Vinnart
-
Posts
2,570 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by Vinnart
-
-
Always nice to see a fellow artist on here Wicky, and I agree with your statement, as I didn’t mean to sound so absolute. I suppose I should have been more specific in the “never” as in a composition such as the UI where the portrait placement is on the far left edge with no negative space on the left of it. Here it acts as bookend either directing the eye into the right (which is where you want it in this specific UI composition), or to the left where nothing is (as is now), or placed looking forward such as Mord’s portraits which is neutral. As an artists I am sure you must agree in the illustration of #1 vs #2 that the #2’s are better compositionally for the UI for reasons stated. If you don’t I shall have to call one of your professors
I always say talk softly, but carry a big paintbrush (well, at least to the ladies
-
@Wicky
Am I supposed to come back and post thousands of pictures illustrating techniques as I described, but did not make up? Am I to explain the composition of all the pics you posted, as there is more at work for the most part compositionally in each one of those pics that move the eye around the picture, and create a sense of balance beyond the way the faces are looking? Do you think EVERY painting from famous artist are considered perfect, and are not criticized in color and composition classes? Am I to put out all my credentials in this area of expertise such as being a professional artist for over 20yrs who has sold a quarter million copies of my work, a BFA in painting, have had work shown in museums and compare them to yours? Are we to keep bringing this up to try to prove me wrong when everything found on good compositional techniques agrees with what I said regarding the portraits in the UI composition? Are we to keep going off topic to teach a subject that cannot be summed up in a paragraph when this thread is supposed to be about an AAR?
I say again to anyone who wants to become more learned about the subject of visual composition techniques to take some classes, or read some books if you think I am making things up. Please, I am not looking to make this thread about this subject due to a side comment tip.
Now once more, back to the action!
-
Mord, your portraits are fine, and certainly more work to change than just taking it into Photoshop and clicking "flip horizontal”. I think you missed this part of my post “Whether you are painting a picture, taking a photo, taking an artsy screen shot, or laying out a UI it is better composition to have things facing either into the page, or FOWARD. Never out.” Out leads the eye off the page.
If anyone wants to learn more about what are good visual composition concepts there are whole books on the subject (some I have read/studied), and sure there is stuff online too. I’m sure we would all rather not stray too much into what this thread isn’t about
. It was just a tip I wanted to pass along to BF to improve if they still have time. -
Any particular unit you're interested in?
All that can be improved.
Which one feels more visually comfortable? The #1’s, or the #2’s?
#1
OR
#2
#1
OR
#2
I will bet all said the #2’s. Artist use techniques to react with the subconscious mind that most do not realize. Compositions done in a way that coincides with the way the mind reacts naturally with what it sees feel good, and direct the eye to where the artist wants. Doing the opposite makes the subconscious mind react in an unnatural, awkward way. The #1’s feel a bit awkward because the face is looking to the left leading your eye out of the picture. Your subconscious wants to be pulled to look where the face is looking which if off the page, but you want to look in so there is this conflict that makes #1 not feel as comfortable as the #2's. The player’s eyes will move more comfortably across the UI to the information you want him to concentrate on by having the face looking in directing the eye to it improving the flow of the UI. Whether you are painting a picture, taking a photo, taking an artsy screen shot, or laying out a UI it is better composition to have things facing either into the page, or forward. Never out. My advice to BF is to take the 2 seconds to bring the portraits into Photoshop, and flip them horizontally before release to improve the visual composition in a functional way that feels more comfortable in directing the player’s eyes to the info in the UI.
There you go grogs composition 101 to improve any visuals. Now back to the action!
-
Ken, are those new unit portraits, or are those same from CW?
-
I am currently experimenting with @sburke's Venafro map and so far it looks superb for CMFI.
I am playing sburke's "Venafro" map now, and I agree. He did a great job on it. It is the only map I can recall playing in Cmx2 that really looks war torn. It reminds me more of how one sees towns in war movie's such as "Saving Pvt. Ryan". Very cool looking map sburke!
-
Ian, I took another look at the video at 3 min, and it really does not make sense that it works as it did showing no LOS from the waypoint, but moved to it and was able to fire. Now I wonder how many shots I could have fired in situations where the LOS tool wasn’t giving a true reading. Also, wondering if it works with infantry too.
I did have a side thought that would be useful, and that is if the firing line changed color like the LOS tool when dragging a waypoint it would make it easier to find the spot needed to move to to fire on something. The way it is now one must make a waypoint, select LOS tool, check LOS, adjust waypoint, check again, adjust again, check again. In the way I describe one would set the waypoint where LOS is definite and set the target line. Then you would drag the waypoint back. If you move the target line to where LOS isn’t it would change color.
-
Ian, I am always interested in learning about more subtleties in the game, but I think I have an explanation as to why it works sometimes, and why sometimes it does not. I think that the small movement given in front of the tank is just the bit it may need to get the shot to see the middle of the action square. That said the tank would be able to fire on the spot whether you gave the target order on a move line and moved it back, or just gave the short move line to where it was moved back in the first place with the target order. Either way the tank must have LOF from where it is firing, and the tank must move to get it albeit just a little bit. Try a comparison, and I think the results will be the same. The reason it does not work sometimes is because the tank has not been moved enough to where it does not have LOF no matter how you do it.
-
Yes check Ken's AAR, I'm sure he showed his objectives.. he should have three road intersection objectives (all the same objective really) on his side of the map... if he doesn't then something is wrong. As I said earlier I meant for those objectives to be the enemy's.. so he would have intersection objectives on my side of the map and I would have them on his... but I goofed when setting up the objectives, obviously.
The town center objective that is near my setup area I am ignoring as if it didn't exist.. another error on my part in my rush to get this AAR going, must have been an errant mouse click.
So to wrap it up.. we each have road intersection objectives that only we can see.. we BOTH have the town center objective to capture.. the only one I will fight over is the one in the town itself, the other I will not occupy and will avoid like it is a body of water.
All clear now?
Bil
Yeah, the objectives are obviously off as there are no intersection objectives on his side for you to capture. Both views show 3 intersection objectives your side, and the town objective in the middle on the edge. As long as you and Ken are fine with the objectives that is the important thing.
-
Looking forward to another excellent presentation/preview Bil. I have to say though that I find the objective placement for a ME rather odd on this map. I read an earlier post where you said there are objectives on the allied side, but I still am only seeing objectives on your side besides the one on the edge. At any rate I am sure it will be an entertaining fight to read with the morning cup of joe.
-
I haven't "walked" this map, it looks odd for a ME. It looks more like an attack/defend, but the defender needs to move a little to set up for defense perhaps more in Bil’s favor as I see no objectives closer to the allied side.
Should be an interesting fight to follow. Remember Ken, when in doubt ATTACK! ATTACK!, and then ATTACK! (While listening to a little Wagner of course. I hear it scares the hell out of the Gerries
-
Very awesome to see the hellcat making it's debut! It has always been a favorite.
-
I know I hate that. My last game my opponent disappeared like a prom dress on prom night after the 2nd turn. Don’t be a pussy, and don’t be discourteous!
I wouldn’t worry about it Sublime you got the win by forfeit. That is how I look at it when people do not finish a game.
-
Agreed. I often have a convoy with an awkward L shape to it due to restricted setup space.
Here is where a "Follow" command would really streamline logistics. With it working as I envision to move that convoy in column formation all one would have to do is issue the move orders to the lead unit instead of having to plot a bunch of waypoints for each unit in the convoy.
Here is how it would make life SO much easier, and MUCH less tedious to move columns:
Unit Alpha is in the lead, and move orders are plotted along a road. Unit Bravo is 10m away from Unit Alpha, and is ordered to “Follow” unit A. Unit Charlie 10m away from Bravo, and is ordered to “Follow” unit B.
Unit Alpha’s starting point becomes unit Bravo’s first waypoint, and so on. The following unit follows the plotted path of the unit to be followed, and maintains its interval distance when the order was first issued. When unit Alpha stops, unit Bravo will stop 10m behind it on the plotted path of Alpha. Unit Charlie will stop when it is 10m behind Bravo, and so on..
The “Follow” order should be something BF plans to implement. In fact of we were to only get one more order I would want it to be “Follow”.
-
Better still, for all scenarios and QBs the units begin not on the map, but in a separate, scrollable, resizable window that can be dragged to any part of the screen. This window would contain all the units, nicely organized within their parent organizations. One could select one or as many as the player wishes by Shift-Clicking on them and then place them within the set up zone by clicking on the map. That way, the set up zone stays uncluttered until the player has chosen spots for the units.
Michael
That could be another function for setup phase of the "Roster" concept I presented.
-
I go about it in basically the same way as Ian described, but let me add a few tips that make things go smoother in getting organized, and some things you should remember during setup. Just as in chess the “opening” deployment can make all the difference. The less smooth the opening, then the less smoothe the middle game (where the fighting takes place) will be. This is especially critical in meeting engagement battles.
*Use a top down view 6+ to separate the force into its groups. Double click, and or use the shift button to select groups, and make a formation starting with highest rank at the rear center. Using the top down, and organizing in a planned formation makes it quick to just get the force in organized order.
· Stock up on ammo. Rotate the force into vehicles to get AT weapons, and extra small arms ammo. Set up is the easiest time to supply. Here is where acquiring from outside the vehicle would be very handy.
· Think about C2 into the game. Do I really need to drive that HQ around in the jeep, or should I leave it with the mortars to use the radiThink about logistics. Who should be loaded into vehicles if there are any.
· Remember to pack up heavy weapons first before giving move orders, then issue again. Otherwise they will have to spend time to get moving. Time is always a factor.
-
I have promoted a modification in the acquire key ever since the release of CMFI. Sadly I’ve come to learn battlefront doesn’t listen or care about its customers so I don’t foresee anything good changing with respect to this issue anytime soon. Apparently only the reviews of gaming websites matter so until one of these sites mentions these short comings, we the customers aren’t going to get alteration.
I disagree. From what I have observed they are more involved with the forum than other developers whose games I have played. I have seen many ideas here incorporated into the game eventually. The reality is they are a small team, with limited recourses to put every feature in that the players want all at once. It is an on going process. Each build since the CMx2 engine has come out has been better than the last. Trust me they see the ideas on here, and sift through them.
-
I think a lot of this problem would go away if SMG toters were inhibited from firing their weapons at ranges beyond 50 meters. That way they would be less likely to fire off all their ammo before their weapons really start to take effect and you want them to be shooting.
Michael
BF has improved this with some tweaking since before the tweak they were burning through even more ammo at longer ranges. This tweak has helped. Even though the effective range would be that short SMGs can still throw lead down at longer range for suppression so if it were limited to 50m one would lose that suppression at longer ranges. When it is all said and done I would still just rather have more ammo available than stricter fire discipline, which still would leave him with his head up without firing. It is always more fun to shoot more stuff up anyways.
-
I do not think this resupply is a good idea at all. Walking back to an ammo truck under combat conditions, asking for "some more ammo, please"?
Does not sound very realistic
Watch "The Pacific" showcasing the story of John Bassilone who ran back several times under fire to get more ammo for the MG's.
I agree the maps are a bit small for supply trucks, or depots, but not ammo crates which would be positioned closer escpecially in fixed positions like trenches, or a little ways back at the CP.
-
And I bet he shot that a few times as well.
Yeah, but at least that gun gets re-supplied eventually
When it comes to 45cal. ammo there really needs to be more available for game play to be more on even par with the mp40’s never ending supply. 2k 9mm rounds on a truck compared to 300 45cal. The problem comes when Thomson guy is out it creates a bit of predicament due to the limitations of the game in that he cannot be split off alone. The options are:
* Separate the assault team to leave back along with the few rifles it comes with where he will get shot if not set all assault team on HIDE thus weakening the squad.
*Keep him in the squad where he will still LEAD the assault with NO ammo only to get shot.
*The best is when he runs out in the middle of a fight, and still keeps his head up only to get shot.
I am assuming the ammo load out amount on it is based on what the average truck/jeep carried, but It is just a case where hyper realism in supply just does not transmit well for playing due to game limits. Reality has much more flexibility to deal with it.
So, all I want for Christmas is a crate of 45 cal, of 45 cal, of 45 cal…. All together boys sing it.
-
I agree that supply could be streamlined, and expanded a bit. It seems to make sense that the acquire command should be able to be used if next to the vehicle instead of having to enter it especially since ammo re-supply happens automatically if close to vehicle now without having to enter it. I like the idea of supply depots, and or ammo crates. The game “Sudden Strike” had depots, ammo crates, and supply trucks. Depots could not be moved, and probably would not be applicable due to the small size of CM maps. Ammo crates could be loaded into trucks/jeeps, and moved where one desired. If ammo crates are added I would like them to be able to be loaded/unloaded too. Ammo trucks when close to troops would automatically re-supply them. In all cases if a unit were out of ammo it would automatically re-supply itself if close to any supply crates/depots. Blowing these up would make for some nice, BIG explosions.
P.S. To commander Battlefront need more 45cal. ammo sent to the front ASAP! My Tommy gunner keeps running into battle with nothing but his dick in his hand when out of ammo.
-
I think this is a classic example of using smoke to gain fire superiority through maneuver. I just played this mission where smoke use is essential, and this is the plan I used.
**SPOILER for Kiwi Soldiers**
First I used the off map mortar to kill sniper team at D (farm). I then ran scout to A where they drew some fire, but the angle didn’t allow good shooting by the Germans at point C. Reinforcing point A with the mortar, and a squad I had the mortar shoot SMOKE at the railroad station at point C. Adjusting for wind I shot it more in the direction the wind was coming from to get more out of it as it blew toward the compound on the bottom which is the starting position.
Using the smoke as cover I maneuvered 2 squads + piat to point B without taking any fire. From point B I gained fire superiority on point C. After getting a lucky hit with the piat on the railroad station the Germans ran out the back where a squad was waiting that was to eventually run into the station from the rear as the squads at point B were pinning Germans at C. I then put one squad along with HQs along with the piat I ran back into the railroad station to fire at Germans in farm D. The squads at B did the final assault on the farm for the win.
-
I think whether it is used to mask your movement over open ground, or to shoot it at the enemy to blind him where he is depends on the situation, conditions, problem that needs to be solved, and what one has at their disposal. I have used it both ways to effect. As others have said wind direction, and strength is the biggest factor in effectiveness so checking the conditions is always best before using it, and adjusting for wind will get the most out of it.
The more tactics in your bag of tricks will give you more to draw from to problem solve. In the tactics I shared I would say they are not the norm, but some of the more creative ways I have found to use it with success when it was the best answer to the situation against AI, and human alike. In the case of using the “Moving Wall” tactic it works best when the wind is light, and moving in the direction of the desired movement with enemy on the flank, but not to the front. In this case one uses the direction of the wind to their advantage, while maximizing the cover since the unit is moving parallel with the smoke. Infantry grenades will work fine for this tactic.
The “Rolling Smoke Screen” tactic works best if the smoke is blowing toward the enemy, and with tanks popping smoke as it is robust, covers a wide area, and can be deployed in a leapfrog fashion quickly. Again, it is a case of using the direction of the wind to best advantage to coincide with desired direction of movement. The tank formation I use most for this is an echelon depending on the enemy position. This method will mask much more troops with much less smoke than if firing a line of smoke in front of the enemy spread on a wide front. The main objective is to move the infantry across open ground creating concealment “terrain” where there is none. There will be no C if one cannot get from A to B first.
Again, it all depends on many factors as to what tactic is the best answer to solve the problem. The only wrong tactic is the one that has never produced success.
-
I use it often when applicable. The most important factor is wind direction in being effective. Here are a few good uses where it has made all the difference. If it is blowing in the direction you want to go down a flank pop smoke, and have the men run beside it as it moves creating a moving wall effect. Another tactic I have used for infantry to cross-large open areas with no cover is the “rolling smoke screen”. Have tank 1 pop smoke, then have tank 2 move to where tank 1 smoke is in front of tank 1, and have tank 2 pop smoke. Then repeat with tank 3 ect… All the while have the infantry moving behind the rolling smoke screen that is produced.
ALLIED - CMBN-Market Garden - BETA AAR (the better beta beater reader)
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Ok Wicky its time we two painters start giving Ken some advice that will help him win this game beyond what will make his eyes move across the UI more easily. Ken, Its time to break out the PAINT ROUNDS ala “Kelly’s Heroes”! Use the pink ones to hit that panther! It will cover all it’s optics blinding it forcing the next tank commander to have to climb out, and wipe it off. You can then hose that commander too. Also, it will demoralize that crew. How tough do you think they will feel fighting in “The Pink Panther”? not to mention all forms of cammo will be screwed.
Even better, and I am not joking here imagine rounds filled with napalm coming in a rain from a quad 20mm that could stick to a tank. That would make any crew wish they remembered to put on “depends diapers”. The fire, and smoke should create enough blindness, and panic. I wonder if the allies ever experimented with such a weapon? The problem I guess would be to get enough of it packed in a shell to get the effect desired, but if it were enough rounds like from a quad 20mm perhaps something like that would be effective. It sure sounds nasty, and something I would not want to be on the receiving end.