Hit decals on Infantry..

[Wodin]

I know it may sound gruesome but as an option I'd like to see hit decals on Infantry similar to how it works on vehicles however this time leave a dark red decal. I'm fairly sure it could be done as I said along the same lines as hit decals for vehicles.

 

Sometimes I think CM is a touch to sanitised and I'm one of those who feel Warfare should be shown\portrayed in it's bloody entirety.

[sburke]

umm last time we went down this road...
  well it wasn't good.

IBTL!

[Macisle]

My opinion:

Vehicles, buildings and terrain: the more realistic (like real life--not current Hollywood levels) the damage and destruction, the better. Bring it on!

Soldiers: Keep it as it is now.

Edited September 18, 2015 by Macisle

[IICptMillerII]

I'm in favor of adding some kind of hit decals to infantry models. I understand that the topic concerning gore has been debated many times before, with Battlefront firmly telling us that they have no plans or desires to add gore to the game. However this sounds like an easy thing to do for an experienced modder, and I think it would only enhance gameplay. If someone kicks in the door on this, I'm sure others will follow by making their own variations, so that the community will have a choice of "flavors" if you will depicting varying degrees of inflicted damage. For example one pack could depict just a small red hole, while another pack could go all out and have elaborate wounding image decals ripped right out of a medical textbook on how to preform open heart surgery. It will then be up to the player to choose his poison. 

Of course, all of this is assuming that it can in fact be modded in, as I doubt Battlefront would pursue it based on what they have already stated in regards to the topic of blood and gore. I agree with Macisle that more realistic damage depictions of buildings, terrain and vehicles would be nice to have, and probably take priority over doing the same for infantry models. Still, it would be nice to have it all in due time. 

[General Jack Ripper]

That's where it starts. "Why can't we have hit decals?" It's a simple question, and the answer is just as simple, "Because it's stupid."

Personally I never understood why we need vehicle hit decals either. What's the point of having black circle holes showing where your tank got shot? Your tank is already dead, and all the postmortem analysis in the world isn't going to change that fact. The same goes for infantry: why does it matter WHERE your Pixeltruppen get shot? Dead troops are dead troops, and all of the hit decals in the world won't change the fact that when you get hit by bullets, you usually die.

The origins for having a visual feedback when an entity gets hit with weapons traces all the way back to the original DOOM. Whether it be hit decals, or fully rendered 3D 'Blood and Guts', visual feedback has long been the domain of the first person shooter. This feedback is intended to be a reward to the player to congratulate them for nailing that 'Sweet Headshot', or landing a grenade perfectly at their opponents feet.

In tactics games however, there is no practical need for that type of feedback. The player is not personally shooting the enemy troops, he is commanding AI troops to do that for him. There are a few exceptions, such as the Men of War series, which allow the player to take direct control of vehicles and troops, but those games are hardly realistic.

Combat Mission is a tactical wargame, it's meant to exercise your brain to defeat your opponent. No one who takes this game seriously is asking for blood and gore to be added, because in the end, it doesn't matter that your sniper got a sweet headshot, it matters that he is effectively inflicting casualties. You might as well ask the guys playing the Silent Hunter series, "Why can't I see drowned, dismembered bodies when I sink a ship? It's more realistic!"

It's because that's not what the game is about.

[JoMac]

Players wanted 'Hit Decals' so they can see where the Shell Hit on the Vehicle...That way, if a Player thinks that a certain Gun shouldn't Penetrate a certain part of a Vehicle at so and so range, then they can complain about it in the Forums. 

Joe

[Alchenar]

That's where it starts. "Why can't we have hit decals?" It's a simple question, and the answer is just as simple, "Because it's stupid."

 

This isn't an evil conspiracy to turn the game into DOOM, people would just like some kind of visual feedback on what's happening because it helps immersion (and sometimes with vehicles is useful info).  I'm unsure that there's really anything to be gained from hit decals on infantry given how small they are.

 

But having said that, I would *love* to see a zombie themed expansion where you have to fight Hitler's undead army that shambles towards your infantry and only dies to headshots.

[Vinnart]

My opinion:

Vehicles, buildings and terrain: the more realistic (like real life--not current Hollywood levels) the damage and destruction, the better. Bring it on!

+1. For buildings, and general environment destruction similar to Battlefield 4 for a bar to perhaps strive for. We do have them now for vehicles and terrain, but the ground fire and scorched earth from cmx1 would certainly add to cmx2's atmosphere.

As for the soldiers, if done in a tasteful, non-grisly way it would not bother me. I could see just a red circle, or something that looks like a red paint ball hit. As for this being high on a wish list it is not.

 

Edited September 18, 2015 by Vinnart

[General Jack Ripper]

But having said that, I would *love* to see a zombie themed expansion where you have to fight Hitler's undead army that shambles towards your infantry and only dies to headshots.

You can have that, but only after we get Space Lobsters of Doom, because that came first.

[silent one]

Lets get real though, Infantry getting killed isnt going to be just red dots even from bullets . Then just think about the big guns and the arty. Its people shot to pieces . heads off. limbs off, entrails hanging from trees and worse. Im all for it . I think It'll add something to the game. However it'll be r18 and not to everyone liking

[Wodin]

This is why it should be optional. Just..not everything has to be functional..even if it's seen as silly by others as an option I see no problem with it. I compared it to the hit decals on vehicles to show how it could be done.

 

@SLIM..I refutre the claim that those who want are some how silly and don't take the game seriously. We can have chrome and visuals that aren't just there for a game reason. I could say mowing down a load of men with a heavy MG and they all fall down with no apparent physical injury is silly..but I don't I understand others like it this way, where as I see no  point in some how sanitising the horror of war. So to suit everyone's taste then it could be optional. Oh and finally I don't think you can say what people get from the games they play nor how they play and feel about a game. As for why it was designed, it was designed for those who love military history and have an interest tactical warfare and how in as "real" away as possible let the player control one force or the other. "Real" as in as real tactically and visually. Some will argue some small blood decals add to the "visual" part of the design. If it was from a purely tactical design then I reckon you could do that with a 2D map, nato symbols and words with no need for any effort be put into the visual aspect.

Edited September 19, 2015 by Wodin

[Paulus]

...No one who takes this game seriously is asking for blood and gore to be added...

Sorry, but i find this insulting. Yes i take this game seriously (but perhaps not to your level), yes i would like to see some blood and gore.

It's not gamebreaking the way it is, not at all. But it would be nice to add, immersion and overall mood in the game. 

As people who find it too offending (to see blood etc.) i've 2 arguments; 

-99% of games, model blood and gore (in combat), but almost none of the gamers complain. 

- Combat Mission models in great detail the psychological effects of combat (the fear, the panic, the cowering, the screaming when hit, 

the running away when broken etc..) and we love the game for it! But the physical effect are too shocking or sickening, or what? I find this

some what hypocritical. 

 

Perhaps somebody can correct me? 

 

 

Paul

[silent one]

I think a bit of blood could add something. At the moment we have a degree of abstraction. I believe that an  optional gore setting is fine. In Total War the blood mods have been around a long time and are fun. and using them is totally optional. Gaming is about fun. Part of that is immersion.  If your happy with the game looking like a tabletop game like an animated Squad Leader, or like a old black and white John Wayne ww2 movie or like it really was with all the dismemberment and gore. They are all correct.If my rig was up to it Id be going for full realism.  I wouldn't call people who want the game running at a board-game level of abstraction stupid. Maybe a bit behind the times? All respect to you . Play the game how you want, but dont expect other people to just make do. Were not playing with cardboard pieces anymore. Id just like to point out that the limit is the technology and we are in the 21st century.  Adequate is not just good enough

[General Jack Ripper]

Sorry, but I find this insulting.

By all means, be insulted, I stand by what I said. There is no practical reason for blood and gore in a war game of this type.

-99% of games, model blood and gore (in combat), but almost none of the gamers complain.

Now that just isn't true at all. Any game with depictions of blood, gore, or both automatically receives an 'M' or '18+' rating from the respective authorities. Receiving an 'M' rating is automatically losing half of your potential marketplace, because children under the age of 18 are the single largest demographic of video game consumers.

- Combat Mission models in great detail the psychological effects of combat (the fear, the panic, the cowering, the screaming when hit, 

the running away when broken etc..) and we love the game for it! But the physical effect are too shocking or sickening, or what? I find this

some what hypocritical.

You find it hypocritical because you don't understand the video game marketplace. You can't shove blood, guts, and gore into any game you want without first making sure you target the correct demographic, and market your game effectively. Battlefront is a small developer who cannot afford to marshal the huge marketing and advertising forces large developers can muster, so they need to make sure their game is safe for the whole market, not just a piece of it.

It's a business decision first and foremost, when you occupy a small niche in the games market, you simply cannot afford to turn anyone away.

[silent one]

Slim you seem to be taking a deliberately provocative stance with your peers just to antagonize them. You can make a point without going out of your way to be insulting as you are . Or are you Trolling your fellow gamers for fun? either way its unwarranted in this community..

Demographically I dont see many children playing this game . I think its pitched at high teens + by its content and complexity. But I could be wrong. 

[Vinnart]

Guys this is the same debate that has happened before many times here. I recall the answer from BF being they have no desire to add gore and blood to the game. I have to agree I don't think there is any need for it, and it will not add to the game play one bit. The game is not about showcasing the horrors of war, but to strategy and tactics of combat similar to chess on steroids. If you want some blood Vein has a "blood spot" mod that turns the base of a casualty into a pool of blood. At the very most IF hit decals are done it would be done in a subtle way like red dots. Don't expect limbs, blood and brains. There is no need for it here in adding entertainment value. The real world has enough of that people do not need to be reminded of when they are playing a game.

Again debating the issue is mute. There will be no blood and gore in Combat Mission. Advice is to not worry about it and to enjoy the strategy and tactics of combat simulation which is the intent of the game. 

[RockinHarry]

Hm.....wondering how "light wounds" (yellow dot) is abstractly modelled in the game. If I´d see at least blood spot decals for lightly wounded soldiers, I´d start asking myself how much of a particular wound would handicap this soldier? If it´s a leg wound, would this soldier moving slower than his unwounded buddies? A head wound restricting spotting and shooting abilities? Others? 

[Quintus Sertorius]

I was disinterested in the vehicle hit decals before they came out.  After they came out and I saw how they worked in the game I changed my mind completely.  I think they add a lot to the experience.  The contention that they add nothing to the game has been completely disproven in my mind.  I never really thought about it before, but hit decals on buildings would be nice too.  Hit decals on infantry...I think that's of much more limited usefulness and probably isn't worth the controversy.

I personally would not be offended even by massive, realistic gore in CM, but I understand some people would have a problem with even a little more, and I don't think it's necessary.

[Baneman]

Hm.....wondering how "light wounds" (yellow dot) is abstractly modelled in the game. If I´d see at least blood spot decals for lightly wounded soldiers, I´d start asking myself how much of a particular wound would handicap this soldier? If it´s a leg wound, would this soldier moving slower than his unwounded buddies? A head wound restricting spotting and shooting abilities? Others? 

At the moment, "yellow" base wounded move slower than normal.

Whether it affects their spotting, morale, accuracy... no idea. Waaaaay too difficult to test, I'm not even going to think about it

I have always used Vein's red bases, not because I want to see blood, but because I find that they don't break immersion as much as a skull pic on the ground.

Can't really see the point of more than that, imo.

[Bloody Bill]

I do like the increase in visuals that the modders bring to the game.  I really enjoy the hit markers for vehicles it is a nice visual add on and ads immersion. 

My opinion only here now.....I enjoy CM for its WWII combat appeal.  I enjoy the thinking involved in command decisions and how unforgiving the game is.  Small unit tactics are amazing in this game. 

I play this game with my two sons for a few reasons.  One....it is a game they have to use their brain and plan out a strategy and weigh the consequences of their choices.   Two...Their is a lot of Historical knowledge in this community and I have my boys research when possible the battles we fight.  My sons are 14 and 16 and they really enjoy CM and are getting pretty darn good at it.  They do not need blood and gore to enjoy the game. 

If blood and gore was an option that would not bother me I just would not use it.  I would rather see the developers efforts in other areas. 

[MOS:96B2P]

<Snip> I have always used Vein's red bases <Snip>  

Yep, same here.  I have Vein's bases in CMSF, CMBN, CMFI, CMRT, CMBS and will add them to the Bulge title someday.  The mod turns the red X into a blood spot.  Great for immersion and screenshots.  The only thing some players might not like is the red spot also shows up under destroyed vehicles.  I just imagine it is the transmission fluid leaking out as a result of the damage.  (No I have no idea what color transmission fluid is on various armored vehicles)    Cool mod that some of the posters in this thread might enjoy.

I grabbed this from CMSF Consulate Rescue.

  

[Bulletpoint]

 

  

That looks Monty Pythonesque to me.. like someone just spilled a lot of red wine.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that in real life, there's not much blood at the moment of impact, and then there will be a trickle of blood later. If there's an incline, it will flow down that in a long thin dark red streak, if there's no incline, it will pool under the body and be mostly invisible until someone turns the person over.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Bulletpoint

[c3k]

My preference is not to have any gore or blood.

[Baneman]

That looks Monty Pythonesque to me.. like someone just spilled a lot of red wine.

...

Yes, but as mentioned, it's not actually trying to depict blood so much as having something that doesn't look like it's a computer game - viz. the skull or cross.

[Bulletpoint]

Yes, but as mentioned, it's not actually trying to depict blood so much as having something that doesn't look like it's a computer game - viz. the skull or cross.

Roger that, but I was commenting more on the "great for immersion and screenshots" part. The hit markers disappear when you deselect the unit, so I don't personally mind them.

Edited September 21, 2015 by Bulletpoint