Jump to content

flintlock

Members
  • Posts

    214
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by flintlock

  1. Originally posted by benpark:

    Moon, I don't know how you are able to keep from losing your marbles. It's been like a bunch of pygmies storming a Bentley dealership screaming for tricycles in here lately.

    I almost sprayed a mouthful of coffee all over my monitor reading this. Thanks for the laugh, and yes, RO is quite a good game.
  2. Great thread!

    SoaN, in a post by BDHX (quoted below), he mentioned that the team is currently working on an upcoming patch that will make the LoF visible, as a tool to assist those that misunderstand the current system.

    Other possible tweaks to LoS/LoF notwithstanding, do you know whether the change to LoF (to make LoF visible) will be implemented as an option that may be disabled via the menu? I ask as I enjoy and appreciate the current effort and don't wish to have any artificial indicators.

    I asked this question in BDHX's thread, though since it was hijacked he likely, and understandably, didn't bother to follow the thread.

    I appreciate any light you may be able to shed on this.

    Originally posted by BDHX:

    Calculation algorithm

    Aiming at target’s outlines standing out of an obstacle is quite a labor-intensive. Our FPS makes it unviable. That’s why the game uses a simplified aiming pattern. You aim at certain points that may be blocked by real obstacles. It makes a target which should be visible to the player vanish. Visibility is calculated by ray tracing.

    Visibility algorithm errors are caused by ray tracing to preset points that may be either blocked by obstacles or, alternatively, visible, although this is not the case with the player (i.e. the player sees the target not being blocked by obstacles).

    However, weapon guidance algorithm (a different one) in 50% of cases produces a ‘line of fire not available’ message due to realistic gun elevation angles. Besides there is a 30% chance of failure due to uneven terrain and some

    15-20% cases failure is caused by aiming at preset points.

    The initial design of the game targeted developing a model being as close to reality as possible, with no additional artificial indicators (like drawing LOF). Basically, the idea is still good and interesting and it is a shame not everybody would like to get used to it.

    Cheers,

    flintlock

  3. Originally posted by seppDieter:

    ...people here do have issues with the game...

    There are people here that have issues with the game, that's not being disputed. Battlefront and 1C have acknowledged this and are hard at work on addressing these issues via upcoming patches.

    My post was merely about putting that "40%" figure being bandied about into perspective.

  4. Not only does Oskar deserve to be awarded that medal and promoted to a higher rank, you should give that man a case of Becks, a sexy fräulein and send him behind the front for a rest.

  5. I haven't installed ToW on my Mac, but I would follow War RaVeN's advice and try out the demo first. The X1600 in the 17" C2D iMac should be fine, though it's a mid-range graphics card. It's better to play it safe and ensure you'll be satisfied with the performance, based on the settings you can live with.

  6. Originally posted by molo:

    ...approximately 40% of users who think the game needs significant improvements to make it fun/playable/etc.

    Ever consider not every customer that purchases ToW posts on these forums? Moreover, those that do may not even bother to post in that thread (I didn't). For all you know, that 40% may equate to less than 1% of total customers.
  7. Originally posted by Moon:

    ...meanwhile the game has excellent sales. The demo is out there for everybody to see what they think of the game. It turns out so far that the majority is liking it, but they're just voicing (sometimes in email) and not shouting.

    It's good to read the game is enjoying strong sales early on. I'm thoroughly enjoying the game myself, and I'm confident ToW will continue to improve with time. Good sales bode favorably for entertaining an expansion, and I would love to see this title spawn a successful franchise.
  8. Not a big deal, but thought I'd post this finding as it appears to be unique to this unit, and perhaps an easy fix.

    This is from the Rising Tide mission, the second mission in the Polish campaign. The unit is a Pz 35(t). There is also a Pz 38(t), though this texture phenomenon appears limited to the Panzer 35(t).

    At certain distances, the hull texture on the Pz 35(t) will be lost, as witnessed in the screenshots below. The turret, exhaust, track and wheel textures remain intact.

    Texture on:

    text_01.jpg

    Texture off:

    text_02.jpg

  9. Originally posted by BDHX:

    Currently our team is working over a patch to make LOF visible.

    I enjoy the current system, which brings me to my question regarding the implementation of the adjustment to it in the upcoming patch: will it be a wholesale forced change, or will we be able to disable it in the options menu, for those that appreciate the current effort and don't want artificial indicators?
  10. Originally posted by atacms:

    aren't we all tired of WW2

    Definitely not!

    Originally posted by atacms:

    hasn't it been hacked to death?

    No, we haven't even scratched the surface.

    As hardware technology improves and gets more powerful, I hope publishers continue to develop future WWII titles and leverage the new power. Thanks to advance in technology, we'll get to enjoy and experience them as never before.

    :cool:

×
×
  • Create New...