SlapHappy
-
Posts
1,576 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by SlapHappy
-
-
Also:
Creating new unit types. Actually pretty simple.
Examples: There is no LMG separate unit. Simply create the entire Inf squad. Give the first guy an MG-42 or 34 and the second guy a rifle. Delete the other 9 grunts. Voila. Instant two man LMG unit. Too bad there's no way to give the assistant some extra MG ammo.
You can also create two and three man units based around the Panzerschrek or an anti-tank rifle.
4-5 man half-squads with rifles and/or SMG's
Recon groups? 6-8 men all armed with MP-40's and maybe some AT grenades. Lots of possibilities.
-
Webwing
Here is a link to the current ASL publisher. The page linked has archived .pdf files with dozens of Advanced Squad Leader scenarios.
You could use these to design some new stuff. These are at least fairly historical. Good background on the battle is given, plus it actually tells you what the historical outcome of the battle was.
-
This idea of "mini-modules" based around some CMX WWII game is an interesting notion to be sure.
The best I can reckon based on what Steve and Co. have said so far is that future games won't be Eastern or Western Front per se, rather CMX - "A Bridge Too Far" or CMX - "Drive on Berlin".
But then, simply based on what was said, there is no guarantee that the third title on the new engine will even be WWII based. We know the first one isn't going to be.
Also, this new approach begs the question: What kind of time cycle between these smaller game sets is envisioned? Six months? A year?
Will each smaller project be free-standing? Or will there be an add-on approach to a WWII core with CMX WWII being a $45 core with battle expansions at around $20 each?
I think we have a general idea what Battlefront is looking to do in the near future, but the details are still a little cloudy.
-
That's my birthday!
Good tidings..........
-
That's my birthday!
Good tidings..........
-
That's my birthday!
Good tidings..........
-
Sensational idea. Wish I had thought of it. Oh well, the important thing is that Battlefront consider this great idea.
The beauty of it is, it would be so easy to implement.
-
I believe a lot of people's problems come about because they are placing too much emphasis on their video card when the game has some major hits on the CPU and memory. I should say memory especially.
There are some games where having the current uber-card does not necessarily give them the performance they have come to expect. They are basing this totally on their experience with FPS games, which are heavily GPU dependent.
Next time you are in the midst of a heavy session of TOW, CTRL-ALT-DEL into the system properties. Take a quick peek at the memory usage of TOW.exe and you will see what i am talking about.
-
I'd have to say I've never seen a game get it right, either. That being said, I don't think it's impossible to properly implement.
It always makes me wonder why game designers don't look at the way "it really was" (especially with wargames) and then say "OK, how do we code it to work like that?"
I have to figure they either don't approach it that way or it's just plain laziness.
-
The more advanced waypoint system which is due to be added eventually will at least get you closer to what you are talking about.
-
I'll answer my own question...yup!
3.3.5 Rnd
Returns a random number within the range of [0…100].
Syntax:
RND ( )
Example:
[Trigger]
Set @num = RND ( )
Halt
-
Can the scripting code recreate random variables? For instance can you have it generate random numbers or work from percentages of probability?
-
Exactly. It's not the same as firing a rifle. You want to put up a "wall of lead".
-
Novice, Regular, Veteran and Elite. These are the four archetypes for the general skill level of a soldier in the game. However, the skill level is typically only representative of the skill set for that particular soldier's job. If you have a MGer who is Elite, then he will likely have a marksmanship skill at or above 90%. His driving skill might be slightly higher than that of an infantryman who is regular grade, but not a regular grade soldier who is designated as a driver. Does that make sense?
This sort of creates the problem of "specialists" in the game who's loss on the battlefield can lead to problems in getting a favorable outcome in the battle. However, I don't really have a problem with this because I see it as being the more realistic way to simulate the game.
-
la Veche
True, but the situation they are describing is one in which the unit WILL open fire but only at targets that appear in the cover arc. In other words they ignore all potential threats outside a particular defined facing.
-
In regards to the post above, the first thing I'd like to see with some new terrain models, buildings, walls, etc. are some items you can really take advantage of in the game. For instance, why are the walls 2 feet higher than the guy's heads? I ended up knocking a hole in the wall with one of those German AT grenades so I could stick my field gun in there get a LOS. Of course the crew died fairly quickly under the effect of massed AI fire, despite the splinter shield.
How about some loopholes? You should be able to setup a situation where you can provide 90% hard cover for your unit, while maintaining a good field of fire to exposed enemy units in a kill zone. The only way to do that in this game is to use the concrete MG bunker.
-
And I believe it is based on the way they are modeled and the cover-sighting issues. Firstly, Mg's seem to want to fire only in bursts of vertical channels rather than sweep horizontally across the front of a wave of attackers. I'd always heard that a machine gun was an area-denial weapon. Not so much in the way it is depicted here.
Secondly, the lack of covered loop=holes makes it hard to put it in action against any kind of concentrated enemy force. The HMG is effective, momentarily. That is until 20 or so troops mass fire on it and take out the crew in about 10 seconds. A well-covered MG is a bitch to take out, but you wouldn't know it from this game, because you can't possibly put you're gun in a position to exploit cover. Simple concealment is pretty useless once you open fire, again because of the AI's ability to mass fire and take out solitary targets even at 200 meters.
-
I believe "Hold Position" should at least mean "don't change the hull facing" in the case of turreted tanks. Or maybe it already does?
-
Oudy:
Does it matter whether or not you create the units or the rects first? For instance can you have already created units and then overlay a setup zone on top of them?
-
Thanks Oudy
Upon looking at my code, I had the quotes in the syntax improperly implemented. For others editing with the Mission Editor, if you see coded text in red, that indicates a syntax error. Green code means proper implementation or syntax.
-
Same here. I created three setup sectors for my troops Disposition_1, Disposition_2, and Disposition_3. These appear properly in the editor. I created one squad of German troops. The troops appear on the map in GAME mode, but there is no checkerboard setup zones as there is in the pre-made missions. I created the trigger ActivateDispositionMode with the proper rects as named above, in the init file, bust still no joy.
I was able to get the "Start Mission" button to appear by adding the trigger, but no setup areas. What's the deal? I can't find anything else that pertains to this in the pre-made scenarios. What am I missing?
-
la Vache
"And sometimes the setup mode sticks a couple of your units in some odd place and then won't let you move them. PITA."
This is caused by either the lack of a "placeholder" for the unit in question OR more likely, the lack of the proper TYPE of placeholder. Placeholders have to be set to the proper type or you will get the "stranded" vehicle problem. I know this because I replaced a couple of vehicles in the game with a different type of vehicle. When I started the mission, the new vehicle was stranded way off from the rest of my units. Once I changed the original vehicle's placeholder to properly match the new vehicle, the unit appeared properly in the setup area with the rest of my forces.
-
la Vache
"And sometimes the setup mode sticks a couple of your units in some odd place and then won't let you move them. PITA."
This is caused by either the lack of a "placeholder" for the unit in question OR more likely, the lack of the proper TYPE of placeholder. Placeholders have to be set to the proper type or you will get the "stranded" vehicle problem. I know this because I replaced a couple of vehicles in the game with a different type of vehicle. When I started the mission, the new vehicle was stranded way off from the rest of my units. Once I changed the original vehicle's placeholder to properly match the new vehicle, the unit appeared properly in the setup area with the rest of my forces.
-
If you open the scenario in the editor the yellow rectangle labeled "territory" can be increased to a maximum of the entire map size.
The largest maps I have seen are 2050 x 2050 meters. You can re-edit to deploy or move anywhere within those boundaries.
New Mission uploaded
in Theatre of War
Posted
http://www.multimanpublishing.com/downloads.php
Sorry.