slysniper

He must have had mud jambed in the end of the thing. They just cannot model that. So firing his rifle represents him standing there beating it against the ground, swearing at it until the mud drops out and he is able to use it.

Well, I must not be most people, because I have seen it at least a 1/2 dozen times. Tank turret is rotating into place to fire on enemy unit, but before the turret reaches the target, it fires, but magic, the bullet is on the correct course. Not only is it a sync. problem. There is the aspect that in general,even when the game functions correctly. there is no delay in the shot once the turret is rotated. Most shots are almost instant from when the turet stops. You would think there should be time in there to adjust elevation for the gun before the shot. It all goes back to how quickly the tank is able to aim when adquiring a new target. in general, seems to fast. And I know i am not the only one that has mentioned it.

sad but true, but the game does not presently prevent how much elevation the main gun can fire at. So there is times where the tank can and will fire when it would be impossible in real life. Thankfully, this is not a common issue, but I can see it becoming more of one as time goes on. No one would like seeing a tank fire on your infantry on the 4th or 5th floor when they are direcly below you next to the building. but it is possible presently.

Amen, this is so true. Plus one of the reasons I like the game so much. I love it when you know what to expect, but every once in awhile the game with give you the unexpected. the game is not broken, I think it is funny , how many will jump to that conclusion when something happens to them one time. Not that the game is perfect, but until you see similar issues many times, then its time to investigate what might be going on. example: the over performance of pistols in the game, it becomes clear when you see a 5 man crew with pistols become a very powerful fighting force within the game.

No matter what he did or did not do in this turn. Which I agree with the fact that setting his covered arc down the street would have help maybe get the spot in first, thus a shot also. The game engine on spotting could use some adjustment, I love the concept but the game version has a flaw. That is motion is not being penelized enough as to the ease of spotting it. When you are looking for something that is hidden, the human mind looks for these traits. Color, shape, movement, unnatural placement. Think about it, when you are hunting. any movement will draw your eyes to it in a fraction of a second, it could be a leaf falling. your sense of movement is great as long as it is anywhere within you sight and you are not moving at the same time. The tank turning on the road is not something easily missed unless there is something else your attention is focused on or dust or smoke or something along that lines is helping hide movement, shape and color. But the tank sitting still actually is not in much better shape since it is in full view, has buildings as a backdrop which does nothing to blend with its color or hide its shape much. So in this situation, both tanks should be able to spot each other very quickly, but with movement. The German should at least have a 80% chance of spotting first. I really do not think the game has much of this moddled correctly at all. Now lets take and test a perfect condition. A tank in vegatation , tuck back in the woods, , with shadows on it and more vegatation behide it. Parked, waiting for the enemy. It has color, that blends in, it has location to help break its outline, it is not moving, in real life it would have vegatation placed on it to try and look natural to the area around it. The enemy tank comes rolling into view, this should be a given who spots who. In the game, I do not think it is. Now actually, I think the game might have some of these things moddled, but as alway, since they will not tell us and I just cannot test every thing til I think I know what migfht be going on, I am still not sure. But I know it is not good enough to give the advantages one would have in real life. Of course, it does not stop me from finding shadowy wooded hiding places to fire from. I do think it helps with not be spotted first. In the game so far, the best thing I have seen so far for spotting advantage for tanks is being behind bocage, great concealment.

Not always, I have seen some of these larger openings and my tanks are not wanting to go through them at times, still a two blast needed event.

The uber pistol strikes once again. Save these files, because hopefully in the next update BF will have corrected this. Testing is showing how over accurate the pistol is preforming, these type of results will go away at some point.

Good proof that a American is so much smarter than his British counterpart:)

I am starting to think with the latest patch, any tank commander is at a higher risk to small arms fire. I have a feeling they (BF) did some adjusting, because in general I am seeing more exposed commanders going down to fire, thus maybe one way to improve the uber tank spotting abilities they have. But I have not tested the game to see if there is a change, but I have made more of a effort to button up for now, the game is more dangerous and at some point I might run the test to see just how much more.

Ok, you two. Go play what you like. But how can you think its better is beyond me. So CMX2 is not perfect. But how units spot in the new game is light years better than the borg spotting in CMX1, that one issue makes the new engine well worth the other short comings. CMX1 was crap to gun duels, fire one shot and every enemy unit in range will be returning fire within 5 seconds, yes I want to go back to that. NOT Infantry battles in the old game are boring, now they come to life. No longer are the days of every house having line of sight to every location. Now, door and window locations, tree trunks, vegatation and all sorts of things become important as to if units will be getting line of sight and being able to help in a fire fight. Position is much more of a challenge. terrain is much more realistic. Clearing out woods now is a real nightmare. where as before, it was a simple move my grunts so far from the enemy and magic, they have spotted and attached that hidden unit in the woods, no effort at all to dig them out. CMx1 has plenty of flaws, so stop trying to point to it, claiming how much better it was, thinking that is going to get your improvements you want in CMx2. Just ask for your wanted improvements and stop with how great it was comments. Both systems have their strengths, and for now, you cannot have all the best of both worlds in one game. But anyone that truely thinks CMx1 is a better system, their comments dont weigh very high in my book.

Now dont give him too much help, I want to rain arty on him in our game. So I think you need to tighten them formations up if I were you.

Bump, c3k, haver you done any testing since this post, it would be nice to see some of the conclusions you have made from testing It sounds promising that some adjustments are going to be made

This is the point most of them that hate the clock just dont seem to understand. They likely play one person games and that normally means they are attacking and they want that huge trump card so they can feel good about their playing ability. Personnally, any designer will ignore this thread because the present game just will not work well without time limits. As for features that could change that, they should request away. but it will not be happening in the near future, that is for sure. Years before we see another engine design from this group, if ever.

Personnally, I like the design to have tight time frames, it is the only way to force the offense generally to do things that they do not want to do. given enough time, the offence in the game will generally win. So to give the defence a fair playing field you almost always have to hold time tight. Once in a great while you will find something where the defence has the terrain and equipment where you could let the offence have as much time as they would like, because it will not change a thing.

Problem with this thinking is you are judging the scenario against your skill, no one else. There is players better than you and worse than you. So a battle you find hard, which would be wrong in your book. Might be just perfect for someone with more skill. Also that perfect battle for you might be really hard for someone else and they are wondering why it is designed so hard. Face it, people need to learn to accept the fact that the game might beat them and they need not look at the designer for putting the Blame. If you cannot beat the scenario given to you, face it, it might be designed to do just that or more likely. You just need to improve your skills. And dont take it personnally Field Marshal Blücher, I am posting this to any comment that goes after the designer. Yes, there is times when a design might be flawed and it needs correction. But if even 20% can only win the game as designed, then the game is not flawed, it just means only a small portion of people have the neccesary skills.

Hey, I was impressed he still remembered it to even post it

Great tactic in some other games. I Lol at your results here, Now I have assaulted tanks up close and personnal with three shermans in the game, but I just send them to three different flanking locations, give them a stop and shoot command, then maybe a move command to a second location. I also have noted that some of my tanks might not like the orders, where others will follow through with it. I THINK IT SEEMS REALISTIC. When you give a command that takes real guts to do by a person, you should not be suprised if someone chickens out and just tries to get out of there. Lets see, which would you prefer to do. Sneak up and shoot him in the ass from them woods 200 meters to his rear. or go up and charge him, drive circles around him, firing as you go, I promise he wont get a bead on you and blow you to kingdom come.

Wow, nothing has changed over all this time, and never will. The reason I do not play QB's much is because I think it allows for such play and one should accept that as part of how the game might be played. If someone can beat you by any means, power to him. It should have nothing to do with history unless both parties pre agree. As for skills. ( Its a skill of purchasing, not so much a skill of tactics). Thus why I prefer scenarios, one is generally rewarded with a situation where both sides are in situations which would reflect real life situations and can also give you different types of challenges than the same old QB feel.

Find players who want to play scenarios over QB battles and you will do better at finding your Professionals' As for the other types, one game only and I move on.

I think the problem might be both morale and Accuracy. Makes it hard to prove in the test, you are normally going after one thing. I just know in the game until now , you best give plenty of respect to them pistol using units. They know how to fight:) Also glad to see that we have Bf's Interest and that we might get some unjustments once we know what we have here.

I dont know what you have set up there, but that is a load time that could drive someone crazy. You are one fine fellow to take the time to test it to whatever level you are planning there. I am the type that I will make 5 test lanes and run it 10-20 times, in the old cmx1 series. It was 10 test lanes, then in 10 runs I had 100 results. Maybe with the improvements in performance, I can do Ten lanes again without running into load time issues.

yes, same issue, only noticed it on a Pbem game we changed to the new version. Not sure it has went away yet. so will be interested to see about that. It does drive me crazy at the moment. each turn starts with it.

Please dont start complaining about how building now offer too much protection. There was a ton of pressure from players to make them better. They wanted them to provide protection, even though it might not be as true as we the player might want to think. There was plenty of data and thoughts about it. So play with it as it is, let time tell if the new programming makes the game better. Sounds like it is going to be a bigger challenge to deal with the enemy within buildings . So we are warned, so play appropriately.

I am not all that sure pathing has improved much in the coding, I am sure some, But i think more has improved in how I give commands. So in general i have no issues with the unit. That is of course untoil the AI kicks in, which is in General, when the unit is under fire. At that point , who knows for sure what it will do, exspecially in wego where there is time to get itself in trouble. Is it perfect, no. But I see most of the time the AI is good at moving units back or to cover, sometimes not. But to tell you the truth. It is a little like real life, bull, if you think your men would always make the correct choice. When someone comes under fire, they will make a decision normally with in a few seconds at the most, sometimes that is not the correct choice, thus moving into a worse situation. So for the game to do that at times should not be that heartbreaking. Sometimes it looks realistic, sometimes it just looks like a game that has no real intelligence and it would likely never happen in real life. I guess if you cannot stand it, only play real time all the time and likely with yourself, since that is how picky you are. I hope they continue to improve it, but I do not exspect AI to get it right all the time, but I dont mind seeing it try to save iunits at times. It is just like flipping a coin as to if it will work.

Well, since this thread started before the CW mod, we might need to test somethings again just to prove it still is the same in the new Mod. But from what we found out on another thread. We might need to test huge number of runs before they look into it. Even if it seems common sence lets you know how off it is at the moment.