Jump to content
Battlefront is now Slitherine ×

CommC

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    45

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by CommC

    1.05 Gameplay/Bugs Feedback

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    I have created a new mission which is on a 4x4 km map. I am getting an out of memory error with this, v1.05, followed by a crash to desktop. Is there a bug with larger user created missions? I thought the max map size was 6x6 km, why can I only create up to a 4x4 km map?

    My system:

    6850 dual core 3.0 Ghz processor

    2 Gb ram

    8800 GT 512 MB vid card

    Thanks

    0

    Poll: Do you think the game is much more playable after 103

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    yes, but javelins don't seem to kill T-72s anymore.

    Ultimately, the 8x8 m terrain abstraction may not allow for a sufficiently accurate sim to be playable. i.e. the frustrations may outweigh the ease of use benefits. For example, will a tank be able to approach the top of a hill to reach a hull down or turret down position with this abstraction? Need to do more testing to see how this works.

    0

    nVidia users running Vista

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    I wish to add my opinion and suggestion that BF consider switching to DirectX instead of OpenGL for the Combat Mission series. Is this a practical impossibility to switch at this late date for CMSF?

    I think the graphics card manufacturers have focussed more lately at making their drivers (and cards) compatible with DirectX, with OpenGL being a lower priority. Or for whatever series of complex reasons, good or bad, DirectX has a better chance of being a consistent standard which will yield the best chance of success across the broadest range of graphics cards, processors and operating systems.

    0

    Here is how bad the movement code actually is, and it's not just "pathfinding"

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Well, this is probably not relevant to the main point, but the problem of the "disappearing" waypoints is easily explained as being due to the 8 x 8 m grid abstraction, and is not a problem at all.

    When the vehicle reaches the outer edge of the 8 x 8 m grid containing a waypoint, the program thinks it has reached the waypoint, shown in the center of the grid, and takes it off the display. When the path line is redrawn, the line is drawn from the vehicle to the next waypoint, and since the vehicle is at the edge of the 8x8m grid, it looks like the line or waypoint has shifted.

    Again, all this behaviour is just the code operating within the 8x8 m grid abstraction.

    I wish BF would add the feature to toggle the display of this grid as an overly to the map, also showing the center point of each grid square, since this is such an important part of the game.

    0

    The Wrong Left Turn and the Uncanny Valley

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Quote:

    "LOL. I have no idea what game you're trying to describe. Something with a 3 hour advance to contact perhaps?"

    Michael:

    A modern armored vehicle can easily travel at speeds of 60 km/hr or so ... thats only 20 minutes to cover the entire 20 km map.. on 6 km map, thats only 10 minutes to travel across the entire map. Where are you getting this 3 hour timeframe?

    Game designers need to seriously think about what they want the player to do and what contributes to victory vs defeat. If you just line up two armies in front of each other and shoot it out, you will have missed much of the depth and essence of modern armored combat. Maneuver to flank and use of terrain is everything.

    I hope whatever game emerges from CMSF development will consider these aspects of armored warfare.

    0

    The Wrong Left Turn and the Uncanny Valley

    in Combat Mission Shock Force 1

    Posted

    Many of us have dreamed of a combined arms company level sim for years and I applaud the efforts of BFC towards this end in CMSF.

    I think 1:1 and RT are essential for such a sim. We just need to persevere to get the kinks out. The feature to be able to give orders while paused may seem simple, but is a major breakthough in the thinking on the topic, in my opinion.

    The challenge is to get the tac AI, armor/gunnery model, 3D terrain model and operational AI, all working and accurate within the computing capacity of today's PCs. I think this can be done, but it will take some skilled programming and some compromises. I, for one, am more willing to compromise on terrain detail in favor of a more accurate combat model.

    But I'm a little confused about the apparent satisfaction in the community about the scale. To me, the scale in CMSF is one of the biggest negatives. The maximum map size is only 6 km, which is only 1.5x the range of the tank weaponry. This doesn't allow room for maneuver, tactics, etc. with armored vehicles. We need a 3D engine that doesn't bog a computer down and can represent both larger maps, at least 20 x 20 km, as well as sufficient detail in urban areas to accurately model infantry operations in buildings, etc. Other programs have done this on the PC, so I know it is possible.

    I think the current way CMSF handles infantry in buildings is a great step forward, and just needs some tweaking regarding LOF/LOS issues, etc., to be perfect.

    I am thrilled with Battlefront's efforts so far with CMSF, and I fully support their efforts to push forward with improvements and enhancements. I have, and will be, voting with my pocketbook. Battlefront: Carry on... please and don't be discouraged by the whiners...

    [ August 12, 2007, 04:40 PM: Message edited by: CommC ]

    0
×
×
  • Create New...