Jump to content
Battlefront is now Slitherine ×

Oddball_E8

Members
  • Posts

    2,871
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Oddball_E8

  1. As a mod slut from the old days, I have a lot of mods. But the problem is that without a huge investment of time in checking, reloading the game over and over etc. how do you know which ones are active and which are interfering?

    One of the things I liked about the "simpler" CM1 is that it was easy to compare .bmp files directly, so you knew what you were going to get.

    i think the "easiest" way (and the one ive chosen by the way) is to unpack all the compressed mods using the mod tools, and then just have a quick look in the folders to see if there are any files that overlap (you can usually suss out what mods might overlap, like soundmods, GUI mods and such) and then remove the ones (or merge) that you dont want.

  2. Soldiers also consistently pick up sniper rifles dropped by dead marksmen, which IMO would be less useful than an SMG, and definitely would be harder to use (starting with the fact that the scope probably wouldn't be properly zeroed for whoever picked it up).

    i dont think that would really matter to the soldier that picked it up... all he would see is a weapon with a scope whitch to him looks more "attractive" than the one he has now...

    doesnt matter that he has no training in it, its more of a placebo effect (as in, cool, that gun looks to be way better than my gun)

  3. I find the synchronization/coordination of AFV drivers and gunners a bit too perfect in CMN. I´d rather like to see some noticeable delay between driver and gunner actions, i.e let the driver first turn the hull and then the gunner turn the turret, aim the gun. CMN AFVs behave much like modern (CMSF) ones, with all that computer hardware onboard.

    i think theres quite a bit of CMSF brought over that isnt fitting for a WWII game (pinpoint airstrikes, some infantry behaviour, tanks accuracy on the move, tanks not stopping to fire... stuff like that).

    overall it kinda feels like BF made CMSF and then just tacked a WWII setting over that and released it as CM:BN :/

  4. This is how it works now.

    thats not my experience...

    learnt that the hard way too, set up an ambush like the good 'ole CMx1 days (troops in foxholes, hidden and with cover arcs) and not until the enemy was within more or less melee distance did they pop their heads up and shoot... and they came under fire far earlier than that.

    also, i checked, they werent cowering, they were still hiding...

  5. im thinking the reason the .zip file is larger than the .brz file is simply because it only packs one set of the .bmp files... hence the smaller size.

    put them all in .zip files (you can still make different .brz files for each type of divisional patch, and then put them in a zip file if you want) but as far as i know .brz files are not compressed, theyre basically a .zip file set to no compression...

  6. yeah, ive had very poor experiences with foxholes... most of the time anything in the foxhole dies faster than anything in the open right next to it (and i know this since my troops tend to crawl OUT of the foxholes when under fire to sit next to them in the open)

    even from a very very long range, it seems you are more exposed in a foxhole than on open ground :/

    i have a sneaking suspicion that there is a decimal in the wrong place or something in the coding for foxholes, making them actually less cover than open ground is...

  7. I've had teams run out of ammo, and yes it would be nice to have them re-arm with enemy weapons in a desperate situation.

    Is it worth coding? I dunno. I'd be happy with the abstraction of teams that are out of all ammo being able to slowly gain a small amount for non crew served weapons and a few grenades from enemy casualties. Once they acquired that small amount they'd be unable to get more until they were completely out again. No blue on blue sounds like enemy weapons coding needed.

    You can't model everything, of course, and I'd rather have hand to hand combat modelled and solve the "useless" team thing that way, but I imagine that would be a bear to make it look anything but silly.

    actually, id be perfectly satisfied with your solution too (and the hand to hand combat thing as well, but yeah, that would be even harder to implement)

  8. That, I'm afraid, is a case of your desires blinding you to the necessity.

    The reason accidental blue-on-blue fire isn't modelled is because of the imprecision inherent in the game's environment. It would be onerous for the player if they had to worry more than they do about covering fire causing casualties.

    If you model the realistic, but highly unusual edge case of troopers rarely being able to acquire enemy weapons in desperate circumstances, you have to include the downsides, which would be deliberate (though misguided) fire from friendly troops on the sound contact of enemy weapons being fired.

    You are missing the point, and it's perfectly clear. Just because you think something is so doesn't make it true.

    and you seem to be missing the fact that we currently dont have a TacAI that fires on soundcontacts. It only fires on confirmed enemies, and then continues firing for some time after loss of sight to said enemy.

    It NEVER fires on sound contacts.

  9. Then stop using the argument that it is easy to program at the same time.

    To attach conditions on scrounging enemy weaponry would make it a pretty complicated thing to implement.

    And considering that it is a feature that only becomes useful in circumstances so very much further from the norm then scrounging enemy weapons, I hope that BFC wastes not a single minute on it.

    i didnt know you knew how dificult it would be to code... are you a programmer? and do you know the coding for CM:BN?

×
×
  • Create New...