Apocalypse 31
-
Posts
357 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Apocalypse 31
-
-
"but I, along with most on this forum would really like to see some development in the game engine "
And where, Captain Mike, is your evidence for that statement. Who are these people, the majority you claim, who want to see CM transformed into a different game that suits your tastes better than the present incarnation? I know I don't read every single post but I see very few people here apart from yourself arguing that CM should become something else.
Different game?
Hell No.
I enjoy the game. I just wish we had an engine with better performance
We're always working on improving performance. Is that suddenly going to double frame rates? No. The game is *fast* considering what it does under the hood.Believe me, I understand. I would love to switch over to CM and suddenly have it be twice as fast. You have no idea how much I would love that. The thought of it makes me smile involuntarily. And if I thought it could actually happen I would do everything in my ability to make it so.
But I've spent my career optimizing applications - beyond AI that's really my primary skillset. And CM is... well, let's just say Charles has done a fantastic job. We'll keep working on it, but unless we compromise our design goals - thousands of units, all driven by individual AI, on very large and complex maps requiring real pathfinding - or suddenly everyone gets supercomputers we're never going to run as smoothly on the highest settings as your next $50 million RTS.
Mr Culliton, thanks for your insight. Good things happen to good development teams (eventually!)
-
Send BFC a few million $$ as an investor and I'm sure they could accommodate you.
Unfortunately, its not about me. :-)
-
Very few games handle what Combat Mission does - a potentially infinite number of units on a 16 square kilometer map - ALL of which can be in view at once!
Have you tried the game RUSE? It uses the IRIS Zoom engine, and it's a beauty. Large maps, lots of units (more so than CM)
check out a video:
It's really limited only by the processing power of the machine in question. Technically it's not something that's easily tackled. That Charles has solved it as well as he has, and on his own, is actually pretty amazing.
I find that hard to believe. I have a DELL XPS with 3-gig processor, 4-gig ram, and a Nvidia GTX 280 1-gig video card. I have no issue running any other game on the market. However, when I play CM there is a significant performance drop compared to other games.
I'm not trying to sharp-shoot you. Afterall, you're the professional game designer here. However, I'd like to see CM avoid something like World War Two Online - a game that is using an 11-year old engine, trying to compete with today's game market. It just doesn't work.
Again - I'm not asking CM to turn into CoH or even RUSE, but I, along with most on this forum would really like to see some development in the game engine - more so than a quickly released Market Garden or Barbarosa addon.
-
Fair cop - I did say I loved CC, it was awesome to fight repeatedly over the same stretch of ground with all the craters, hulks and bodies from previous battles
Head-to-head campaigns in the GJS and Stalingrad mods remain as my fondest wargaming memories.
I still have some proud moments in CC IV, holding off the initial German offensive with a handful of squads and an M1 57mm AT Gun.
"The armor is too thick!"
Path finding in that game was always weak, and amazingly got even worse as the series progressed. I played CC Modern Tactics, and you couldn't even move your squad 100m without them getting lost, and a member or two falling out.
-
As much as I love CC, and I really do - whether you're talking CCIII or CCV it's campaign-system is pretty terrible and overly gamey, I see no reason to have anything like it in this game. Force pool? I'd rather just get the whole battalion on an extra-large field..
It IS a game after all. I thought the campaign system was good. Tactically, it gave you options as to where you wanted to attack - and overall let you decide the direction of your campaign.
-
No, I've not played it. Are you saying you get to select your units from a pool for each scenario? Because if not, I really don't get what you want.
Yes. A player will normally get a Battalion sized force for a campaign. Each mission is a company-sized engagement so players can select through a Battalion worth of equipment to field during each mission.
-
Gents,
Keep in mind that the Bovington tiger has had its engine re-done, and you can still hear some issues with it (turbines popping and such).
I modeled the sound based off of what I THINK a well-working engine sounds like.
-
I have no idea. I didn't think the game tracked Campaign casualties on a regular basis. I didnt know it even tracked campaign kills.
-
It's not the fault of the engine.
Maybe...but it is certainly not something that can be done with the current engine.
Have you ever played Close Combat? The UI and engine support a FORCE POOL system.
-
I can understand the reasoning behind the scenario designer not telling you which units are core (to stop gamey bastidges flinging the non-core units into the fray with no thought for preservation)
Eh. I don't buy it.
Look at it this way; At least players would have that option if we had a force pool.
-
I'm not disappointed with CMBN, but I have a few gripes (that have probably already been voiced by many players)
CMX2 Engine
I'm not asking for CMBN to be Company of Heroes, but I just feel like the game engine isn't optimized for performance. CMX2 is not a very smooth gaming experience.
I was hoping for more development with the engine for this release, especially compared to other games out there. Better physics and effects. Maybe better development for terrain and trees/shrubs..speedtree?? The CMX2 engine feels stiff.
Story Line for Campaigns
My second gripe hasn't changed since CMSF: There's really not much depth or story line that goes with each campaign or mission, scenario.
I'm not asking for Company of Heroes cut scenes in between each mission, but how about some animated mission briefings? In CMSF it was much worse, because we were going off of a fictional war; I never really understand the operational or strategic portion of the campaign.
With CMBN we already have a script: Reality! Why not do what Close Combat did, and toss in some historical video footage between missions to spice things up.
Bottom Line: Campaigns still have no feeling to them
Force Pool
Close Combat gave players a force pool. A group of Soldiers that they could call their own. It gave players ownership and a sense of command. It also allowed players to develop their Soldiers through combat and experience. By the end of a campaign you could have a group of killer Soldiers, with lots of experience from battle.
I was really hoping that CMBN would have some of that. Instead, I go through the campaigns and receive random reinforcements. I'm not sure if this is equipment that was with me from last mission? Did they gain any experience. Their leadership still shows +1 or -1..no change. Kind of a let down.
-
hope you guys enjoy it.
let me know if there are any issues. someone is saying that the tiger sound was not included in their download. ill have to double check that.
thanks
-
Sounds good, but can't find the mod. Or does it take a while to appear on the list?
I think it takes a while
-
You might like my sound mod
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taGq83q_gIA
I just uploaded it to the repository about 5 minutes ago
-
I just uploaded it to the repository. Enjoy
For a preview check out YouTube
-
Aha! Another victim of "sort by name" I think! Though it's the first listed, Courage and Fortitude's second mission School of Hard Knocks seems to be accounted one of the most tricky of the scenarios supplied with the game. Losing lots of men in that one isn't anything to be embarrassed about.
Yes. Mission 2 from Courage and Fortitude.
That mission is nuts. The Germans are dug in, and aren't moving for crap. Not only that, but the enemy has mines, artillery and AT gun support that would make you want to rip your hair out.
I've also become frustrated with the amount of friendly forces I have to manage. At one point you're managing an entire battalion worth of forces. I dont like it, and I have trouble clicking that fast.
On a final note - I wish MG teams didn't consist of 2 separate teams. I really have found no use for a MG Ammo bearer team. I wish I could just consolidate them into one MG squad.
-
I could do with some tactical advice - I'm an armchair general no more no less, with plenty of experience with CMx1 and Shock Force. But this is something else. It's difficult for the most part.
Don't feel bad. I'm a Captain in the US Army and an Armor officer with 2 deployments to Iraq...this game kicks my ass on a daily basis.
I just got done playing the second mission of the first campaign. It was uuuuuuuugly. I'll leave it at that before I embarrass myself and degrade everyone's thoughts of military officers :-)
My tactical nuggets:
-Always attack with a 3:1 ratio in forces
-Never attack without a base of fire - Make it rain! Keep their heads down and maneuver your forces while the enemy is suppressed.
-Always over-kill your enemy - I can't tell you how many times that I THOUGHT I had wiped out an enemy squad only to find 1 or 2 survivors jump up and fire a burst at my guys as they cleared the objective. Use the 'assault' or 'hunt' commands while clearing enemy positions.
-Cut your enemy's retreat - One thing I noticed in CM:BN that is much different from CM:SF is that the enemy will be much more sensible about retreating. I've been in a few situations where the enemy fell back to another location and continued fighting.
-Don't lose your "Tactical Focus" - I'm often guilty of my own advice. Some of these missions are complicated. Constantly evaluate your mission and review your objectives. In most cases your objective is terrain-based, not enemy based. You don't have to kill every single enemy - don't waste time or your men's lives if you don't have to.
-
One more thing, I hate having Panther sounding same as sherman and thompson same as mp40 and kar98k same as m1 garand and so on... You cannot make different sounds at all for each one of them???
Thanks
Nope.
I really wish we could. Realistically these weapons and vehicles sound much different
-
Can we please get different sounds for the K98 and M1 Garand
Same applies for MP40 and M1 Thompson. These weapons have distinct sounds in real life, and have been portrayed differently in every World War Two game since the beginning of time.
I know Steve said it was an issue with the amount of sounds, and the total game file sizes and all that, but honestly how much could 2 more sound files hurt the game?
Thanks
-
Something that always bugged me in CMSF, and now bugs me again in BFN.
Those 2 commands. I'm not really sure what the point of MOVE is. Nobody ever moves that slow in combat. That's the speed that Soldiers walk when they're on the FOB. NOT when there are incoming rounds or an enemy threat is imminent.
I'm guessing someone will come in here and tell me how wrong I am...?
-
Correct me if I'm wrong, but both the K98 and M1 Garand are sharing the same sound file - gun rifle.wav
Would it be possible, in future patches, to get different sound files for the M1 Garand and K98. Realistically, both weapons sound somewhat different, and would be a nice touch for the game.
-
Hmm, and the Nyala (RG-31) was in USMC service in Iraq as well (see the below pic from 2007). That might be the droid I'm looking for.
Not just the Marines. US Army still use it in Iraq.
-
XO stays on the FOB and orders the parts for your blowed up Strykers.
-
So for every single Taliban chap it took an average of 1,000 bullets 22 artillery and mortar shells, .5 hand grenades, 7 rifle grenades plus 200 pounds of air munitions.
Anyone have an estimate of how much it has taken to cause a single casualty in previous wars? WW2, Vietnam etc??
(Dollar cost?)
You cant get wrapped around the axle on this fact.
He who has the most firepower, wins the day. Or at least scares the crap out of the other guy.
When talking about dollars, consider that it costs much more for human life. A Marine commander on Guadacanal said it best: "It's easier to get more ammunition, than more Marines"
improvements carry over from CMBN?
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
I would pay $20 for an updated engine - mostly focusing on realistic physics.
I'm not asking this game to be Company of Heroes (beautiful explosion effects!) or RUSE (very smooth engine!), but the CM engine is just very sluggish and slow compared to the rest of the games on the market these days.