Wartgamer
-
Posts
939 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by Wartgamer
-
-
So will LOS be Fireteam:1 then?
-
Watching a gun crew carrying out their firing drill, and defending their gun with small arms and grenades, will be engrossing in itself.Originally posted by Sirocco:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Battlefront.com:
EVERYTHING is modeled in 1:1. Doesn't matter if it is a squad, an enclosed tank, or an open TD. 1:1 means 1:1, no exceptions.
</font>
-
Good points. I also am wondering how the fireteams, which will seemingly select targets by the AI, are going to fire at the enemy.Originally posted by undead reindeer cavalry:i have understood that each soldier's cover & concealment is modelled, but their LOS is not modelled? how can this be? for example if you have two men hiding behind a tank, surely LOS/LOF is the crucial factor that defines both cover & concealment for these fellows [in relation to the enemy they are hiding from]? or is it just that you can't manually check the LOS of each soldier, while it is modelled under the hood?
another question that i haven't seen a definite answer to is: will LOF be real 3D lines instead of 2D point objects of CM1? e.g. will we have machineguns that can lay down realistic horizontal fire across a field instead of just point fire? will we finally be able to shoot at houses that are located on higher terrain than us? and dear god will tanks be modelled in real 3D so that e.g. turret size begins to matter?
i think both of these questions deal essentially with one and same thing: 1:1 3D modelled LOF/LOS.
Will each mamber of the fireteam add some firepower value, depending on weapon, suppression, etc.? Will individual member's firepower of the fireteam be resolved seperately?
As you point out, if there is 1:1 LOS, then certain members may not see the fireteams target. Realistically, they should fire at something.
Since control is now at the squad level, and I am assuming that weapons like HMG, mortars are 'squad' level, what becomes of the sharpshooter, bazooka and lmg 'non-squads'? Are they going to be attached to squads as another fireteam under the squad leader/platoonHQ/etc? Since there is no more direct control of 'half-squads', I can not see how these small 'units' can stay at player control.
Edit:
What we can or can not do with spotting, LOS, and LOF remains a little up in the air. For sure we can't do 1:1 LOS because, as I have said before, even the fastest home computer out there can't handle it. So that is completely off the table. How we work around it will come down to technical capabilities more than anything else. When we have more answers for you I'll of course bring them up for discussion. Until then probably not much else that can be said about this for the moment. Steve
This answers some of the 1:1 LOS. I suppose also the LOF?
[ February 20, 2005, 02:56 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]
-
Any awards given out at the end of the yeAR?
-
Somebody shoot me
-
Almost too wierd.
-
I am just reading. But it would be nice to discuss the issues. Do you have any inclination to do that?
And I am not just sayin'. Kind of requesting.
-
Oh, you know, he liked to "take charge" of threads relating to CM game design issues about which he knew as little (or less) as the rest of us players, was generally abrasive toward anyone that disagreed with him, belittled the designers and their goals, the players and their desires, that kind of thing.Originally posted by dalem:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Wartgamer:
He stayed on topic? Focused? Is that an exacting attitude? Exact same? Same exact?
What is the attitude you are describing by the way? Can you express yourself so I can understand your jibey posts?
If that's what you call "focused", then oh yeah, he was focused. He was frikkin' collimated.
Anyway, I'm just sayin'.
-dale </font>
-
I hate to say this but I am beginning to see what the designer is saying about frustration.
Dorosh. I see you want to have the gnarley old sarge having a sten gun and maybe a few of his admirers. If that can be modeled for you, I would be personally delighted on a level I can not express.
But the point is that we are trying to get to the system wide implications of this radical change.
Sorry, it feels like minutia to me.
-
I think they are striving for realism through exacting methods.
I understand what you are saying but they have dug in around the 1:1 so lets explore it? I think what you are saying deserves a thread also.
[ February 19, 2005, 06:42 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]
-
He stayed on topic? Focused? Is that an exacting attitude? Exact same? Same exact?
What is the attitude you are describing by the way? Can you express yourself so I can understand your jibey posts?
-
Pace of Combat? Cmon. Its a bit off topic in a thread that is focusing in on a major design change.
-
Thats sort of a minutia thing at this point. Its been established that individual weapons and ammo loads will be modeled. Weapons might be remanned also I suppose so LMG get manned, etc.
-
I suppose even ATG crews may be micromodeled also. Realistic crew type weapons, like M1 carbines or SMG may be available.
-
Read the threads that prompted the Parable. This thread is productive, the two threads before I made my point were not. Sorry if you're confused.
Yes, I started the thread to be productive.
I think you over reacted. Make your point by selling the benefits/coolness of 1:1 representation.
Personally, I am liking the TACAI trying to deBorg the gamey player. The player is a MAJOR part of the Borg problem. He is the entity that abuses the Borg info. Get his Borg claws off the nitty gritty is a goal. I believe I read other suggestions along those lines in old threads.
Good Work CLOG. Keep it up.
[ February 19, 2005, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]
-
I sort of mentioned something about AFVs crews being 1:1 and the effects.Originally posted by Sirocco:It just occurred to me - and perhaps it's come up before, but I haven't noticed a comment on it - will the crews of TD's like the M10 and Marder be represented 1:1? And will they have functionality to provide visually represented close defence for their platform?
-
In any progression of products, there is always the people that want things the way it was, slightly different than it was but really the same, better than the way it was, radically different than it was.
This is nothing new and anyone that has been around any product development knows it. One develops a sense of humor about it if they are smart.
-
I dont see how this is addressed by fireteams. Is there a minimum 'chunk' of men that can actually be pinned (or other effect like pinning)? Can pinning really be 1:1?Originally posted by Wartgamer:Getting back to the squad being spread out or even 'sub-united'.
Lets take the example of a squad advancing in the open. They incur some light fire and one man is pinned. The squad advances on. The man is seperated now by distance and LOS (the majority of the squad is over a hill now). Next turn the squad moves again and the man is still pinned in the same spot. They are seperated by a greater distance..
So when does a individual 1:1 soldier become divorced from his squad? Will he have a 'black' C&C line to him? Will he stay put till combined with someone else? Is the divorced soldier under any player control if he becomes unpinned yet seperated?
-
I suppose a bazooka can now be assigned to a squad and acts as a attached fireteam?
-
Thats interesting in that 'half squads' (fireteams) are actually out of player 'menu' control in cmx2. This is actually stepping the TACAI up as the actual granularity (1:1 rep and no tiles) is going down. I am sure some are glad to hear this. Control freaks might not like this at all.Originally posted by Battlefront.com:CMx2 will still be based around the Squad in terms of control. Fortunately, the behavior of the squad is quite well laid out in Field Manuals (Handbooks, or whatever each nation calls them). They are very specific as to how things are supposed to work in specific situations. This makes AI programming relatively easy. In fact, it is easier to program this stuff than probably anything else the AI has to do. Not that any of this is easy in the sense of not taking time and great skill.
Will Fire Teams always do what they should do in a given situation? Hell no
It is up to us to program the prefect simulation of these actions and then allow the circumstances to screw around with them in perhaps unpredictable ways. For example, a really crappy Experienced unit might have the covering team get up and move too early or wait far too late. Or perhaps both will go at the same time. That sort of thing. However, this is the sort of thing that will work generally as it should for most units that have decent training, regardless of other circumstances.Steve
What is a prefect simulation?
[ February 19, 2005, 01:29 PM: Message edited by: Wartgamer ]
-
Are you refering to the testing 'discussion'?
I had quite a few examples of testing to discuss but in light of the fact that a tester even stated that speed was a goal, a test coordinator had nothing to add but the fact he used fictional animals as testers, and your over reaction to everything (which certainly precludes ever faulting you for anything); I decided to drop it.
But as far as the reaction you exhibit above (or over reaction really), perhaps, again, you need to balance your frustrations with a true sense of humor.
So if you need to vilify 'Grogs' and go out of your way to cast them in some strange light that you areconjuring up, then fine. Name calling is back in vogue.
Is it OK if we come up with some names for you? How about CLOG? Its what we called systems engineers at a job.
But if you still stand by your claim that Grogs can not fathom the intracacies, ramifications and bright new future of 1:1 representation, please read through the thread and help us.
-
I think he said that orders will be at the unit level. So the question is; is a fireteam a 'unit'?Originally posted by stikkypixie:Steve, will we have to command these fireteams ourselves, or is it something the AI will take care off. I'm hoping for the latter.
-
Is there going to be a cmx2 forum?
-
In the present system, I often split a squad, give the half squad with the most firepower (usually the lmg part) a pause and a target, have the other half squad do an assault to an objective closer to the target, and then have the covering half squad advance to the first assaulting half squad. They recombine if he makes it there.
Its abstracted but it does show a squad doing a basic cover/manuver drill OK. If there is a known enemy at the end of the planned move to point, I give the covering half squad two pauses and a definite target
It is up to us to program the prefect simulation of these actions and then allow the circumstances to screw around with them in perhaps unpredictable ways. For example, a really crappy Experienced unit might have the covering team get up and move too early or wait far too late. Or perhaps both will go at the same time. That sort of thing. However, this is the sort of thing that will work generally as it should for most units that have decent training, regardless of other circumstances.
1:1 Representation; What WILL be 1:1?
in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps
Posted
Should morale be modeled at the individual level? Something like fitness is surely an invidual trait and differs enough in individuals that if it can be applied 1:1, then it should.
But something like morale is a bit of a group mentality and perhaps could be applied to a group (everything can't be modeled 1:1 and there will be some concessions I imagine).