Kwazydog
-
Posts
1,547 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Kwazydog
-
-
Not sure what we can really do here guys short of removing the bazooka from seated soldiers...Ill run that past Charles.
-
Dan thanks. I happily stand corrected.
Bil.
No probs Bil...its one of those things that youd hardly notice in game directly hehe, though the results will show...wheels, tracks and weapons mounts are tracked individually also for instance
-
Vanir is correct.. however the visual representation is just that.. visual. Has no effect in game on whether an incoming round will take into account whether a skirt is present or not.
Actually the opposite it true guys.
The skirts are separate parts of the model and are treated as such for LOS and damage results. If you get given a Pz-IV with a missing skirt, and a heat round happens to pass through that section, the hull will take the full brunt of the impact. The same was even true in CMSF for M1 and T series skirts, so in theory those wacky fold out wing type skirts on the earlier soviet tanks could actually pre-detonate an incoming missing (even saw it happen once hehe) and could, in theory, make a difference.
If you are seeing otherwise please let us know as I am doing a lot of extra naming of objects for no reason if so hehe.
Dan
-
Thanks guys, I thought we had squished that one
-
Could you do a quick test and confirm those results are still valid Tamptest...if so Ill pass it onto Charles as I believe that may not be how they are intended to work.
Dan
-
Really glad to hear this Kwazydog, although I would be happy simply with "Burnt-out" versions of cars, trucks and even tanks - perhaps even one with blown-off turret. They would just add that look of "battlefield"
Thing is if we put this simple version in now chances are a more detailed version will just be pushed further down the to do list than it already is.
Something we have wanted since day one are destroyed versions of tanks...the problem is that that means we also need to make LODs for them, exponentially increase the work load of such a feature. I do believe it will happen, but we need to flesh out our vehicle model list first so we have less new vehicles to make per module thus allowing us to concentrate on this sort of stuff
Dan
-
Certainly hope so, in fact I would like to do a lot more with terrain in the future and as we build up our 3D vehicle 'database' as such that should indeed be possible including many more trees, flavour objects, etc.
One tricky part about cars as a flavour object is that to be realistic they need to be able to burn and they are large yet light enough to need to be movable or destroy-able by vehicles, which will likely require some further work on Charles end. In theory we could make a simple one that would somewhat work under the current flavour object system, but Id prefer to wait until we are able to have them go from a regular car, to a destroyed car to a burning car as they should.
Something I am working on for the nearer future are modular build roofs with proper 3D models for damage showing beams, etc. For such a small change as such (well not on my end, I think it requires around a couple of dozen models hehe), the overall affect of them should be very pleasing I think
Dan
-
Hehe, I was meaning to say shipping containers there...full of beer
-
One thing I never realised (nor had particularly thought about hehe) about tanks before making 3D models of them is just how vulnerable their engines are due to the need to cool them.
Check out the rear deck of a Tiger or Panther in a photo and you will see huge open slats allowing for this. I had always assumed that there would be some sort of further armor plate below these, in the darkness, but there is not...in the case of the Tiger tank directly below either of these vents are the radiators, fans and fuel tanks for the vehicle, all of which would be highly vulnerable to shrapnel.
Even the moder M1 Abrams has a similar spot to its rear, where the slatted armor allows air into the cooling system, which has proven very vulnerable to RPG fire and has prompted armor upgrade in this area.
Dan
-
Yup thats correct guys, they provide cover and its variable depending on how solid the object it...the design of flavour objects though is that they arent large enough to block LOS as such. In the future we hope to add a large type such as say, storage containers, that will provide both.
Dan
-
Along with their machine guns that reload the spent rounds into the clip lol.
-
To answer the topics question with a simple answer, as with everything is comes down to development time...for this release the development time we spent on the interface went into the quick battle system which we felt was the better choice. We do wish to make some notable changes to the in game interface overall and we didnt feel we had the time to do them justice with this initial release, so keep an eye out in the future guys.
Dan
-
Heh! Yeh we just matched the color to that off google maps as close as we could and generally the testers were happy with the result. Some prefer a more desaturated 'old film' look like was used Saving Private Ryan though which is what mods are for and Im sure there will be many!
Dan
-
Yup ammo does cook off in burning vehicles Abrams...not good for any infantry nearby either
-
My other primary complaint is the camera, which feels....sticky... Is it something you get used to?
Im guessing so as this hasnt been changed in CMSF and I dont recall anyone mentioning it in as long as I can recall
-
Just a suggestion for those wanting faster turn around on pbem play for now.
Add your player to msn and you can just drag and drop the pbem file into the chat window...they will have the turn in a couple of minutes depending on internet speeds and you can chat in the mean time.
Dan
-
but realistic mechanics aren't always enough.
For *you* you mean...I would say maybe 90% of our customer base would actually rather we spent more time on mechanics over visuals though, particularly the CMx1 fans many of whom suggested that they were actually happy with the visuals as they were. Bottom line is that we can only do what we can do as we can do it, and in general we do spend more coding time on game mechanics vs visuals...if the visuals (along with some of your other concerns looking through your posting history) do end up reducing your enjoyment of the game then its possible that this isnt quite the type of game you are after
Dan
PS : By the way I bet ya wont find more accurately modelled vehicles in any game on the market, hehe.
-
I'm glad to see that the seriousness of that fact is represented in the sim. And after watching the video--I now call it a simulation rather than a game.
Interesting info Snafu and thanks for passing it on!
With regards to the grenade conversation I think some may may not be considering the difference between a tank being totally knocked out (unable to return to battle at a later time) and abandoned in such an attack. The chances of a grenade knocking out a tank would of course be small short of a fire...but if I was in a tank that had been immobilised by by such an attack within infantry range...personally Id want to get out of there before they call up something bigger to finish the job
Dan
-
Tanks getting knocked out with hand grenades is pure john wayne stuff
After spending thousands of hours modelling these vehicles Ill have to disagree with that...panthers, shermans, tigers and many tanks all have engines that are visible from outside of the vehicle through their engine covers. Any fragments, be it from grenades or even small arms fire, that passed through these covers has the chance to knock out oil lines, water hoses, electrical fittings, etc. Even the Abrams has a weak spot to the rear some half century later that required modification for an urban environment (albeit to rpgs).
Dan
-
Sorry guys, have just done a reinstall and am in the middle of flavor objects at the moment so dont have time for a screen shot but basically we reduced the height of the dirt and added a layer or so of sandbags to the top...as a result I think they visually they look much more like a reasonably good reinforced position considering the compromises with regards to FOW.
Trenches have also been reworked with the new sandbags, in fact fortifications in general have probably been completely revamped from any screen shots you guys may have seen (older than a couple of weeks at least). Dan
-
Yes we have seen the foxholes in the screenshots and I, for one, am more than happy with them. They look slightly odd but it is very much worth it to have them FOW.
Just FYI guys - the foxholes you guys saw in the AAR were always just place holders, Ive made some changes to them and overall am actually reasonably happy with their look now, all things considered.
Dan
-
They are just place holders guys...Im not sure we can do a hell of a lot with them but Ill be looking at them shortly.
-
Dan how exactly does that work...will the forest floor completely wipe out any tile beneath it or bleed into it?
To be totally honest I not sure, it was one of the more recent terrain elements added and I havnt had much time to play yet at all. I can say that the tile is placeable independent of trees though, so bottom line is that its up the the scenario designer how it is placed
-
Yeh we added something like that some time back guys, basically a forest floor terrain tile. Actually we have two types, light and heavy, though they share a texture as the moment. This will change when I give them a final once over.
BF, please tell me the M91/30 model is WIP
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
Yeh, it is hehe...I made an oops somewhere there and went from just having one of the models incorrect to all of them
Itll be sorted by released...by the end of the weekend all going well!