Jump to content
Battlefront.com

Update on Engine 4 patches

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Heirloom_Tomato said:

The Flyers? Really? Hometown team not good enough for you? ūüėÄ Last spring must have driven you nuts.

Nah, I move on.¬† I am nothing at all like a Leafs fan... ¬†¬† ūü¶Ü¬†¬†¬† ūü¶Üūü¶Ü¬† ūüôā

 

Edited by Blazing 88's

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three and a half hours from the deadline. The Sens are asking for the patches in any deal for Mark Stone. C'mon BFC - don't let us down!

Edited by Howler

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a professional 'ice' hockey men's league  in North America. Simply titled as the National Hockey League. Very close to a religion for us Canadianas... and an attempt on my part to inject a little levity while we await the "pending" patches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Howler said:

It's a professional 'ice' hockey men's league  in North America. Simply titled as the National Hockey League. Very close to a religion for us Canadianas... and an attempt on my part to inject a little levity while we await the "pending" patches.

I see, thank you for the clarification, for one small moment i had hopes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the game, the most accurate and realistic so far (it is of course impossible to get a computer game realistic with a big R). I am promoting this game to all strategic nerds I know and also to my NCO and officer colleagues. It is only one thing with this game that is really irritating. Why do paper thin wooden walls of a builidng have the protection value of concrete walls? Tanks has so realistic penetration values, why do not building has that too? Will this be fixed in the patch?

I also have my hopes that all the issues with fortifications (trenches and fox holes) are fixed, making them worth the cost and of course that the units do not run away when arty hits them. One of the points of digging in is to resist arty better, then it is quite "fantastic" when the units running away from shelter - out in the open. Strange behavior if the unit are not paniced, then strange behavior are realistic.

There is of course other little things with line of sight-tool and also line of fire vs line of sight (as you see it from ground camera view), but I have understood that it is quite hard to make this work with out a new engine or something (I am computer "handicaped" and are not interested with the technical disucussion what is the difference between engines, patches, DLC and all other fancy pancy names) and one learns the work arounds to the LOS-issues any way.

Lastly, adding to the discussion of waiting for new patches/updates. Better wait for a patch that is good than them rushing it and it becomes ****. I have quit playing Steel Division, not realistic enough (when I found this game) and I would still quit playing it due to their crappy hurry up updates, making the game more and more un-playable.

This game is good because I have noticed that the crew behind it puts down great effort to make it realistic and still playable, of course critic are always good but for my part I rather wait for a good patch then them throwing out crap.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Panzer_Freak said:

and of course that the units do not run away when arty hits them.

These issues, even though they're game-ruining for some players, have only existed for 2 years and 2 months now, so let's give Battlefront a fair chance to fix them. Testing is hard -- really ultra mega super hard, apparently -- and keep in mind that they're just a small company, and that this a is just a niche product. Why, we're lucky that the product even exists, or so I'm told. It would be unfair to expect any sort of urgency on their part.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, sttp said:

These issues, even though they're game-ruining for some players, have only existed for 2 years and 2 months now, so let's give Battlefront a fair chance to fix them. Testing is hard -- really ultra mega super hard, apparently -- and keep in mind that they're just a small company, and that this a is just a niche product. Why, we're lucky that the product even exists, or so I'm told. It would be unfair to expect any sort of urgency on their part.

I never said it is not wrong with critic, I only owned this game for half a year. If a problem has existed for 2 years and two months and it has been promised to be dealt with - well critic is of course reasonable.

Still, this game is the best in its genre and I still believe it is because they are putting down big effort to do things rigid. That is my feeling and I compare it with Steel Division which eventually was eventually un-playable when it was updated with out thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Panzer_Freak said:

Love the game, the most accurate and realistic so far

Tanks has so realistic penetration values, why do not building has that too? 

This game is good because I have noticed that the crew behind it puts down great effort to make it realistic and still playable

+1.  Nice first post.  Welcome to the forum.  I agree, this is a very cool game and 2019 should be a very good year for releases etc. 

Below is my take on how building work in the game.  I also wish the building skin, (wood, concrete, etc) was more of an indication of what kind of protection the building provided.  Maybe someday.     

Generally the bigger the building the stronger it is.  The skin of the building does not matter.  A combination of a buildings height and footprint (total square footage) determines the strength of the building, relative to collapsing, within the four building types listed below.  I suspect the type of building has more to do with the protection provided to the troops from suppression & casualties than the size.  As in the Church vs barn example.

Very Strong: Three biggest church structures.

Strong: Modular buildings and independent small church.  

Average: Independent houses, independent commercial, and independent other.  (CMBN & CMFB have an "other" category for buildings.) 

Weak: Barns

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

+1.  Nice first post.  Welcome to the forum.  I agree, this is a very cool game and 2019 should be a very good year for releases etc. 

Below is my take on how building work in the game.  I also wish the building skin, (wood, concrete, etc) was more of an indication of what kind of protection the building provided.  Maybe someday.     

Generally the bigger the building the stronger it is.  The skin of the building does not matter.  A combination of a buildings height and footprint (total square footage) determines the strength of the building, relative to collapsing, within the four building types listed below.  I suspect the type of building has more to do with the protection provided to the troops from suppression & casualties than the size.  As in the Church vs barn example.

Very Strong: Three biggest church structures.

Strong: Modular buildings and independent small church.  

Average: Independent houses, independent commercial, and independent other.  (CMBN & CMFB have an "other" category for buildings.) 

Weak: Barns

and to expand on this, also probably misleading is all the many tracers going through walls and pretending bullets to penetrate, when they do actually not. With tracers removed and building penetration sounds emphasized, one gets a somewhat better impression of what actually happens. Also walls and windows are not quite WYSIWYG. It seems any openings are abstractly enlarged, maybe in order to help on buidling occupants spotting and targeting. Just bits of brain farting though.

Edit: There¬īs some indep (city) buildings from CMBN Market Garden module that have huge windows, making the whole thing an avoid at all cost death trap. So there¬īs still some variation, which can be substantial. Guess the other games have similar candidates.

Edited by RockinHarry

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, sttp said:

These issues, even though they're game-ruining for some players, have only existed for 2 years and 2 months now, so let's give Battlefront a fair chance to fix them. Testing is hard -- really ultra mega super hard, apparently -- and keep in mind that they're just a small company, and that this a is just a niche product. Why, we're lucky that the product even exists, or so I'm told. It would be unfair to expect any sort of urgency on their part.

Don't be so hard on them.. I'm sure all seven Mac users appreciate that the patch was delayed again to make sure it works also on their machines :) 

You wouldn't really feel good playing the game knowing that somewhere in the world, a lonely mac user sat quietly whimpering in the shadows, rejected by his gaming community, would you?

For my part, I wouldn't be able to bear it. Solidarity, brothers! Just because a few people choose to play on a widely unsupported gaming platform shouldn't mean that I should enjoy any special privilege just because I bought a Windows PC. All animals are, after all, equal, and the nail that sticks out gets hammered down.

So carry on and show patience, comrade...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

+1.  Nice first post.  Welcome to the forum.  I agree, this is a very cool game and 2019 should be a very good year for releases etc. 

Below is my take on how building work in the game.  I also wish the building skin, (wood, concrete, etc) was more of an indication of what kind of protection the building provided.  Maybe someday.     

Generally the bigger the building the stronger it is.  The skin of the building does not matter.  A combination of a buildings height and footprint (total square footage) determines the strength of the building, relative to collapsing, within the four building types listed below.  I suspect the type of building has more to do with the protection provided to the troops from suppression & casualties than the size.  As in the Church vs barn example.

Very Strong: Three biggest church structures.

Strong: Modular buildings and independent small church.  

Average: Independent houses, independent commercial, and independent other.  (CMBN & CMFB have an "other" category for buildings.) 

Weak: Barns

Thanks for the info, someone wrote almost the same in "The Few Good Men" forum, really strange way to determine penetration value - but it is what it is, they really need to change it. I'll copy/paste your list! :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Panzer_Freak said:
1 hour ago, MOS:96B2P said:

Generally the bigger the building the stronger it is.  The skin of the building does not matter.  A combination of a buildings height and footprint (total square footage) determines the strength of the building, relative to collapsing, within the four building types listed below.  I suspect the type of building has more to do with the protection provided to the troops from suppression & casualties than the size.  As in the Church vs barn example.

Very Strong: Three biggest church structures.

Strong: Modular buildings and independent small church.  

Average: Independent houses, independent commercial, and independent other.  (CMBN & CMFB have an "other" category for buildings.) 

Weak: Barns

Thanks for the info, someone wrote almost the same in "The Few Good Men" forum, really strange way to determine penetration value - but it is what it is, they really need to change it. I'll copy/paste your list! :)

LOL I may well have learned it form testing that @MOS:96B2P did.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, IanL said:

LOL I may well have learned it form testing that @MOS:96B2P did.

Below is the original thread where we discussed and tested some of the buildings and ideas we had at the time.

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/123150-buildings-collapsing/

We all learn from each other around here.  That's one of the things that make this forum and community so great. :)  

As an example I was able to locate the above long buried thread because of the below thread posted by Ian. :D  

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/127241-how-to-download/?do=findComment&comment=1755566

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MOS:96B2P said:

As an example I was able to locate the above long buried thread because of the below thread posted by Ian. :D  

http://community.battlefront.com/topic/127241-how-to-download/?do=findComment&comment=1755566

Nice one - that was the exact technique I used to try to find the original explanation of the way artillery shells are counted and I came up empty. Glad you got at least one such posting. I was sure that Steve or @MikeyD or @c3k had written something but I could not find it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you. Yes, in fact I haven't been checking. I figure I can count on fanatics like yourself to shout the news from the rooftops when the time arrives. Thanks again for your alertness and devotion.

Michael

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

Thank you. Yes, in fact I haven't been checking. I figure I can count on fanatics like yourself to shout the news from the rooftops when the time arrives. Thanks again for your alertness and devotion.

Michael

You are welcome.  Just trying to give back to the community...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quite a number of rather minor issues had been reported from players the recent times, So¬†I¬īd guess (and hope) BFC goes through them all and check for validity and do fixes if necessary. If that takes the time we need to the see the patch, I¬īd be willing to wait even longer, also considering current V4 is fully playable with no true game breakers IMO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...