their time and money into. When AG reviewer writes "When soldiers run inside of buildings you can actually see what they see." I wonder what they really mean? I know there is nothing to see since I have the game but what about someone that has never seen the game? They may think that you can see all the objects, soldiers engaging into fierce hand to hand combat etc.. They should have instead written that you can follow the soldiers closely when they operate on the ground and follow the action, then they should also write that some actions like hand to hand and house interiors are abstracted but that abstraction generally works well since the end result seem plausible with real world results. Thant’s the kind of info I’m looking for. As for fire they should notice the lack of it since nobody here can claim that fires don’t break out regularly in an area where heavy fighting is going on. Is it a deal breaker? Probably not but it does remove from the overall immersion. The battlefield looks dull without fire and destruction..
  14. Hmm, I respect armchair but they are generally not good at reviewing games. Their reference is just not that good in gaming departement. Black Sea is a good game with great mechanics but it fails in areas such as graphics, sound, UI etc. When Armchair claims that "the game objects can be targeted and damaged or destroyed". "When soldiers run inside of buildings you can actually see what they see." Game objects can be destroyed? Really, all game objects? Did they notice lack of fire, or that it takes several high caliber projectiles to even notice any change in how the building appears? What can you see when soldiers run inside the buildings? Abstracted rooms? They also claim the game has great graphics? Really?
  • Create New...