theBrit Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 Ok so the Uber patch has come.... many are rejoicing but for me, fundementaly nothing has really changed. The core of the problem for me is the constant micro management of my 'deaf, blind and dumb' troops/vehicles. The core of this game is still flawed in my opinion... In every department from Pathfinding to simple fire and manoeuvre TOW struggles. Troops ordered to move to a position have to be almost instructed on an individual basis constantly if you are to have control over the action. Even small actions, such as soldier v soldier ends in comedy as two combatants stare at eachother, some 8 yards apart...fumbling for grenades!!! Sadly the tow community and devs seem now intent on this legendary add-on to save the day, well if that's the case I feel cheated....this add-on should be FREE as the game has never really delivered its promises or vision...its still broke! As it stands its a pretty map generator, with the ability to place mindless drones... and nothing more! I will however watch this game with interest as I feel all is not lost...yet! Thanks for listening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikoyanPT Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 I lost the count of how many games i bought and played for a week. I am playing TOW since its release and it´s getting better as time goes by. What else could i ask. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theBrit Posted February 19, 2008 Author Share Posted February 19, 2008 Obviously you enjoy micro management....I find it frustrating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Petrus58 Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 I have to agree with (a fellow) theBrit. So much potential, but too much is not working or requires (thanks to the deficiencies in the AI) too much micro-management. I don't mind paying for new content, but fundamental aspects of this game should be fixed for nothing. Uninstalling (yet again). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gunship Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 close combat in 3d and the year is safe..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilot37 Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 Fantastic. The quick battle generator has renewed my interest in this game. I can remove half the trees and bushes so that I can see what goes on and I can set up all sorts of great scenarios to play single player. In time I hope for someone to develop some bigger towns (quite hard to do I think). Even if you cant get in the buildings, a long fight in a gradually crumbling town is good fun. Bigger maps to give all the trucks and cars better use would be more fun as would replay, entering buildings and motars. And an easier map mod tool would be good....etc. I applaud the uber patch. And I eagerly await the add-on. I am happy to pay. This game is going in the right direction. Thanks. Keep us all posted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammelman Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 I agree with a fundamental flaw being the AI for sure. I guess at this point it seems like the AI just doesnt do anything except whats scripted. In many missions they, if you are defending for instance they just kind of come at you and dont really do much. Sure the tanks fire and they move around and such, but it is all so linear. The infantry is god awful stupid, they just walk into defenses most of the time without firing a shot, and as your positions are cleared by tanks they dont move in the direction of your other troops, they just kind of continue on their course as id there is nothing else going on around them. I like this game, and i think the engine is awesome, but i just dont see myself playing it for very long, it really doesnt have that replayability that i am looking for - even with the the new mission editor. All the mission editor does is send a fresh wave of dead infantry against your line, period. It makes it easier to create battles yes, but findamentally noting in the battles changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helm123 Posted February 19, 2008 Share Posted February 19, 2008 I have to agree that the game though much better than at release shows little depth and too much micro managment. The scripted nature of the AI really hurts the replay potential of the scenarios, but I can't fault the game for that since CMSF also has scripted AI. I still hold high hopes for the game, but I'm not going to stand around and wait. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbear Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 well the problem here is that this game was designed as RTS game and the units still behaived as rts unit. TOW is mix now between A wargame and rts game, In here are some script that let the enemy units know where your units are. any way if you play this game expecting to be CMx1 you for sure gona get frustrated. The AI is not to that standard the self preservation in the unit is not modelled if you try to suppress it did not work well. The AI in CMSF is diferent i have not see any script there with the patch 1.06 is alot better. but it don't have script the way tow has and if the unit got fire they go to the ground ok it have its problems but it is very different from TOW here the model is very different. Something i don't like of TOW are the missions designed by the guys at 1C those mission put you on very difficult situations. some time i have to say that they are fun to play if you change your mind and play it as it is a brain game and not a wargame, but to end the mission you have to replay it to get the lucky combination to win instead of the right tactics. This is the way an RTS game like command and conquer do but not to comparer i have not see such difficult situations when i played that kind of game long time ago. They at lease are lisening to the players and are changing things on the add on I thing they have to change a lot things in the game thats why the add on, at lease i think so. If they gonna move this game from rts to wargame here they have a lot of work to do, a lot things to change in the AI to move this game to a wargame if that is the intention of 1C. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pad152 Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 I like the micro management, I don't want C&C or sudden strike but the AI could be better. AI attacking on most maps have the AI infantry advancing with little or no cover. I think smoke grenades and on map mortars with smoke rounds to cover advances would help a lot. Infantry need to make better use of cover and coving fire when advancing. Infantry run out of rifle/SMG ammo firing at tanks and other AFV's. I would like to some ammo & weapon carriers in the game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mcalhau Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Originally posted by pad152: I like the micro management, I don't want C&C or sudden strike but the AI could be better. AI attacking on most maps have the AI infantry advancing with little or no cover. I think smoke grenades and on map mortars with smoke rounds to cover advances would help a lot. Infantry need to make better use of cover and coving fire when advancing. Infantry run out of rifle/SMG ammo firing at tanks and other AFV's. I would like to some ammo & weapon carriers in the game. I agree with that, and it also should be possible to get ammunitions between tanks, like infantry (I know it would be more micro management but it would be great, the French campaign was to much rounds consuming , in the 2nd or 3rd mission (veteran) I had to make tank crewmens to jump between immobilized tanks (German ad Allieds)to win, because my tanks got out of ammunitions, it almost got to be a final battle throwing rocks LOL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sandy Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 I also agree with the poster Downleaded the patch to see if things were better, but little has changed, except for the cumbersome QB generator (which should have been properly integrated from the outset) The game still looks beautiful but the units are still brain dead. I tried a QB style battle, and despite repeatly issuing halt orders to my units, they just stopped for a few seconds, and then continued their stupid original moves. No fun, no play, (and no buy ever again without trying a demo!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mcalhau Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 Originally posted by sandy: I also agree with the poster I tried a QB style battle, and despite repeatly issuing halt orders to my units, they just stopped for a few seconds, and then continued their stupid original moves. No fun, no play, (and no buy ever again without trying a demo!) My units stop, if I hit the hold button. But if I hit the stop button they cancel orders, but don´t make them to stop. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pad152 Posted February 20, 2008 Share Posted February 20, 2008 I always pause the game at the start of a battle and halt all units! Then advance the units as needed, I really think the game should do this at the start of all battles. The issue is with giving a unit a manual fire command, the unit will automatical advance if it doesn't have a shot! There needs to be more options for commands such as "Advance and fire" & "Hold & Fire", "Fire and Retreat (shoot and scoot)". [ February 20, 2008, 12:17 PM: Message edited by: pad152 ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlapHappy Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 I think you guys are complaining a lot about "scripted" behavior and blaming that for the game's woes. I have to point out that CMSF has scripted AI, but is much more enjoyable from a command and control aspect even when just playing with infantry units. It's not "scripting" that is at fault...it is an non-existent (or nonsensical) TAC AI that is the problem. It is the problem of what happens to squads between point A and B and how they respond to it that is unsatisfying for me. Everyone over on the CMSF wanted extra buttons and doo-dads to make squads and vehicles do all sorts of things the TAC AI should be doing anyway. Like troops moving to cover when under fire and vehicles retreating to safety when faced with an over-powering threat. Instead of cramming more buttons on the GUI, they did what actually needed to be done....they fixed the friggin' TAC AI....... Now units do all of those things and you don't have to babysit....the right answer all along! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redbear Posted February 21, 2008 Share Posted February 21, 2008 Originally posted by SlapHappy: I think you guys are complaining a lot about "scripted" behavior and blaming that for the game's woes. I have to point out that CMSF has scripted AI, but is much more enjoyable from a command and control aspect even when just playing with infantry units. It's not "scripting" that is at fault...it is an non-existent (or nonsensical) TAC AI that is the problem. It is the problem of what happens to squads between point A and B and how they respond to it that is unsatisfying for me. Everyone over on the CMSF wanted extra buttons and doo-dads to make squads and vehicles do all sorts of things the TAC AI should be doing anyway. Like troops moving to cover when under fire and vehicles retreating to safety when faced with an over-powering threat. Instead of cramming more buttons on the GUI, they did what actually needed to be done....they fixed the friggin' TAC AI....... Now units do all of those things and you don't have to babysit....the right answer all along! Yep you are right and was confusing triggers with script the point is right they need to better model the TAC AI the units behave as an immortal heroes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pad152 Posted February 24, 2008 Share Posted February 24, 2008 I still think there needs to be a hold & fire command, in Tow, when a unit is told to hold and then given a fire order the unit will move if the target moves out of range and not hold position, I've never seen this in CMSF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
z1812 Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Hi All, I must agree with the "the Brit". What has been done is not nearly enough. ToW is so frustrating as it is one of those "possibly" great games that does not nearly meet its potential. Perhaps 1c and Battlefront will do the same for ToW as Battlefront has done for CMSF. At very least you need a TAC A.I. that works. Combat resolution has to be reasonably logical. And for goodness sakes who wants to use text editing in notepad to delete a saved game made in the mission editor. The editor may be powerful and comprehensive, but who cares if it is convoluted, counter intuitive, and not enjoyable to use. Mind you I bought it and I can rationalize that by hoping it helps to move wargame development along. Regards John Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narses Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Lots of great comments here. I tend to agree with TheBrit. Too much micro mgmt. As a Co Cdr, certainly as a Bn Cdr you simply don't need to be doing all this stuff ( I've been there, done that in the Army). I've been playing the CM series and that has some of the same faults although I find the game much simpler and that the AI seems to react better. Graphics not that bad either. Maybe its just I've been playing CMBB steady since 2002 and then CMAK ( CMBO wasn't quite up to these last 2 and I seldom played it). Actually, I normally develop my own CM battles of a co minus and then go at it. But I must add I fool with those neat Peiper "Blowtorch" scenarios also. Anyway in TOW I simply have reverted to small, discreet battles using the battle generator and using the mission editor as well. These are truly great editors; on the other hand it takes lots of time by necessity (I like loading my own ammo types). TOW has done some great stuff here. I love sending one of my pz crew out on a recon while I hide my zug. I wait for him to spot enemy then I try to manuever into a more favorable flank position. Of course it doesn't always work. In CM if I get the urge to fight a zug of PVIV vs T3485 (silly me) I can set it up in less than 1 minute and add a zug of inf or two plus mortars. I'm hanging in to see what TOW does next. If they don't soon give me a Pz III G or H, and 2 J's ( short & long with extra armor )for 'Barbarossa' and 1942 I may have a problem with TOW! I also don't like playing in 1943 with a Panther G. At least need the A. Btw, I just noticed Steel Fury is talking about a new SF Kharkov 43 (mouthwatering graphics!) and SF Kharkov 42 isn't even released outside the Ukraine/Russia yet. What kind of marketing is this! Then there is T3485 vs Tiger - I'm still checking my mail box every day for it. Oh well, back to Pz Elite 'Ostpak' I guess if I want to enter a tank turret. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartan Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 I think I have to agree as well unfortunately with most of the posts. In this game a virtually have to order every single man/unit. No what I thought it would be. I want to be able to mange a platoon for a while but expect another unit previously ordered to carry out orders to some level. I have had many times tank standing meters apart..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spartan Posted February 27, 2008 Share Posted February 27, 2008 Narses, I have aways wanted to play a first person tank sim onlinemulti-player. What would you recommend? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmayer Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Spartan, I recomend you keep waiting because there isn't one out yet that is worth playing...lol. Untill there is you might try playing ToW online for it is a great Tactical game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
helm123 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Spartan If you have the funds to puchase Steel Beasts it should give you what you want in a tank sim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sfox28 Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 Hey guys a new tank sim will be out soon called T-34 vs Tiger. It's made by a Russian company IDK I think! It's graphics are the same as TOW but without a lot of excess Infantry. It should be interesting. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sneaksie Posted February 28, 2008 Share Posted February 28, 2008 IDDK is publisher. T-34 vs Tiger is not connected with T-72: Balkans on Fire (if you thought so), many developers from T-72 team made another tank sim, Steel Fury. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts