Oddball_E8
-
Posts
2,871 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Oddball_E8
-
-
I really appreciated Battlefronts decision to offer a realtime game mode with Shock Force. To support their effort, I even bought the whole we-go combat mission games, although I don't like we-go game mode and I've never touched the games.
From there on I bought every base game and module. Some I liked more, some less. But each releases showed some progress.
This is the first time I'm not excited about a release of the combat mission games and it's the first time I won't buy it.
In my opinion a balanced mix of gameplay features / scenarios / units makes a good game or addon.
On these forums are threads with some amazing ideas and all we get this time are:
- some units which already exist partially in other modules and the new ones don't offer much gameplay wise
- some maps, which basically could be done by everone who already owns the game (except some special objects like the bridges and new buildings)
- some scenarios
For me (I understand that there are other opioions, but this is mine) this isn't worth 35$. I wouldn't pay more than 10-15$ for this content.
I really want to support you, but this time I can't. Sorry. I hope future releases do better. My saved next-combat-mission-title-money goes straight into Creative Assemblys Rome 2.
Please consider the community suggested features for future titles and I'll be happy to support you. As I stated before: offer a balanced mix and not only eye candy, then I'll happily spend my money. Each release should make the game more fun to play and offer more possibilities.
Added:
What I would have expected for 35$ example is:
- announced stuff
+ aa guns work against planes
+ improved urban combat
Well that is an interesting view.
It makes me think that you do not consider scenarios, campaigns, maps and terrain as something worth money.
The only things i see you putting value on is units that are completely new to the entire game series (no matter that you cannot use an M15 halftrack in normandy, even if you can in italy) and changes to the game engine.
As it has been pointed out repeatedly in this thread that there ARE changes to the game engine but they will not be announced as part of the module since they will be added to the base game via a patch later to be accessed by all who own any combination of the base game and modules.
So why did you buy the other modules then?
Apparantly only because of the units.
So it seems clear to me that you only value new (and i mean brand new) units.
In that case, i feel sorry for you as you will no doubt be dissapointed in alot of the modules (and games) coming out in the future since (NEWSFLASH!) the armies didnt switch out their entire vehicle line every 3 months.
They upgraded their vehicles, sure, but you don't seem to appreciate that ("- some units which already exist partially in other modules").
This means that the modules and base games coming out will have mostly either the same units as other moduels/games but with different textures and different organisation, or they wil have later and upgraded versions of the same base vehicle (fx. Panzer III M instead of Panzer III J) which also seem to matter little to you.
New terrain, new scenarios and new campaigns are of no importance to you, so I'm guessing your "support" for the game will boil down to buying one or two of the eastern front games (unless you dont like that front at all) and then maby the early western front game (invasion of france in 1940).
But other than that, I dont see you buying many base games or modules since these will undoubtedly include alot of "the same" vehicles and units.
But it was nice of you to "support" battlefront since we need more WeGo games out there to make game designers understand that real time is overrated.
EDIT: also, have fun with the completely unrealistic and historically incorrect Rome 2. Keep shelling out your cash to that company since they give you new units every time, no matter if they existed in real life or not.
-
Thinking about the new things that MG's bringing to the sandtable, it occurs to me that the new monster bridges hopefully mean that at least the way bridge elevation is handled will have had changes made. At the moment, troops can't go under bridges. If that's the case for those big suspension types, they'll be very effective long walls, or at least their approach ramps will be... But I'm hoping they've nailed that.
They can't?
I have driven tanks under bridges, i know that for a fact.
I have also had vehicles (mostly wheeled) drive under a bridge only to warp on top of it and get stuck.
I have never observed infantry behaviour around bridges tho...
-
-
Just search for mike or cpt. mike and you should find it.
-
Also, thanx for the appreciation
-
Dang!
I am at work with my laptop and figured i could just download the mod for it here instead of transfering it from my computer. But I can't remember my greenasjade login
-
What else would you spend that $35 on that would give you greater entertainment value?
Lets see here...
35$ will buy me:
a number of low-priced games on steam (none of which I am interested in).
one high-quality game on steam (none of which I am interested in).
one 60-day subscription to SW:TOR, the only online game that interests me right now (but not enough to pay for it, so not that).
one evening with pizza, beer and a rented movie. (not comparable to the entertainment I'll get from the module in the long run).
a number of pointless adult toys like an airzooka or remote control miniature helicpoter. None of which would give me the same entertainment value as a module.
Honestly, i can't think of many things that would keep me entertained for as long as a new module would for the same price.
-
M8 and M20 sound heavy to me, but I don't have CMx2 handy right now to check.
IIRC i have tried those too...
I'll check again tho.
EDIT: Nope, they use the same sound as the trucks do, which is the medium sound.
-
Ah ok. Was wondering why it was cluttered with private vids...
wouldnt mind if you released them all tho since i wont have access to internet at home for 2-4 weeks now.
So i can only watch at work and i have noooooooooooooooooothing to do at work normally...
-
exactly, here may be a problem, it is difficult to find some information, because I had the wrong expectations, not knowing what is the difference between a module / patch / upgrade - I'm from "outside", a few days ago someone told me these subtle differences.
in other games (which is the norm) patches fix bugs game, "DLC" add a few new (campaigns, scenarios, new vehicles, etc..) and new modules enhance the game in every aspect (mechanics, graphics, optimization, new terrain, campaigns, etc.)
maybe this is what false expectations?
To be honest, a fair number of people pointed out the difference between patches and modules in that other thread but it seems they were ignored by the people it was aimed at.
It is great that you now know the difference, and i hope the others do too, but it was pointed out repeatedly.
-
What vehicle, if any, uses the wheeled heavy sound?
I have never heard it in-game so far, and I have tried all the wheeled vehicles i could think of.
-
Why so many private videos?
-
If you are sure to buy (like me), fine, there is much rejoicing and feasting :-)
-
-
Also works with CMBN.
-
-
Except when they're not. See GL.
Ach. Indeed. I meant the 1.12 patch that fixes mortars and MGs to the same state as the rest of the game...
Hence the word "usually".
usually
u·su·al [yoo-zhoo-uhl, yoozh-wuhl]
adjective
1.
habitual or customary: her usual skill.
2.
commonly met with or observed in experience; ordinary: the usual January weather.
3.
commonplace; everyday: He says the usual things.
noun
4.
something that is usual: He could expect only the usual.
Idioms
5.
as usual, in the customary or usual manner: As usual, he forgot my birthday.
See?
It doesn't mean always, but I never claimed that either.
-
Yes, I'm impressed also. And I will also hold out on buying it too...I refuse to buy it until pre-order is announced.
-
Sorry for the necro, but I'm curious as to why this mod is no longer available.
-
We're still waiting for a couple of those. The post-GL patch for FI and the 1.11 patch for BN.
Point was that engine updates are usually part of a patch and not a module.
EDIT: also, here is the 1.11 patch for BN: http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=2044&Itemid=518
All i've heard is that the GL patch for FI is sorely awaited, but nothing about BN, so i guess you just missed that one.
-
module will be pretty cool, a lot of new content, etc.. unfortunately, does not change the mechanics of the game (yes I know it is a module, and it does not improve the mechanics) simply more attracted to me if introduced significant changes to the game (only for the "fog" of the movie, I would give money, but it was not fog ;(
- If I give money for a product? probably yes (treat it as a support for the brand)
* I just hope that the next module / patch / upgrade (no matter how it is called) to change the essence of the game - optimization, mechanics, graphics, etc..
There has almost always been a patch upgrading the base game around the same time when new modules are released.
-
Yes' date=' that was what this thread is about, at the beginning. I would just like to point a few things about urban combat, that's all. And some people on this thread want the use of rocket launcher inside building to be allowed, so...[/quote']
That post was from the Market Garden thread. It got moved here. And this is the thread I was referring to.
-
So... where are the staunch complainers of yesterdays? As I said in that thread, are they going to come back and apologise for their brutish behaviour?
It seems not...
In fact they seem to be suspiciously absent from the entire thread.
Maby they still dont feel its worth 35$?
EDIT: oh wait, someone posted right above me
-
I don't want to start a fight like it was for the hmg problem but i think that shooting from buildings with bazooka etc.. is not the problem.
First, i've been reading the osprey elite books: "infantry anti tank tactics" and "WWII street fighting tactics". Both books forbid the use of AT rocket launchers in buildings. So i would tend to think BFC is right on that point.
I've been playing a lot of QB's in a small city map that i modified and it can be fun to train to kill tanks with demo charges/grenades or panzerschreck.
I use some rules :
- The map : It's very important to provide infantry with places to hide, put some destroy buildings, shell holes, walls, tree, ruins and use the elevation tool in the editor to simulate ruins. I have modified the qb map 260 to have a place to play. You already have an AI plan so just modify the map.
- Split squads is a must. I have AT teams oustside buildings protected form infantry by the rest of the squad. This avoid loosing a squad if the attack against the tanks fails. You also can assault tanks from multiple directions for better results. prepare alternative positions if things go bad.
- Use obstacles and mines : they help to slow tanks and make them go were you can set ambush. If in cmfi mines are efficient, it's not the case in cmbn. I have seen a tank touched by 3 mines and still rolling. This should be looked upon i think.
- it's possible to destroy tanks with at rifle grenades but you'll need lot of luck. I 've seen once a sherman destroyed and burning with one single rifle grenade shot from a building.
with trainning and good tactics, tanks will have a very bad day if they come in cities.
Now, there are some problems i think :
- spotting : i have seen many times buttoned up tanks spot infantry before infantry spots them. Even from the rear, they have very good spoting and i think that this could be modified. Even with destroyed optics, they spot well.
Infantry , AT guns and Hmgs suffer from what i call the crawling problem : when they have to change their spotting direction (with fire arcs for exemple), instead of just turning, they start to crawl and that takes too much time.
- Foxholes and trenches are not efficient. Because they are not really holes inside the ground but more just sandbags they don't provide enough cover. It's sometimes better to be in shell hole than in a trench. If you take a look at pictures from real life, in foxholes you can just see the heads of soldiers.
I've seen hmg position were the barrel of an hmg42 was just over the hole, maybe 20cm or less making it very hard to spot and kill, the same for AT guns positions.
- I don't think that the concussion effect of demo charges or grenades affects the crew or not enough. As you can see on this link : http://www.lonesentry.com/articles/ttt07/german-tactics-against-tanks.html
the crew should be temporaly knocked out. I have seen crews ready to fight just after they were hit by demo charge and their tank destroyed.
the crew shoud be blinded or K.O. for a moment allowing a close assault of the tank and making it easier
- we don't have much blinding possibilities except smoke but sometimes, through smoke infantry spots after the tank and gets destroyed.Incendiary Bottles would be an interresting addition to the game i think.
- small weapons don't have blinding/moral effect on crews or maybe not enough.
- as i said in my other post, tanks don't have minimum range or gun limitations. When cmsf came out i had the chance to talk with Steve about this and it seems it's a problem of AI programming that would bring a lot of other problems. Now, assault guns have gun limitations, so developers managed to do it maybe they could take a look at this to avoid the most extreme situations and adapt the rules made for assault guns to tanks.
- The reaction time : as said before, tanks seem to react immediately.
Even if the TC is killed by infantry (sniper) they spot, react very fast.
- I would really like to have more stealth snipers.
Back to CMX1 i remember that they were a plague for tc and i used to never approach building areas with opened hatch.
These are just my experience after a lot of AT fighting in cities. I'm not expecting the game to replicate the exact reality, but i still hope that BFC will find a nice solution to those little problems like they did for hmgs/small weapons.
I still enjoy destroying tanks in cities, especially with troops not equiped with at rocket launchers and those problems are not game killing for me, but i think that improvement is needed to avoid the most frustrating problems.
This could be as important than the modification made for hmgs i think.
Regards,
Don't want to star a whole discussion here as there is another thread for this, but the point of the discussion there isn't that infantry cannot use rocket launchers from buildings (which i think they should since the game abstracts things like moving out of cover to fire the rocket and then back in) but the fact that infantry will not use grenades and demo charges from buildings.
The only things they will use against vehicles from buildings are rifle grenades and piats.
Operation Market Garden announced!
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Ok, so this is what I see as new in MG:
7 bridges.
Countless new buildings. (windmill included)
New features in the editor (ditchlocks?)
New terrain (footpaths)
14+ scenarios.
7 historically accurate, detailed and thoroughly researched maps.
2 Campaigns
22 COMPLETELY new vehicles and equipment. (11 if you are extremely conservative and only count new versions of tanks and vehicles with major changes and not the different versions of halftracks and such)
Fallschirmjäger in the normandy setting (surely you cannot count this out because they are in italy, when they played such a large part in some of the normandy battles)
Panzer Brigades (armed exclusively with Stg44's)
And other formations not seen before.
Surely that is worth just as much as the Commonwealth module or the Gustav Line module?
Anyone that says it is not either only considers brand spanking new units worth their money and considers new terrain, new scenarios, new campaigns and new versions of units completely worthless.
OR they want game engine upgrades,which is idiotic considering the outcry there was after BFC announced that they wanted us to pay for patch 2.0. For some reason people get upset if they have to pay a low sum of money for a patch that upgrades the game engine alot, but they are A-ok with paying 35$ for a module that changes the game engine slightly.
Luckily for us that is not how BFC operates, the upgrades included in the module will be included in a future patch to the base game and all its modules. So no need to pay for engine upgrades (and no need to include them in the features of a module).