Jump to content

whaco

Members
  • Posts

    114
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Posts posted by whaco

  1. Originally posted by HardRock:

    You may not like it...but waypoints and LOS aren't the problem..other things are. LOS is correct. waypoints..I mean really..that's going to stop you from playing and too high a price for a game "you like". assuming you liked it..which may not be the case.

    What exactly do you mean LOS is correct Hardrock?? Is this your expert opinion or are you speaking for the masses? Also what exactly do you mean LOS is not the problem? It may not be a problem for you which is fine. And I say that in a non-condescending tone. But, for the peeps who may be disappointed with TOW, 70% of those rate the LOS issue as number 1. That is precisely the one issue that HAS become a deal breaker for many. Excluding those of course who cannot get the game running. ;)
  2. Originally posted by crazylegsmurphy:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Let’s imagine such situation. Some armored car is moving on its max speed towards the trenches. For example 60 km/h. On the half of its way it gets an order to move in opposite direction. It will be reasonable to stop the car before it will turn back. You must stop before gear shifting to reverse. It was decided to make it in such way in game for avoiding “strange” situations.

    This totally makes sense. When I am driving on the highway, or to the local Burger King, and someone calls me on my cell phone and asks me if I want to come over and hang out, the FIRST thing I do it slam on the breaks!

    I used to try actually just turning the steering wheel, slowing my car down, and turning casually, but I found that just wasted gas, and you know how expensive gas can be.

    In this game, it only makes perfect sense. When you are driving a truck through a situation where you are getting shot at, and someone gives you a new order, the first thing they did in WWII was yell, "WOAH, stop the truck, we have a new order!"

    They would then sit there and wait for the order, and only then would they move. I mean, I think it's a rule of war or something where once a vehicle stops, it's considered "home free" until it starts moving again. </font>

  3. Originally posted by stic.man:

    CMBO was patched over a dozen times before it was deemed by BFC to be complete.

    They are working on a patch. It just takes time.

    Yes stic.man many dissatified consumers are awaiting with much anticipation for the upcoming patch. Problem is, not much has been said by BFC on what can be fixed and what is coded and not doable. ;)
  4. Originally posted by Fetid:

    Hey Fil, what about the problem people are reporting on trees not blocking line of fire. Forces are destroyed by unseen enemies but line of sight is mutual. You should be able to see them too.Is there any way to fix that? If anything, the unit in the trees has the advantage because it's dark in the woods and someone outside of the trees can't see into (or through) as well as those on the inside looking out.

    Fetid, I assume that is the way it is coded. It is no bug and hopefully will be addressed. tongue.gif
  5. Originally posted by HardRock:

    I'm with you. As long as they have a "valid" los/lof code I'm good without seeing the indicators. Some people want to see all these LOS lines and check it out in a sterile environment. Well..in real war more often than not..you never saw what hit you. Unless you froze time and brought out your computer and checked LOS to every known unit. LOL!

    LOS is a sterile wargaming tool not available to real men in the field.

    I agree, personally I don't give a rat's ass if I see a LOS line. Just give me a realistic code where I don't get picked off through ten tree tops, two building walls and one, three foot high grassy tongue.gif field while my men are crawling, and I'll be fine.
  6. Originally posted by SlapHappy:

    Just not believable.

    It has been stated from a number of peeps that this game is the best realistic game out there as far as RTS goes. I am not seeing that TBH. Too many unbelieveable, unrealistic moments that become quite frustrating while playing. My kids enjoy it though, so that is a bonus. :D
  7. Well I agree with Peter in that I have no one to blame but myself. I don't expect my money back, nor do I think BF should refund my money. **** happens and you move on. I am still holding out for a major patch but won't lose any sleep if that day never comes.

  8. Originally posted by SA_Avenger:

    I totally agree, AI is "cheating" and it's annoying. (usually it knows exactly where your men are)

    Wether I have men crawling behind bushes or tank hidden behind hills and tons of trees they still get spotted. (I don't see the ennemy when I go first person)

    I totally agree with what you are saying SA_Avenger. Not to sound condescending, but maybe we have missed something here. To be fair, it is quite possible that this game was dummied down on purpose and LOS, LOF issues were implemented this way for more mass appeal from the C&C, Warcraft, Dune gamers. :eek:
  9. Originally posted by Destraex:

    it would be nice if Fil could advise if the patch being worked on will really resolve this

    I don't care what factors are in the calculations, LOS is often the hardest thing, not the easiest in war even with a clear LOS

    Agreed.
  10. Originally posted by Rollstoy:

    whaco,

    did you pre-order without playing the demo first?

    (Just trying to confirm a theory of mine!)

    Best regards,

    Thomm

    Yes old friend I did indeed. I am still hoping for a patch to fix a few of these issues and have not given up on the game. That being said, my only excuse is I sort of figured BF (based on there reputation) would not be involved in a WW2 game that didn't have some sort of realistic LOS. Your theory is confirmed and I have no one to blame but myself for not playing the demo first. ;)
  11. Originally posted by MajorPrivate:

    I am digging this game, but I would certainly like to see the LOS issues resolved.

    More than a few trees should really affect LOS.

    I have been shot through part of a village and many trees

    You are digging this game are you. I feel you are the the minority but for the time being I am willing to use my cd copy as a coaster for my beer till 1C patches it. Now you want to talk about LOS through a few trees. Play the Russian campaign on Vet and take the hill above the town so to speak. I took a first person view of what I could and could not see on that small ridge and basically I had a forest between me and the enemy. Incredibly, I was getting picked off and firing as well from behind a forest. This is not a minor issue this is a major blunder on somebody's part. Is this game supposed to be in between CC and CM. Is this WW2 game supposed to have a bit of realism about it. Hell in this state, GIC and Squad Assault were more advanced than this out of the box. Maybe I missed something here. Maybe this game is for Command and Conquer type players. If that is the case then the LOS issue is fine the way it is and no patch is really necessary except to have all tanks fire there AP semi automatic rounds at 3 per second. :rolleyes:
  12. Originally posted by someone:

    Thanks for the info. I dont really mind if the game uses true LOS or not which it appears not to but like other people have said, I would like to have some idea of how good my concealment/visibility is from a particular place.

    From what I have noticed, it is a safe bet to assume that you are not safe from any particular place/woods and assume that you can pretty much have LOS on the enemy from anywhere (exception being on the other side of a hill) and have a half decent chance of inflicting some sort of damage on his tank with no clear LOS.
  13. Originally posted by Elmar Bijlsma:

    Trees and bushes DO affect LOS.

    In what way? I can name you a dozen instances where my units were being fired upon and being hit by uber gun aces through 4 rows of trees. Command and Conquer of War.....err sorry Theatre of War has uber optics in these WW2 tanks not to mention an awesome LOS. I'm being being hit by the enemy and returning fire through walls, trees, and buildings. Played 4 battles now in Command and Conquer of War, and am finding that LOS is real gamey. What I have noticed is LOS is effected by hills but I think that one is a gimme.
  14. Yea, I don't know what's up with that. IMHO 1C could have made the same game and still had a very well received product but skip that whole capturing equipment feature. Maybe a feature like entering buildings instead of using enemy equipment would have been a wiser choice in the early development stage. Never was a fan of any game genre that used enemy equipment no matter what positive spin you put on it. ;)

  15. Originally posted by MeatEtr:

    Wow, a bit of a walk down memory lane. I remember those screenies, like 3+ years ago. Another one of my favs that was taken out is this one of a russian river boat.

    How about the original box art.

    ww2r_823_box.jpg

    Yes Meat, it always amazes me when a development project is in the early stages and a game is going off in every direction possible. Then weeks till final release, The game is scaled down in terms of what's realisticly possible in a certain time frame/budget, what was implemented and what didn't make the final cut for whatever reason. I love thoses old screenies.

    tongue.gif

  16. Did a search and could not find anything that answers the question on whether units can run out of ammo in TOW. If units realistically can run out of ammo, what are the chances of that particular unit walking over to a KIA in his squad and grabbing his ammo, providing it's the same rounds?

  17. Originally posted by Sneaksie:

    If you expect too much from a game then you are prone to disappointment:)

    My expectations are always aimed low in life that way I am never disappointed. :rolleyes: Seems to have worked out pretty well with about 99.9% of the PC strategy/wargames flooding the market.
×
×
  • Create New...