panzermartin
-
Posts
2,302 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by panzermartin
-
-
At certain angles graphics almost look photorealistic like those screenshots above. The problem is when grass doodads dont get shaded, trees distort, elevations of terrain become invisible when light is direct etc.
For instance check this screen:
CMSF maps though give you complete freedom of POVs which is a huge plus compared to the restricted camera in fancy RTS with small maps and 100m visibility.
With CMx2 WW2 , normandy scenery would be an instant boost to graphical aesthetics simply because of the colors and the less lego like buildings. Realistic water will be another thing to enhance visuals.
Generally I think its the quality and the pallete of the textures that will make it look beautiful, not the extra FX and polygons. I will repeat that CMBO looked absolutely stunning with Magua's sublime and finely colored textures on the simple 3d models. Just hope Dan and co will get those greens right. Its a damn tricky color!
-
Offline its ok. Could be my bad luck that I had the worst lag with wooded maps in TCP/IP?
My main complaint is still about the visual part mostly.
-
Yep, Obama cant pull a trick like that..yet. But an Iran raid would be far more impressive for McCain. Syria isnt risky enough. Its so safe that even the first CMx2 game takes place there
-
CM:WW2 should be delayed as long is needed to make it the flagship wargame of Battlefront. Polished CMSF engine, new quick battle system, a semi random map generator(?), water, bridges, ATs, mortars, new TCP/IP modes, balanced and humanly paced combat...I'm drooling already. Some extra care with the atmosphere and graphics and, really, what can go wrong and keep it away from near perfection?
Possibly the above suggestions heh. Seriously, I hope they take note and update the scenario listing as well. Size, type of battle, designer, vs AI or H2H, all should be more organized and helpful.
P.S Also, can we get that amazing pin up girl menu interface mod from CMBO as a default?
-
Since Normandy will feature a lot more wooded areas, will we see an improvement in tree modelling both visually and gameplay wise?
Visually. Some tree types look subpar in certain angles. especially the tall ones. Normandy maps will not look really good with rows of distorted trees. Trees like olive trees, low, bush types look ok, since they suffer the least from the angle distortion. Tree bases in CMx1 made forests look more "tidy" and not that chaotic despite the primitive patchy tiles. Also, some tree types dont behave well in environmental lighting and look flat and with no volume. LODS for trees are average and maybe my last complaint about graphics in CMSF. Close up they look quite ok but at a distance you dont get a whole, uniformed effect of a wooded area but sparse little tree LODS here and there. Shadows disappear with distance as well and the whole result is far from looking aestheticaly pleasing and realistic.
Gameplay. For me, there is a confusion with LOS/LOF and cover issues. Its more realistic to have every tree affect LOS/LOF but soldiers dont seem to notice that inside a wooded area, eg not taking advantage of every tree crown. If it was an FPS I would be prefectly ok with the true to life modelling but in an RTS which requires quick judgement its pure luck to get good cover inside a wooded area. LOS is a pain and there are times I almost miss the simplistic abstracted CMx1 system with the primitive wood tiles. I know it cant get better than 1:1 but I was thinking if we could get a sort of gameplay aid inside wooded areas or maybe a smarter defensive AI behind trees.
Then there is the performance hit. I played two TCP/IP games that featured heavily wooded areas and I had strangely huge lags, while all my games since 1.10 even with many units have gone mostly smoothly. I'm not 100% sure about that but I suspect that pathing and LOS/LOF calculations inside trees with many infantry units might cause the problem.
-
I'm loving CMSF since 1.10 but I'm not very interested in playing the US side and this puts me kinda off. Sometimes you want to do something more with the syrians than just waiting in the corner for a passing tank/platoon.
However I'm still impressed BFC managed to make an interesting game placing a 3rd world army against a high tech superpower, since scenarios are by no means turkey shots. Kudos to them, I never thought it was actually possible. Its just one more reason to imagine that the WW2 title would be jaw-dropping gameplay wise.
-
I loved the scrolling map to be honest. Gave you a sense of progress and continuation and allowed you to add a strategic element to the game. Wrecks from previous battles would stay there and add drama and atmosphere, while you could try to save immobile tanks to repair them. Some other parts were a bit flawed though.
I'm not really fan of linked missions. There is something missing in between and its too black or white. There is something intriguing about objectives slowly reavealed in the distance.
If missions were part of a larger CMC type strategic map I guess I would care more about the story.
-
Sometimes I get the weird shooting through multiple buildings. Last time I lost a Bradley from an RPG passing through 2-3 walls. Its like LOF finding a way through a series of windows which behave a little larger than you expect. I could understand maybe rifle fire but an RPG getting in a window and exiting from the other? Where is the damn fridge to stop the round?
-
I played the Bye Armour and it was fun. I just get the feeling that there is little room for manuever and units are bit too many. Same for Byte Orchard. The map is almost a soccer field large yet we get Artillery,Kornets, Recoiless and tanks. If you keep these units we need a bit larger maps. Personally I'm in favour of larger maps with few units. It seems you have the talent for good map making so it is a matter of adding a few more square meters.
-
Well I think more attention should be paid even with stock maps. Some qb maps are very plain and boring, like they were made in a couple of seconds. Its a vital part of the game and BFC should have a dedicated map designer that can actually commit some time to make nice and large maps. When I see hammertime by George MC, with the ditches, elevated roads, fields and all this nicely detailed terrain and then play a QB with a huge mountain in the middle and some trees here and there the contrast is disappointing. Also some graphics should be avoided. An all grassy map comes out uber ugly due to the non shadowed doodads and there is no way you can judge elevations. It can turn out worse than CMBO standards
-
I rarely pay attention to command links in CMSF. Icons are too small and its not clear in which circumstances your units are linked with HQs. Therefore you assume its not that important. Maybe a flashing light or something bigger could be useful.
CMx1 had things much more straight forward with the red lines etc. It was great using the special abilities too..stealth for recon units, morale, combat. Would be nice to see some of these back.
-
Nice..
Lavs are cute but I always thought of modern american AFVS as visually boring. Where are the curves?? The caged Stryker tops them all in ugliness though.
Russians on the other hand build some nice sexy armour. One of the things in CMSF that makes me less nostalgic about those cool german panzers
-
Well for me, CMx1 WeGO was an awesome gaming experience. Maybe the top in computer gaming. I loved it but it now seems a terrible time waster for just a game. RT just seems much more "healthy". I had been addicted playing with my friends lenghty sessions of CMBO/BB/AK TCP/IP. I almost had dreams about maps and hull down positions and we even talked to the phone afterwards discussing about the battle. It had turned into a kind of obsession watching replays, purchasing units, etc. The CM fix..hehe. Realtime is more normal now, it is just a little bit shallow compared to WEGO where you can memorize the names of your Plt Leaders. But now it is just a game not that religious 5 hours experience. I think I prefer it that way. Sometimes it is better to not go that deep in a PC game.
-
bump:rolleyes:
-
I noticed passengers in vehicles losing their rifles (only RPGs remained), as well tank crews losing some of their pistols, rifles etc. No contact with enemy. Blank weapons icons as well as 3d graphics. Issuing fire order not working either for the disappeared guns. It seems the game treats them as damaged?
Happens in TCP/IP mode when passengers start in vehicles.
-
I think RT is fine as it is in single player. I mean how difficult is to pause and issue some orders every now and then. A timer option for not overusing pauses might come handy (i like what Cpl Steiner's idea with those "command points"). But RT in TCP/IP needs some more care imo. No pausing and no delays means big games end up in sudden strike fashion and barely playable. A well thought restricted pause feature is going to be added, hopefully for Normandy(please!). I think command delays might prove usefull only in RT TCP/IP for preventing overuse of recon with super tanks, zigzaging SPWs deep in enemy lines and things like ruining well thought ambuses with instant input from the player. (eg a tank is trapped between two flanking enemies ready for the perfect shot. The tank itself hasnt spotted any of them but a sniper on the hill has. The player bypasses the relative spotting penalty by intanstly ordering the tank to reverse into safety).
-
I want David Becham lofting grenades into windows with his precise curling shot. British pub building with Paul Gazza inside. Beer tiles instead of water. Red double decker buses instead of trucks. Beatles in menu music. And a bonus mission with British vs Syrian suicide cabs.
-
Unfortunately since I played RT, I simply cant go back to WEGO anymore. Sometimes it is a fabulous experience but other times a frustrating waste of hours of nothing. If BFC can find the mid solution with rolling replays, pausable TCP/IP and maybe even command delays to counter gamey tactics I think there will be no more need to split gamers to separate camps.
-
Steiner, you have a good point. To counter this in RT, command delay penalties could be re-introduced maybe? I was playing a TCP/IP game last night but due to the huge size we had some lag and I had to wait 10-15 secs to see my orders executed. I had to think twice before placing an order because I knew I couldnt intervene if something wrong happened. It felt much more tactical but at the same time it kept adrenaline high and the game flowing. First time I find lag adding something to a game
(unfortunately the host didnt lag so I was always a step behind heh) -
WEGO's Replay is the only thing I miss. Pausable RT is planned for TCP/IP too so there will be even less to miss in Normandy. Of course Pausable RT in TCP/IP means games will last longer and a savegame option should not be overlooked. Now, if we could have that "Whole Battle Replay" option one day, I would be extremely happy
-
Thanks Steve, I didnt remember all these had been mentioned. About the Flags, I actually think of them as a visual cue and not determining the objective area as in CMx1. It was cool seeing them changing hands. The current system is better for sure but it would be nice to have a visual indication of who has the possesion of the objectives. Anyway, I can live without them..
-
All Join Hamachi!
Multiplayer is fun with 1.10
-
For the Normandy title..is there a chance to reintroduce:
-Troops surrendering.
-Routed troops running backwards to safe area, not just disappearing with a (!). I would understand this in abstracted CMx1 but disappearing soldiers in 1:1 simulation isnt up to the realism of the rest of the game.
-Kill list. No replay and no kill list dont help to understand what worked and what not in RT mode.
-Detailed armor hits texts. Works as a quick damage report.
-Flags for capture objectives. Call me nostalgic but I miss this "wargame" touch. It also made
things clearer on who has what.
Thanks!
-
I have 1Mbit DSL but my opponet must had a faster one, I didnt ask him. We played 3-4 battles with him as a host and all went smoothly. A couple of pauses in the beggining and after that all was well. The guest has a slight delay in ordering as I said. It was amazing to see large tank battles with all guns blazing and no lag.
When I tried hosting another opponent, he complained about big delays though, over 5 secs.
I supsect it matters if the host has the best connection.
No CTDs during play. Only once after the AAR screen.
I've noticed some strange happenings though. I had a rifle squad that lost all of its AKs with no apparent reason. The weapon icons disappeared along with the 3d graphics. I couldnt issue a firing order ether. Happened more than once and with some tank crews too. Strange.
CMSF Marines review up at IGN
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Personally I cant go back to CMx1 style gameplay, no matter how infected I was back then. Its higly desirable for me thought to bring back those things you mentioned missing in CMx2. Sound contacts, misIDs, QBs, etc. I would even suggest a kind of CMx1 flag system for those quick games you dont really want to bother reading briefings but just have a clear indication of score and victory conditions that make the game a "fight till death" and much more gripping in head to head with objectives changing hands etc. It would look more "gamey" but I dont see the damage in the prestige of the simulation aspect of the game if the current more sophisticated system is also retained for scenario building.
As a side note, generally making the rules of a game more complex dont necessarily make it better. Its simple rules+awesome gameplay that leads to success. Take for instance football. Two sides kicking a ball trying to put it past a line. Sounds dull in paper but in reality it is the most loved game in the planet. The more symmetrical and balanced WW2 with a return of a point system in QBs would make things much simpler for the average wargamer.