English Demo first impressions

[Russkly]

Haven't posted here, or indeed on any of the Battlefront forums, for a long while, but, after the disappointment of ToW, I'd like to express my heatfelt thanks and congratulations to the development team.

Visually and aurally a fantastic achievement, and personally I find the theatre (excuse pun) one of my military favourites.

Some of my frustrations (camera, stopping units charging around without orders to do so[ a la ToW], etc.) have been addressed in this thread, so it's largely a question of laziness in not reading more about the controls - look forward to the manual lol.

Didn't realise the 105s could go indirect, because they got wiped out by the German infantry assault designed to do just that. Which units can relay fire orders btw?

Like the area fire option and the ability to 'storm' positions, which worked well, as long there wasn't an MG42 in the building.

Would agree with other poster (sorry, forgot your name), who suggested that the infantry weapons effectiveness was over the top - hitting a moving human target at even 200 metres with an M1 is seriously hard. I was rubbish even with an SA80 with SUSAT sights.

Some AI offensive doctrines seem a little short of panache - little attempt to use cover or bounded approach, and little use of AT screen to cover flanks before tanks followed infantry up, as was Afrika Korps doctrine.

Defensive arrays good, with good AT and MG sitings. Suicide for infantry to advance on the village in the open and rightly so.

Also, probably wrong, but how easy was it for a M4's 75mm to take out a IVF2 from the front at >1.000m?

Another OOB point: did US sections have smoke capability in 1943, or indeed in WWII?

Also agree that snipers are spotted too easily - I know it's the desert, and cover is spartan, but at 1.000m I'd expect snipers to crawl around the tops of escarpments without being killed by rifle fire.

Perhaps I've missed it, but is there any way to issue orders above the section/vehicle level (without using the slightly cumbersome drag and select tool)? It would be useful to issue platoon/troop orders, especially if the friendly AI could execute them well. This would cut down on the micromanagement, which, whilst a key aspect of the scale of this game, could become onerous if we get beyond a reinforced company.

I hope the campaign(s) is more closely linked chronologically than ToW, where the jump from one theatre to another ruined (for me) the sense of continuity and developing your combat group's skills.

So, in summary, much more immersive than the first iteration, and I will definitely be pre-ordering.

Love CMSF, which is a truly great game, but I just can't get excited about the theatre...

Russkly

PS Great to hear Battle for Britain is still in development.

[Russkly]

There's a bit of a tendency for AFVs to target individual soldiers with their main armament - annoying waste of ammo.

Am I doing something wrong, because at present I have to chenge their fire orders manualy all the time?

R

[Steinfisch]

Nothing else to say

[cabal23]

I feel 20+ patches are the only fix for this game. It feels really incomplete for what I was able to play before I gave up with the camera, laggyness, overall ugliness despite descent specs. I updated everything and still not great performance. I think I will let this one go too. I spent too much energy waiting for BF to fix CMSF, I will not do it again with another half arsed game being released too early. i have no way of knowing how much polish they will put on this game, but so far it needs a lot.

[Piecekeeper]

As soon as they fix the game so you can play with specs OVER the minimum specs. i will buy it too.

[Captain wow]

i cant w8 all thoes flak 38 im MAD in thoes things

[Petrus58]

Seems to be an increasing issue with games these days; just look at the problems some are having with ETW. I guess I'm lucky in that I can play the demo maxed out. I personally like the theatre (though I would have preferred 1941-2) and feel that far from feeling like an unfinished product, I encountered no major problems.

[Gnasher]

I just hope that the missions provided aren't single solution puzzles, I like a good tactical battle over repeated save game, get killed, reload save yadda yadda. This I think was the biggest downer on ToW as the stock missions were too single solution & very hard to beat & had little to no replayability once you've cracked the puzzle. IMHO the solution to this is to have a large reserve force that the player can select units from & randomly selected opposition, so that when replaying the mission it isn't the same old every time. I tried to address this with my Bulldogs campaign with I hope some success.

[Lanzfeld]

Well I played the demo all day and I have to say that it is not for me. Fun in the training mission as you can keep track of what is happening but when you introduce the number of units in the normal mission without turn based WEGO then the details get lost. I was hoping that this could be my WWII fix until CM:N but it is back to CMSF for me. I have never been the "twitch" crowd....

well....except for Red Orchestra....

[Sneaksie]

Well I played the demo all day and I have to say that it is not for me. Fun in the training mission as you can keep track of what is happening but when you introduce the number of units in the normal mission without turn based WEGO then the details get lost. I was hoping that this could be my WWII fix until CM:N but it is back to CMSF for me. I have never been the "twitch" crowd....

well....except for Red Orchestra....

The pause button will let you see all the details:) ToW can be played as you like it - some people use pause rarely (like in Close Combat where pausing was prohibited), while those who want to see all details and carefully choose new course of action without hurry can use pause a lot. My friend usually even looks at the target to determine angle of shell impact before firing, since there is little reason to fire at sharp angles - there will be ricochet anyway.

[Centauro]

... though I would have preferred 1941-2 ...

I agree, they best would have been a 1941-42 and then a 1943 expansion but you know, they probably didnt have time to model all the vehicles and troops since the beginning of the desert war and, above all, they need USA buyers NOW.

[Tartari]

I think that early african war will be possible specially with this mod:

[Centauro]

Wow! Your doin a good work! You are probably aware that I sent (big) stuff about italian armored to Sneaksie. Anyway, I really hope in an early desert war mod.

[Gnasher]

This is being done by somebody affliated to 1C see this thread that was locked for inappropiate comments:-

http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=86452

[Tartari]

yes, it's not my mod, saw that in the russian forum.

Would be great if they could add to their vehicle list, matildas and cruisers!

[amandus]

Actually this issue had been announced by Sneaksie on 6th march already.

Quote:

Italian and British armored vehicles for TOW2

Currently Belorussia missions designer's wife makes models of various Italian and British units for a possible extension of TOW2 (mod or addon).

http://img19.imageshack.us/img19/4395/ital.jpg

Models are mostly finished, she is working on textures now.

Last edited by Sneaksie : 03-06-2009 at 06:11 AM.

Unfortunately however, comments went off topic and the thread had to be closed.

I am personally looking forward to see this work to be continued and the scenario expanded even to autumn 1940 when Italian Carri Veloci met Mathildas and the Aussie’s used captured Italian M 11/39 tanks during their counter offensive with their distinctive kangaroo-emblem.

Having already preordered the game and anticipating 24th April to come, to be able to start my download, I would like once again thank 1C and Battlefront for their dedication to their games and to us enjoying the games they provide.

Having read the manual provided yesterday, I am looking forward to play the campaigns using ‘trophies’ like captured equipment, new infantry assets (e.g. Solothurn AT-rifle, AP-rounds for ordinary rifles, smoke grenades, AT-grenades a.s.o. and looking forward to still discover further in the game ) Many other proposals have been addressed satisfactory (sneak, ambush mode, occupying building, breastworks, etc.)

The only thing I am still wondering is, why most troops by default do NOT have any ‘scouting-skills’ at all – except officers and snipers to a certain extend. And these are initially rather low. Even veteran soldiers do not have any initially, though they have high ‘accuracy’ skills. I do not understand why this skill I retain vital for the survival of my troops (even for tank crews – after bailing out) is almost neglected by the AI as it simulates the ability of the individual to hide.

Even the sniper in the demo has a rather ‘lousy’ scouting skill which I claim to be the reason for his easy and early death during the mission(s).

Reading about officers using binoculars from time to time to spot enemies was great. Did anyone already observe a spotting officer using his binoculars playing the demo?

Interesting to know is the effect of wounds to different parts of the body reducing his ability to fight in different ways.

Also good to know, that the use of a sniper rifle increases the accuracy by 15 % of any soldier using it.

[Sneaksie]

Reading about officers using binoculars from time to time to spot enemies was great. Did anyone already observe a spotting officer using his binoculars playing the demo?

Interesting to know is the effect of wounds to different parts of the body reducing his ability to fight in different ways.

Also good to know, that the use of a sniper rifle increases the accuracy by 15 % of any soldier using it.

Officer model doesn't actually look using binoculars (i mean it is not represented as animation), his view changes from naked eye to binoculars and back in visibility system each several seconds.

Also, not 15%, but 15 points are added to accuracy skill.

[totm8er]

I think it is a great game! Played the demo over and over, using different tactics.

In the beginning I had a lot of crashes in Vista, but running as administrator works much better. The game crashes now and then and the save funcntion doesn't always work properly. So there's some work to do...PreOrdered my copy already and I can't wait to play the complete game.

I read some remarks about the sniper. I sincerely hope they do not turn him into a superhero which can crawl through lines without being noticed. Snipers don t do that...and they certainly have no radio equipment carrying around to inform the arti

I think the tank battles improved a lot. I feel I have much more control in a tank battle than in TOW1.

No lagging on my computer ...but then again, i just bought a monster machine at the end of 2008. It looks real pretty on full detailsettings

Great work so far!

[CharonJr]

Hi,

I have had no problem with the demo as well (1900x1200), but agree with some other things that have been said, mainly:

- infantry guns seem to accurate at long range

- ammo supplies would be nice

- tank AI seems to be improved

- I hope that there will be less/no puzzle solving with TOW2

In addition it seems like in order to give the AI an edge we are still seeing battles where the AI has a vastly superior number of units - but with a bit of luck it will be more balanced than TOW.

And for my taste the range looks a bit too close still, but there might be other scenarios.

Mainly I am still undecided here, but will surely follow the forums after the release.

CharonJr

[Russkly]

Having played the demo through a few times...

Like:

Graphics

Improved AI (esp. vehicles) - played demo 4 times , and each time different dispositions, attack routes, etc.

Genrally decreased 'uber' spotting cf ToW, esp. by vehicles of infantry (but see below)

Increased control of formations and actions, esp. infantry

Storm feature

Area fire

Not so sure:

Infantry with smoke capability at section level

Artillery/AT guns wasting ammo and revealing position by expending rounds at single infantrymen

Scouting does not seem to hinder enemy spotting - lone infantryman at 500m crawling to side of peak of ridge still spotted and taken out

Ability of ordinary infantry to spot for on-board artillery. Surely this should be restricted to FO at company level, or at least by section/platoon officers. Radio is a must for directing arty, or not?

Infantry AI sometimes suicidal with failure to use ground

Ability of infantry sections to crew AT guns, etc. How possible was this in reality?

As stated before, I like it a lot and also look forward to a 1940-42 mod as well.

R

[Dietrich]

Il2 crew is very busy making Battle for Britain.

Really? Good to hear. I've been hearing about that game for so long that I thought they had eventually given up on it.

I bought ToW1 and found it atmospheric and enjoyable but fiddly, with some very 'unrealistic' actions from infantry and vehicles alike at times.

In assaulting the SdKfz 251/1 near the artillery battery, one of my GIs ran over the grenade he had thrown at the halftrack two seconds earlier. Ouch.

On the minus side, troop levels still seem awfully small for each side. Is there still a cap on the number of squads you can put into the game? I see that you can reinforce gradually as the game progresses, but that is a small consolation. In the demo, like TOW 1, infantry seemed to get chewed up fairly quickly and starting with only six squads make them very delicate in the game. Some had complained about TOW 1 that the maps were too small, but I think with the troop levels currently supported, it is best to play this game with a map of about 500 meters per side, only a couple of pieces of armor, and shortened lines of sight (as much as this is possible in a desert warfare game).

Good point. Using the scenario in the demo as an example, would two understrength platoons of Shermans (six tanks) and a severely understrength company (five rifle squads and a single HQ squad with a 2nd lieutenant in command) be sent to attack a village defended by multiple AT guns (including 88s), a couple platoons of infantry, and at least two Panzer platoons counter attacking from different directions? Of course, if the US commander who ordered the attack didn't know about the strength of the German defending forces....

ToW and ToW2 seem best suited to scenarios including forces of at most a reinforced platoon per size. Any more than that, and it seems crowded, and the numbers of units becomes a bit hard to manage.

I also think small arms lethality needs to be tuned down a bit, especially at medium to long ranges. It just isn't easy to hit moving targets with iron sights only with the strain and terror of close combat working on your nerves!

I thought it was a bit odd that the Kar 98k's range was listed in ToW as 2000m. Sure, a Kar 98's bullet could hit something that far away, but even a crack sniper with a scope-fitted Kar 98k operating in optimal conditions (no wind, no incoming fire, etc.) would be something resembling lucky to actually hit his target beyond, say 1000m. In most cases, the range from sniper to target was more in the realm of 400-800m. Contrary to popular opinion (as far as I understand, anyway), sniping is not all about headshots at extremely long range.

[Sneaksie]

In assaulting the SdKfz 251/1 near the artillery battery, one of my GIs ran over the grenade he had thrown at the halftrack two seconds earlier. Ouch.

We changed grenade throwing behavior somewhat, this shouldn't happen anymore (in the release).

I thought it was a bit odd that the Kar 98k's range was listed in ToW as 2000m. Sure, a Kar 98's bullet could hit something that far away, but even a crack sniper with a scope-fitted Kar 98k operating in optimal conditions (no wind, no incoming fire, etc.) would be something resembling lucky to actually hit his target beyond, say 1000m. In most cases, the range from sniper to target was more in the realm of 400-800m. Contrary to popular opinion (as far as I understand, anyway), sniping is not all about headshots at extremely long range.

Range listed is maximal one, even a 100% skilled sniper will have 2 meters aiming error in 80% shots and 10 meters error in other 20% shots at 2000m (K98k).

[SlapHappy]

A good quote from a user's web space:

Recent actions in Afghanistan have called into question both the terminal effects and long range performance of the 5.56mm round. The issue of terminal effects will be dealt with in this article. This one addresses long range combat.

The 5.56mm is termed a "intermediate" round, which is a round that is designed for shooting at ranges of 500m or less. The design specification of the M855/SS109 did call for an effective range of 800m but we'll deal with that issue a bit later.

There are times when a Soldier may have the opportunity to fire at ranges greater than 500m. However, there is a difference between sniping at an unsuspecting foe or suppressive fire at an area and combat shooting. In Combat shooting the enemy is aware he is a target and acting accordingly.

To understand intermediate rounds, let's put them in their historical context:-

The idea of intermediate rounds (optimized for 500m or less) is usually portrayed as a German wartime concept. In actuality the contract for developement of the 7.92x33mm round was placed in 1934 and it was apparent during the First World War that shots at more than 400yds were very rare. The usual explanation you'll see for a 500m range being selected is that in most of the world visibility and terrain prevents shooting at greater ranges. Since MGs and snipers routinely shoot at greater ranges this accepted and often repeated explanation is obviously wrong!

By 1942 the German army was very familiar with alpine and desert fighting and it is very “un-Germanic” that these experiances would not have been figured into development of the intermediate rounds.

My theory is this.

It is Tactical Accuracy not visibility that is the limiting factor.

A 7.92mm or lesser bullet takes around a second to reach 600m. In that time an AWARE target can sprint 5-9m :- you don't know which direction he will take and he'll often be darting between cover. Your chance of hitting him with a single aimed shot is virtually random.

I think most shooting was less than 500m because most German riflemen knew there was little point shooting beyond this unless the foe didn't know you were there or you could fill an area of about 10m with bullets.

A couple of friends confirm this with more recent experiences:-

“DOD did the same kinds of studies for all kinds of terrain, same result/conclusions; usual infantry engagement was 300 yards or less (didn't matter what you were armed with, typical infantry could not get hits at greater than 300m unless shooting volleys in mass or using machineguns.

I was a former USMC National Match M-14 shooter and I can testify that even then the average infantryman was not going to get hits beyond 300m.) If you are under 1000m you call company or battalion mortars or MGs or Mark 19 (full auto grenade launcher), artillery and air strikes are for better targets that are further off. The point is correct on not firing individual weapons at longer than 300m, you won't kill them and they can call fire down on you!”

The entire article with some slope charts can be found here:

http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/range.html

[SlapHappy]

Here's an Air Force website which lists some small arms effective ranges for common modern weapons. Note that some of these differentiate between single target fire and area firing capabilities:

http://www.af.mil/news/airman/0106/abdefense.shtml

[jassibi]

I think the demo looks great and I could get used to the interface. But I end up leaving the infantry at home and just using tanks - well, I leave them with the artillery so that they can replace losses. I think this is the disappointing side of Theatre of War - the infantry just do not survive. It's really a tank game. I've just started playing the original TOW and find the same with this. Can't really see the point of Infantry in this game except to replace losses of tank and artillery crews. They just die too quickly, and tanks seem to be able to spot anything within LOS. This is a real shame as it could be such a great game but this aspect spoils it for me. I am a long time player of Combat Mission (at least the first 3) and in those games it was always dangerous to let tanks wander around without infantry support. And, if you lost all your tanks and were facing some enemy armour there was always the option of attacking with infantry – usually suicidal but it could work. In TOW, infantry seem just helpless against tanks. Mind you, I haven’t played any of the later TOW missions where infantry may have a bit more AT capability. So for me TOW is really a tank game. I wonder if there are any infantry only scenarios out there and how they play?