Jump to content

1:1 Representation in CMx2


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 330
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Originally posted by David Chapuis:

I am assuming all of this would be calcualted abstractly at the squad level but played in detail in the 'movie'. The way I imagine it, if a squad were to take a casuality, here are examples of possiblities - depending of an array of variables:

1. Bandage script (light wound) - squad firepower drops for 30 seconds (that is CM bandage time) while two guys quickly bandage their friend

2. Checks man who is KIA

3. Pick up comrade - squad halts its move/advance to gather their friend

4. Call for medic (serious wound) - firepower drops for longer as men treat a more serious injury. An medic appears and takes over.

5. Retrieve wounded man - (this could happen when a unit starts advancing but then becomes pinned and a casualty happens at same time)

6. Wounded man left behind (when squad routed)

7. Man wounded but dies while being treated

8. Man wounded and then helpers get wounded

To be true to life one set of options is missing: the treatment of friendly KIA.

9. Mobility/firepower momentarily sapped because buddies retrieving the body of their friend.

10. Buddies getting hurt/killed trying to retrieve the friendly KIA

11. Platoon firepower and mobility lowered due to members carrying the injured/fallen with them (especially when retreating).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I couldn't care less about 1:1 control, I've got enough to handle as it is in CMAK. It would be cool if there was a model of each man in the squad that you could watch moving around during the movie, but think of the overhead. The smoke graphics already bog down my computer.

I wouldn't mind more subtle controls of each squad, but then the command list might get too unwieldly.

I would like to be able to reman certain weapons when their crew gets killed, as long as it isn't damaged. Or maybe surviving crew members from a two tanks could get into one that is knocked out but still workable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

willbell if the smoke is bogging down your computer it's time to upgrade

what sells games these days? Graphics and gameplay, a good mixture of both is a game destined for gold. Battlefront is out for a profit, and the hard-core grog with a PC from 1996 as a fanbase isn't conducive to large profits.

1:1 control is not what's happening, it will be similar to Close Combat, EYSA, GI Combat etc. You still control at the minimum a fireteam ( split squad ) but you'll be able to see men take cover.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by dalem:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by David Chapuis:

If they are trying to make a realistic combat sim, how can you leave treating casualties out? It wouldnt be a player controlled function. Or have I watched to many war movies?

See? smile.gif

This is exactly why I am "against" 1:1 representation. Squad level combat games/sims are supposed to keep me, the player, focused on squad level combat. I'm not trying to make my own personal WWII movie with stars and extras and villains and victims and heroes. Put an abstract squad on the screen and there has been a strident cry for individual soldiers, even if the individual sprites (or whatever) are not actually affecting gameplay.

Give in that inch and put individual soldiers on the screen and there will now be raised a strident cry for medics and runners and ammo bearers and civilians and dogs and the like. Put all those in and there will be demands for realistic razor stubble, officers' mistresses, fuzing wire, clanking dog tags, oily films on gasoline spills, gruff senior commanders, and all that.

Once we get that people will start complaining that after playing the game 500 times there are clearly only 50 random razor stubble skins.

Bah. BAH! I say!

-grumpy abstract dale </font>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hope this 1:1 representation will not be forced onto the player and that there will be an option to toggle squad size, much like we can now from 3-2 men representation.

Obviously not everyone will have a computer powerful enough to run the new engine and the more options available to the player (for those with low end machines), the more people are likely to be able to run and purchase CMX2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a reminder, since there seems to be some confusion going on here:

1:1 Graphic Representation;

Individual soldier modeling, and

Player control of individual soldiers

are three VERY different things, and the new engine could include any combination of the above three things. I think some of the discussion on this thread is getting confused, because people are talking about different things.

As for myself, I would love to see 1:1 Graphic Representation, but this is largely an eye candy issue, and not a gameplay issue. However, as I have noted previously in this thread, in addition to the nice eye candy 1:1 representation would provide, it could also make certain new gameplay features easier to see and use for the player.

Within certain limits, and assuming the game engine has AI routines that can handle it, I would also like to some additional refinement to the combat modeling that could come out of representing and modeling the actions of individual soldiers. For example, modeling what happens when a soldier is wounded (recovery, carry to the rear, etc.), is fine with me, so lone as the AI can handle this in a way that is consistently realisitic across a broad spectrum of combat situations.

What I definitely do NOT want to see is Player control of individual soldiers. If I have to actually order the medic up to care for that wounded soldier, and order the strecher team to pick him up and take him to the rear, than I don't want this "feature." It takes long enough to issue orders for a turn in CM as it is. If anything, I would like to see the player control interface of CM move up the command chain a bit, not down. For example, I would love to be able to issue platoon-level commands, such as formation movements, and have the AI take care of keeping the platoon in tactically realistic formation as it moves, rather than having to click my way through plotting and adjusting movement waypoints for all 4-7 units in a platoon myself.

Cheers,

YD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by YankeeDog:

As for myself, I would love to see 1:1 Graphic Representation, but this is largely an eye candy issue, and not a gameplay issue. However, as I have noted previously in this thread, in addition to the nice eye candy 1:1 representation would provide, it could also make certain new gameplay features easier to see and use for the player.

And I was interested on features that make sense now that 1:1 will be represented, where it didnt make sense before.

To expand on the squad facing/formation post the YD did previously, there is a CMBB forum thread right now about 'gamey' half squad swarms, and how they can be more effective since half squads can shoot at a full squad from two different angles, and if one half squad pins the other still fires.

Well with 1:1 representation, it makes much more sense for a single squad to be able to target mulitiple units. That does not mean I want to be able to control which man shoots at what, but I think it would be good game feature, that is realistic, and could be modeled abstractly but shown in detail with 1:1, where it could not (at least not well) with the CMx1 squad modeling.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not sure if the is the right place to ask this

given the 1:1 representation theme/title here...

BUT

Does anyone know if there has been any mention of shooting and getting LOS Straight through Vehicles and bunkers like in CMx1?

In the past (CMxx) infantry units could get NO cover or anything behind a tank because you could shoot and target and get LOS right through it. (its true no need to question this)

Same for AFV's for instance a BIG tank could never cover a smaller tank by being up front because you could get LOS and target right through AFV's UNLESS they are burned out and smoking then the smoke was known to block the LOS. (BUT provide NO cover)

Anyone know anything about this question in CMx2?

-tom w

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by David Chapuis:

Well with 1:1 representation, it makes much more sense for a single squad to be able to target mulitiple units. That does not mean I want to be able to control which man shoots at what, but I think it would be good game feature, that is realistic, and could be modeled abstractly but shown in detail with 1:1, where it could not (at least not well) with the CMx1 squad modeling.

Here's one interesting point right there. I, too, certainly don't want to start assigning targets to each and every individual soldier on the battlefield. It will simple never end. But I think you are pointing out a very nice side effect of the 1:1 representation, that is the tracking of each part of the firepower value.

True, in CM you have a total value made of from each member of the squad. Yet you can only fire at one or two targets at any given time, by splitting a squad. But if, instead of summing up the total firepower and then applying this number to the target, the CM engine could take these values individually and apply them as such to the target(s), we might end up with some more variables to play with.

A very basic example of this would be to take two squad of the exact same type, but one conscript and one elite, with same armament. The first would perhaps diffuse its fire on multiple targets, react to flanking fire and so on, while the elite group would keep a much tighter fire discipline. The end results would a variable firepower value depending on such factor as experience, moral, weather and so on.

I don't know, it looks like it might be worth discussing.

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by David Chapuis:

Well with 1:1 representation, it makes much more sense for a single squad to be able to target mulitiple units. That does not mean I want to be able to control which man shoots at what, but I think it would be good game feature, that is realistic, and could be modeled abstractly but shown in detail with 1:1, where it could not (at least not well) with the CMx1 squad modeling.

Of course it could! 1:1 presentation wouldn't really change that at all. However, it would require some VERY elaborate coding, for absolutely no benefit.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Sergei:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by David Chapuis:

which man shoots at what, but I think it would be good game feature, that is realistic, and could be modeled abstractly but shown in detail with 1:1, where it could not (at least not well) with the CMx1 squad modeling.

Of course it could! 1:1 presentation wouldn't really change that at all. However, it would require some VERY elaborate coding, for absolutely no benefit. </font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1:1 representation would also need to be depicted in the experiance.

Special Guest Star "Norman Noobee" would be green and Vic Morrow would be an Elite. They would both in the same squad. When the shooting started Noobee would duck under a log and Sarge could pick off a tank commander at 500yards with his Thompson.

I may need to reload CC 2 and 3 on my computer machine just to look at their model of individual soldiers. Nah I don't think I'll do that.

And does all this 1:1 mean that I'll need a new 3300MHz just to process it all? I hope it does, I need a new machine!!! ;)

[ January 20, 2005, 12:10 PM: Message edited by: General Colt ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This 1:1 effort must be driven by the "let's make it more real" crowd.

Well, to be fair, this game won't be anything like "real" unless you show limbs and heads being blown off. What about the cries of the wounded calling out for their mommas?

Combat Mission is just a game. We should not forget that. Any attempt to make it more than a game, will detract from it, in my opinion. Detract because it won't go far enough. It will be a never ending proposition until ALL of the aspects of warfare at this scale are in the game. Including the cries of the wounded.

I say keep CM as it is and instead improve the graphics and fix the problems that already are known to exist. Problems like vehicles not interrupting LOS and snow falling when the weather is hot. Make sure all the vehicles are in the game. Things like that.

I fear that CM will make young kids think that war is fun. This game will make them numb to what happens on a real battlefied. Numb that is until it happens to them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If there is true 1:1 representation of soldiers then there has to be true 1:1 representation of - say - trees. That sounds like some major effort to me.

If the 1:1 is confined to internal representation and a generic group of soldier models, then I think most of the graphic advancements like more terrain detail are in vain.

All that said, I think true 1:1 cannot be beaten in terms of ATMOSPHERE. I hope it will not be too watered down ...

Best regards,

Thomm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How can you show in detail something that is abstract?
Isnt that what the entire current movie play back is? Graphic details for something that is really just abstract? The calc section of the game doesnt care about the tress swaying in the wind. It doesnt care if a mortar round shoots into the air before it lands on the target. It doesnt care if the squads point their guns or if little bullet lines fly around the map. Those are all visual details that dont really exits in the numbers.

Originally posted by Sergei:

Does it have to??? Besides, what do you mean with "modeled abstractly but shown in detail"? How can you show in detail something that is abstract? It makes more sense to model things in detail but show them abstractly.

No it doesnt have to - CMx1 is great without it. And if you read my posts, I dont necessarily care to see 1:1 if there arent additional play features that brings to the game.

But since they could now show in accurate detail squad facing, it makes since to enhance how squads target. They could have enhanced it in CMx1, but we wouldnt really have been able to see a graphic of what was going on. IMO, now it makes more sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey all.

I would just LOVE to see 1:1 reprsentation in CMx.

I understand that it opens up a BIG can of worms, however.

Things like formations. How a squad/team fills a space/room. Foxholes. How a squad moves from point A to B. (In one big group? Or in single file?) All sorts of things have to be addressed once you depict 12 (+/-) little men.

But it will look SO sweet to have full squads running around on the map. Men dashing across roads. Climbing out of burning wrecks. Crawling through the grass.

I've done up a couple of sketches just to tinker around. aka_tom_w is going to post them for me here, in this thread. Just for fun. (I'm just visualizing out loud, here.)

Boy oh boy, I can't wait. I think when CMx comes out, I'm going to buy two of them. :)

Thanks,

Gpig

P.S. Look for aka_tom_w's post later today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...