Paper Tiger
-
Posts
3,621 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Paper Tiger
-
-
Those are FPS game shots? That was really dishonest posting them then. And I'll bet they had a whole team of programmers working to create that editor. Given some fences and building types like those in the pictures, I'm pretty certain that I could outdo two of those with the CMSF scenario editor. The second one in particular is very badly designed. The scenario editor is my favourite part of the game.
-
KiloApha4
VERY nice pictures there but of course, it's WW2 Europe. Your disparaging remarks about CMx2's scenario editor are a bit unfair. It IS already capable of producing very nice and highly detailed maps at the moment. No doubt when the game system moves to Europe, we'll get whole new building sets, terrain tiles, flavour objects, etc and I feel very confident that when Charles and Co put water into the new game engine, it will be amazing.
For the time being, we already have an impassable marsh tile. While it doesn't look that good and it craters, it otherwise does the job. Mod them and you might get a better looking water tile until later.
blow56
sucks worse than a broken Dyson.
A broken Dyson still sucks?
-
Broken and burning buildings are something that I would LOVE to see put back into CMx2 too. I guess this will come with the Normandy game. I can't imagine a WW2 game of this level without them.
-
Ken
Yes, I certainly am aware that you're a detail oriented player and I respect that. So much so that I'm surprised that BFC haven't invited you to join their Beta testing team (honestly) as your eye for detail does pick out some very peculiar anomolies, i.e. the changing M249. That's an exceptionally good catch.
With the exception of my first playthrough of the 'Boot Camp' training campaign that comes with the game I have played CMSF exclusively in Real Time so my opinions are strictly limited to the RT perpective and so will probably be out of synch with yours and other WEGO players. I wouldn't want to see the ticker tape introduced for RT as it would break the magic for me. But for WEGO, well, heck, yes, if it makes it easier for players to keep track of what's going on without having to watch every unit for a full minute, why not.
If I can DRIVE a Bradley, why cant I be notified (actively) when it is DESTROYED?
I guess this highlights the difference between us when we're playing the game. For me, I rationalise it like this. I have a Bradley that's moving unaccompanied by infantry along a street and it gets whacked by an RPG team in a building along the way. The crew dies (no survivors) and has no chance to call in what happened. Even the BEST C2 in the world would yield zero information about the enemy force other than a loud BANG and smoke and 'why isn't Charlie answering my calls?' And God forbid that the game should reward me with the information that there's an RPG team sitting at the third floor window of the pink fronted building on that street so that my avenging angels can move in and take them out risk free. All that a real life commander SHOULD know is that there's a burning Bradley up that road and that means trouble. More info than that is not realistic IMO.
Now, that's how I see things and it helps ME enjoy the game, enhances MY immersion. It also helps overcome some of the limitations that the AI operates under. That ambushing RPG team won't do the logical thing and change position after it's performed it's ambush. It will sit there either until it's current order expires and it's time to move to it's new one or, it stays in place. Even the very BEST scenario designer can only approximate the time span that an ambush can take place so the first is very hard to do while the latter is what usually happens.
-
Weird. I found myself wishing for the same thing yesterday too. I am in the middle of playtesting a scenario that starts immediately after a lethal ambush which has killed two platoons of infantry, their vehicles and three tanks. I have the burning wrecks strewn along the road but was wishing that I could put the squads in with their status as 'Dead' to complete the picture. Unfortunately(!), this mission is part of a campaign so I can't take recourse to Mark's suggestion.
Since the game already shows dead soldiers, of course it's not in bad taste. However, flavour objects of arms, limbs etc... THAT would be gross.
-
You don't think the Strat AI (i.e. the AI player, rather than the built in unit reactions) knows what's happening to each unit as it happens? Currently the Strat AI has that advantage over us.
Of course it doesn't because all it can do is what your units will do without guidance from you. Unless you've ordered them to move really quickly in the face of enemy fire your units know they're under fire just as quickly as the AI's do as it's units will react according to the same TAC AI as yours do. And then, you come along and go 'whoa', stop advancing, retreat to that building and bring some units over from this flank. The strategic AI is just an enormous WEGO turn and the AI has no ability to do anything else but that.
Where I'd agree that the AI has an advantage over a human player is that it can co-ordinate a large force without getting a major headache but that's it.
And as we're the squad leader as well as the CC we should know what goes on at squad level immediately.
But you do. You just fail to notice it because, like a real life commander, you're attention can only be focussed on one thing at a time in the game. I just think of it as hats. When I'm focussed exclusively on one squad, I'm wearing my squad leader hat. I think you get my point. The flashing icons will definitely help to bring this to our attention and I agree that it is needed for RT play. Now, for WEGO...
So, in reference to PaperTiger stating, "...but WEGO players really do have all the time in the world to see what just happened and do something about it. If you miss something important, who's fault is that? Otherwise, anything that increases the fog of war factor in the game is welcomed by me.", I disagree.
I, a WEGO player, do NOT have all the time in the world! My game time is limited by real life.
OMG Ken, you really CAN'T be serious! Of course I didn't mean that you have ALL the time in the world. I can't believe that you refuted that as if it were literal truth. Okay, WEGO players can replay their turns to their hearts content so who's fault is it if they miss something important.
-
It's been interesting reading this thread. This is an idea that's been around for a long time now and I really do like the idea of unit icons flashing when they take fire. I wouldn't be surprised if we get it real soon too, if not with 1.1, then a not-so-distant patch as it really is a good idea. Anyway, I'm almost certain that even the flashing icons will get missed more often than not.
However, it seems to me that as the human player I already enjoy an ENORMOUS advantage over the AI side and other kinds of alerts, especially the ticker tape idea, is just one other way to be omnicient and screw the AI over even more effectively. The quality of the TAC AI affects the AI player just as much as it does me, especially when it's doing the attacking. Even with the 'borg spotting' problem largely gone, I still can and do take advantage of knowledge I shouldn't really have to manoeuver units into positions to take out enemy units, area fire on buildings etc. When units come under fire and I don't see who's doing the shooting I just put that down to fog of war and I'm pretty sure that's what happens in real life too. Especially in dense urban environments. MOUT is lethal in real life. And even viewing from far out, vehicles getting hit by RPGs or other AT weapons make enough noise to alert me to hit the pause button.
I play exclusively Real Time and so I'd definitely appreciate the visual clue of a flashing icon but WEGO players really do have all the time in the world to see what just happened and do something about it. If you miss something important, who's fault is that? Otherwise, anything that increases the fog of war factor in the game is welcomed by me.
-
Absolutely 100%. I'm definitely going to give the Marines units a try out at the start but I'm certain that after a few days/weeks, I'll return exclusively to the Red fold once again.
With regards to the enhancements to gameplay, it would appear that almost all of these will be made available to everybody as a patch so that's not a good reason for buying the Marines module. The only reason for buying it is to get the new units and of those, the T-90 will undoubtably be the star of the show for me. And the BMP-3 equipped Syrian Mech Infantry units with their ability to split into teams will let me develop missions that feature modern Russian Infantry units. Goodbye Syrian Theatre of Operations.
With respect to Red air power, yes, it can be included for Red v Red missions but it's a workaround and it's not hugely satisfying. However, Steve has already said that Red airpower will be included in the Brit module (i.e. done properly) so that will be worth waiting for as Red air power is very effective in it's own right.
-
handihoc:
Yes, patience really is the key to winning this one. There's a lot to do and it's easy to try to take on everything at once with terrible consequences. Nice result. I occassionally got a total surrender before time ran out too when there were just four tanks. I'd have to say that this was one of the most difficult missions to balance that I've ever made. If you play this mission again, you might find that a lot of your shots on the enemy tanks just ricochet off their armour. I've 'set up' that tank duel many times and I've once had your result i.e. only lost 1 tank. I guess the random numbers play a much larger role in a Red v Red game. Trust me on this but seven tanks would probably slaughter your forces most of the time. It actually was this way for a while, albeit they were mere T-72M1Vs and not the superior (2001) models and a victory was extremely hard won, fine for a stand alone mission but in a campaign, it's a bit of a ball breaker. However, once again, when you get to play the full campaign, you may very well see 7 tanks in this mission. The full jobbie will be dynamic and this will be one of the possible versions.
I've taken onboard the comments about the volume of artillery support. V1.1 has a bit less and when I do the full campaign, there will potentially be even less than that.
I also must make a strange confession here. There are only two AI plans in this mission but there was a third and it took advantage of the terrain in a really fiendish way. Once those tanks reached their final destination, they took up hull-down positions and were almost impossible to kill no matter what I did. I deleted this AI plan because I figured those that got it would hate it. Perhaps I'll re-introduce it in the full campaign.
Regarding the potential wrecks blocking the bridge for vehicles, I NEVER once had this happen in any playtest I had and nobody's reported this happening either so I thought it was a safe bet.
Anyway, thanks for your feedback. Personally, I think the last mission has the best map but, unfortunately, potentially the weakest challenge if you take a large force through to it. If you lose a few tanks and have very little artillery left then it can really hurt you. I hope you get a good battle out of it though. Look forward to hearing how you got on later.
Combatintman:
Thanks again. You're going to see a lot more very soon as I've started playtesting on one of the best maps I've ever created.
-
Maybe I missed something Ken and if I did, I apologise. But I'm curious to know why you didn't just create an ATGM team from that squad and that would have solved most of your problems.
-
Hey, thanks for that. It was the rocket arillery that I was particularly interested in. So it won't be unreasonable for me to give my core forces some rcket artillery to play around with... cool!
-
The scenario editor is excellent for setting up an accurate OB for up to battalion level formations but I'd like to ask you guys what could you reasonably expect to see in a larger formation; in my case a Syrian Mech Infantry Regiment?
In particular, I'm interested in things like artillery and the other assets that are mentioned in the scenario editor .
The reason I ask is that my next project will feature units from around 3 battalions which is practically a regiment. I suspect that a Regiment would have quite a bit of stuff attached to it, artillery, engineers, recon elements etc.
-
I love the tanks in this game, particularly the Russian equipment. Here are three photos of tanks in action.
This first one is an in-game photo from mission 3 of Perdition. It's probably one of my favourites as the graphics are very sharp and it makes the terrain look very realistic. It's a T-62MV.
This one's from the final mission of the Hasrabit campaign. Those T-55 MVs are basking in the warm evening sunlight providing overwatch for their advancing infantry. One of my elite Sniper teams on a rooftop opens fire on an enemy MG team and... bam..
Scratch one elite sniper team. Overkill but a very satisfying TAC AI response. Notice the shell streaking through the air towards it's target.
-
All I can suggest is to make three copies of the one scenario and put each plan on each scenario. Test till your hearts content then combine the data into one plan
Hey, that's a good idea. I might try that out a couple of times before the Normandy module changes the current set up. However, I can see a significantly increased risk of stuffing up with this big time. :-D
-
About the AI using up all of its artillery on opening move barrages, that can be got around in two ways that I can think of. First, when the scenario designer does his terrain targets he specifies 'suppress' or 'damage' rather than 'destroy'. This should hold back some of your artillery for later use. A second thing is if the scenario designer assigns artillery as 'reinforcements'. That means it won't be available to the AI for initial bombardment. That 5 minute (or however long) initial wait for your mortars can be interpreted as off-map 60mm mortar teams hastily setting up position and aligning their weapons.
Sweet. Thanks for posting that. I feel I now have enough information to go ahead and start adapting the individual missions in 'Hasrabit' that I've earmarked for dynamic artillery. That'll mean I can get straight into playtesting them when the Marines arrives on my hard drive. I'm pretty sure I know how smoke will be handled too. However, I will actually need to see what it does in the game before I can plan THAT. If it dumps smoke in the same way that it does artillery in the pre-planned barrages, that will be a pretty dense smoke screen.
-
Handihoc:
The plan is to develop two campaigns using more or less the same maps, one as Red v Red which will be called 'Perdition' and a second Marines v AI which as yet has no title or structure. The battles will probably be quite similar although I expect I'll have to significantly upgrade the Syrian opponent in the Marines campaign. At the moment, the first few battles in the Red v Red campaign are BTR Mech Infantry with poor tanks v Reserves (Conscripts or Green with low motivation), occassionally with really crappy tanks. That turns out to be a very well balanced set-up for Red v Red but the US player would be able to walk over these Reserve forces with scarcely a casualty.
The reason for using the same maps for my Marines campaign is not so much lack of imagination or laziness on my part but rather because there are a significant number of people who just will not play Red v Red because there's no US forces. This'll give them the chance to play on some of the new maps. And, I want to play around with the new Marines equipment as well. As long as they're not inundated with javelins, I think I can make an interesting and challenging campaign for the Blue playing community.
So far, I've got two missions for the Red v Red finished ('First Blood' and 'Battle for the bridges') and one for the Blue v Red campaign. Right now, I'm hard at work getting a load of new maps drawn up. Hopefully, I'll be able to start playtesting a new mission before the weekend. I have had some really terrific ideas for the full Perdition campaign over the weekend which I've scribbled out on paper. It's really coming together now and I'm really keen to make this one REALLY special.
-
I have posted an amended version of Perdition at CMMODS that should be v1.1 ready. If you have the time, I'd be very grateful if some of you Beta tester guys were kind enough to have a look at it and give me some feedback on the AI artillery.
cheers
PT
-
This one comes from 'The Road to Amarah', the first mission in the Perdition mini campaign. When I took it, I couldn't help marvel how much computer game technology has advanced in my not-so-long lifetime.
That's using M1A1 Tank Commander's superlative Syrian Faces Mod.
Here's another one that shows off his faces again. And yes, that's Scipio's Flames Mod in the background too. Another must have Mod. Thsnks to both you guys for doing this excellent work.
-
Well, it's back up again and hopefully ready for v1.1. Here's what's been done to it.
First, I have removed all the AI artillery support zones for the AI and substantially reduced the amount of artillery they receive. Since there was no AI artillery in 'The Road to Amarah' and the artillery in the other two missions did absolutey nothing, you shouldn't really notice any difference except for it being a bit quieter for the first 5 minutes. However, once you have patched the game to v1.1, I suspect that the missions will play VERY differently.
Secondly, I have also reduced the artillery available to the Blue player. Not by a lot but it means that you to be a bit more economical with it, especially in the first mission.
Finally, after Elmar exposed a drastic flaw in the first mission's design I have changed the AI plans and slightly altered the Red OB to prevent anyone else from repeating his experience. Red has lost some good things and gained some not so good things. Sorry about the changes but I guess I'm a perfectionist and I shouldn't be ashamed of it.
("Hey, that was OUR ride... someone's gonna pay")
I am really hoping that some of you Beta testers will have a look and tell me if I have done/overdone the AI artillery correctly.
-
http://www.battlefront.com/community/announcement.php?f=56&a=35
You don't need to search very hard to find this...
-
Press 'Esc'
-
It's on the list for the Normandy release. Charles at first asked, "why is this needed?" and I described exactly the same thing you did in your initial post. In fact, what you wrote could have been swiped from one of my emails
That's good news. It's such a small matter and it only inconveniences scenario designers but otherwise has no impact on the game itself. Thanks for getting it on the to-do list
I am so used to building one plan and testing it at a time then go onto plan 2, 3 and so on. I only move on once I am happy with a plan.
That's how I do it too. It just happens that when I move on to testing 2, 3 or whatever, half way through, or even later, I find that I've been playtesting 1 again.
-
Way back in the 'good' old days when CMSF was still a struggling toddler there was a mode for playing Real Tile called Elite where the player was unable to pause the game during play. I'm actually beginning to wish for this option to come back as I have to confess, sometimes I shamelessly abuse that pause option.
While I definitely want to keep Elite the way it is what about re-introducing it as a next-level play option?thank you and goodnight.
-
Hey guys, I had this happen twice more this evening. It's not working out as 'Use rarely' so much as use 1 in 3 times.
On-screen Event Cues?
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
LLF
I admit that I can see how this feature would be useful to you if you're playing in RT on your Ramadi map (750m x 500m of densely packed urban terrain) so fair enough.
Other Means and Canada Guy, what do you mean 'get over' with regards to Morale, etc? Do you have any ideas or are you asking for a whole new game interface? (Not that there's anything wrong with that
) Are you talking about pop ups when you hover your mouse over units or just more info made available through visual cues in the icons? For movement, all you have to do is select 'Show all movement orders' and they're all there for you in all their colourful glory. What more are you asking for there?
Anyway, after playing my way through another mission on a very large map this morning, I have to ask you guys, how much attention are you paying to the sound cues in the game? I have become very sensitive to what's going on 'off screen' just by listening to the game sounds. Apart from RPG rounds being fired a LONG way away, I can pretty much identify everything from the sounds. I know when an ATGM fires by the POP, a Recoilless Rifle team by the chunk sound, an RPG team by the POP. And anyone who fails to notice the sound of a Red tank firing must either be deaf or playing with no sound. I am even able to discriminate between the standard Syrian MG (with 1000m range) and the HMG (with 2000m range). Or perhaps some of you are playing with music in the background?