aka_tom_w
-
Posts
8,130 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by aka_tom_w
-
-
Unless accurate shoot throughs are correctly modeled for realistic physics and ballistics, both solutions are equally unrealistic in my opinion.Originally posted by DzrtFox:Yeah I wasn't trying to stir up a can of worms over what is (to me) a minor issue. I was just curious after reading your explanation if the better fix would be to have the rounds blocked.
My initial 1.05 impressions soon to follow...
Solution #1:
All AFV's in LOF block all rounds.
Solution #2:
All AFV's in LOF let all rounds shoot through
I think I should add that if you test this in the game it will feel even more realistic then just, "all rounds pass through all dead AFV's" (that is NOT the case with this fix)
I think if you test this one out (if you are interested), dead AFV's will not block rounds only if the round was aimed at another vehicle.
(LOS and LOF are granted both way through dead AFV's for the purpose of both sides targeting opposing AFV's equally)Meaning also, that if you are aiming at something else like an area target the dead AFV WILL block the LOF so it is a fairly discreet fix. I think you will find.
[ December 15, 2007, 07:40 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
Wouldn't a more realistic way to fix this be to have the dead AFV block shots both ways rather than letting shots fly through both ways?
Note:
I did not say it was perfect and Steve or Charles may need to answer that specific question
BUT if you think about it if AFV's start blocking rounds both ways, and you want to do it with accurate ballistic physics then an intervening M1A1 in the LOS would need to be treated differently then an intervening BMP, (depending on the shooters and the type of weapon and the range and the weight and velociity and kinetic energy of the round, think about it
So the question you have to ask yourself is:
"Did I want a v1.05 patch before Christmas that levels the playing field in this area or, do I want to wait another 4-6 months (I'm just guessing as only Steve or Charles could tell you if this is even remotely possible
) for the mother of all patches that models ballistically accurate shoot throughs for all possible rounds with all possible armour penetration combinations for every vehicle in the game modeled with realistic armour penetration values for shoot throughs and subsquent (follow on) hits (where possible)??? 
" But only Steve or Charles can really answer your question for certain.
[ December 15, 2007, 05:55 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
OK, yes I was thinking of Crumble and thanks I did not realize Crimble was slang for Christmas
Thanks for the prompt reply.
[ December 15, 2007, 07:41 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
hmmm...
I think there might be a few folks that would like to take a look at that one.
-
Yes, a full moon makes a difference in the night lighting for sure! Look up in the sky you can see if the moon is full or just partial. The phases of the moon are accurately modeled, by real date and time, so are the positions of the constellations. :eek: :cool:
-
In north america, I am not sure if "Crimble" is good?Originally posted by Other Means:...and hell, it's nearly Crimble.
Is that a dessert and does that mean its almost done to perfection?
-
This may have to do with the gamma setting on your monitor, you can darker the screen setting and turn down the gamma to get the dark night scenes I think.Originally posted by Hev:i was wondering how they got the game so dark in thier screenshots, night battles for me arnt THAT dark. I want blackness
-
I saw this in my quick 1.05 test. A enemy BRMD? recon vehicle was behind a destroyed BTR-60. My Stryker was able to target the vehicle behind the BTR. It also destroyed this target quickly with MG fire. </font>Originally posted by SlowMotion:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by orwell:
I have read the change list and I have a concern which I hope can be answered here.
* Vehicles are not shielded by hiding behind knocked-out armored vehicles.
If your hiding behind a piece of armor that's just sitting there, even if it's been damaged in some way, wouldn't that protect you in some manner? it may not stop it, but I would think it would reduce the damage you take. Is this modelled, or is my interpretation of either how damage works, or what a knocked out vehicle really means, off?
-
I agree completely.Originally posted by SlapHappy:While I'm sure there are some annoying LOS glitches that will pop up that need to be fixed, I'd like to go on the record in saying this:
This game has one of the most impressive infantry squad models I've ever seen in a game of this type. Nothing else really comes very close at all. I am enjoying the game even playing just the "all-infantry" scenarios. And I honestly didn't think I could do that in any game. It really makes you appreciate how under-developed "the grunts" are in most wargaming titles......
I think this comment deserves its own thread.
It could also make you appreciate how extensively the infantry model has be designed to simulate reality as closely as technically possible in a consumer level military simulator.
-
by the way....
Steve's post above "could be" interpreted to suggest the patch release might be CLOSE.
-
if the round hit the front sprocket of the track then it was a track hit (or an M-Kill) with no substantial damage to the main body of the vehicle. A very lucky shot indeed for the Bradley.
Sometime stuff like that happens.
not very often I hope.
-
-
on Blog front:Originally posted by LGMB:Matt, can you talk about the sound changes in 1.05? I'd really like to know what cool shizzle we can expect.
seriously, this is just the tip of the iceberg :cool:The team is finishing testing of the upcoming 1.05 patch for CMSF. The changelog is impressive and consists of over 60 entries, including bug fixes as well as new features. Here is a short overview:1. Over 60 bug fixes, feature enhancements, and a few new features
2. Many fixes to LOS/LOF and pathfinding
3. Dynamic lighting at night from muzzle flashes and burning objects
4. Trees can now be visually hidden via a hotkey
5. Soldiers use the cover of corners of walls and buildings much better
6. Hunt is now more responsive to enemy activitiy
7. Soldiers do a better job retaining important weapons from fallen comrades
8. Vehicle ammo selection is much better when the targeted spot could theoretically be penetrated by more than one type of round
9. Buildings stand up better to damage from explosions
10. TCP/IP instability and various visual glitches fixed
On Blogfront: Dusting off the the credenza click me
[ December 13, 2007, 05:54 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
What colour are they?Originally posted by the Fighting Seabee:Have you ever seen a firefight at night???
The tracers aren't white. To me, white tracers look dumb.
What should the tracers look like in the game?
Different coloured tracers for the Syrian's is an interesting idea.
(maybe not realistic and a little on the "gamey side" but I don't know that for sure.)
-
GSX,
These are all problems that everyone wants fixed.
In order to fix them all it takes is time. (Last time I checked you can't really buy some extra time to carry around in your back pocket, although, come to think of it, that sounds like something someone should invent and market, hmmm
)Have a little patience.
You will see v1.05 soon (Before Christmas Holidays, I think Steve was suggesting) and he has promised v1.06 for sometime in the new year.
"At the core", the game engine has way, WAY more potential then you give it credit for. Have a little faith.
[ December 12, 2007, 06:15 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
oops
[ December 11, 2007, 05:04 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
If his base turned red he is either KIA or almost KIA and out of the battle for the duration.
Its not a bug, if you see the red cross the guy is a casualty and even he is near by friendlies he disappears and this simulates a med evac, if he is not near friendlies as in your situation his body disappears and this "might" simulate him becoming a prisoner, but live or dead prisoners are not taken in this game, none the less, either way he is out of the fight and all red base KIA's disappear after about 30 secs in the game.
-
gone dark
[ December 11, 2007, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
wrong thread
[ December 11, 2007, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
oops
[ December 11, 2007, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]
-
This may be a good point, hypothetically speaking, is it possible that 2 out of 3 just isn't good enough? (Hence no patch release).I definitely don't expect perfection, I just want the major issues to be fixed. LoS/LoF problems, pathfinding issues, and broken multiplayer are the three things that come to mind for me.I ask this because if the issues noted above are deemed to be the 3 big ones to fix, (and they might be the most complicated to patch and test and trouble shoot and test again) then if only 2 out of 3 of them are fixed, it "might" understandable to wait for the patch until the 3rd is perfected.
I speak of course, only hypothetically.
-
ROTFL
Good one, Mark E. !
-
Please keep this in mind before you start planning your complaining strategy.
There are "known issues" that means Steve and Charles know about themWe do need to get it out, though, so we're pretty close to calling it "good to go" even if there are a few significant known issues. The amount of stuff v1.05 addresses successfully is quite substantial and so they will go on the top of the list for v1.06. If I understand how the whole patching system works correctly.
-
my statements and conclusions about small arms accuracy are the result of observations at close range in a target rich, urban environment playing the US mostly.
The Syrian AI runs guys out into the street and the US mows them down if they are on near by roof tops.
If the US units run out into the street Syrian units mow them down.
I am not sure I see a problem, but I will be looking a lot more closely for it for sure now.
thanks
"
Opinions of 1.05?
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted