ZPB II
-
Posts
1,469 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by ZPB II
-
-
In my opinion, the most important thing is that it's been a jolly good show. A bit like a movie director, he is. Spectacular bravery and blundery, if that is an actual word?
True warrior spirit! Onwards men, to the next battle in the great beyond!
-
Entertaining links, thanks.
I will rewatch the old Terminator movies to remind myself why the future is scary. Note to self, remember to print how to construct your own EMP weaponry instructions incase things get out of hand. How long until the first public AI vs. AI drone kill?
-
+n to the posts before, the rear arc of AA trucks is where stuff happens.
They are fun, but a huge gamble especially QB-pointswise. It is quite something to watch a 37mm flak truck shoot laterally at 3 Challengers traveling down a road. That thin turret side armour...
Lately I've found satisfaction in chaining movement orders to AA units with short pauses and a Target Briefly command from each waypoint. This means it's moving, so it's a harder target and it stops to empty the magazines and reloads while it is scooting to another location.
-
As far as I understand, that should be correct.
I haven't messed around with the bundle installer, but I did it like this:
CMBN -> CW module -> 1.11 patch -> 2.0 upgrade -> Market Garden module.
Market Garden requires the 2.0, but I am assuming that the bundle installer will install it first and then the module.
The game has come a long way from 1.0, I hope you will be positively surprised.
-
Could late Stug IIIs fire their top-mounted MGs with the gunner staying inside like Hetzers? That's what I am seeing right now ingame and I am unable to tell if it's a future or a bug.
StugIIIG (late) and StuH42 (late) have remote-controlled machine guns on the roof that can be fired from the inside.
-
OooooooooooooooooOOoooooooOOoooooOooo...
Monkey time.
-
Acid in the water again, damn hippies.
-
Say something? They said it's coming soon when it's ready. I don't think they've changed their stance.
-
Making the Defenses tab of enemy AFVs viewable during gameplay would help.
One can always look in the manual and look at the Defenses tab of the target in question, but I do admit that it isn't the fastest possible way.
But if you need that info it is there in the manual, it's pretty good as far as abstract goes and it does help in guesstimating and sidesteps most of the pedantic grognard stuff.
-
It's never too late to fix the game.
Try it the next time you're on the hunt. Go easy on her, only talk about the Nahverteidigungswaffe, Panzerbüches, Zimmerit and stuff like that. When you get the feeling you're reeling her in, go all in and seal the deal with the Pak44. It will clear all doubt.
Have someone video the encounter and post it here so we can point out any possible trivial mistakes.
-
GJR144, I've played since the CMBO demo and numerous times while playing CMx2 I find myself toggling between "Show All Move Paths" using ALT+P. In large scenarios with bottlenecks and chokepoints, the move paths of different units will overlap and cause much confusion. The most common one is when I am moving a column of vehicles on a single road. The movement orders will overlap eachother.
While I do agree that being able to customize all these aspects of the UI would be great, having to click on a unit to see move paths never really became a problem for me. When I am giving movement orders to units, I am selecting them. When I select a unit with ALT+P toggled on, I see the movement paths of other units and this gives me the visual cues I need to help synchronize the movement orders. It works for me and I personally don't see it as a big deal.
Oh, I do care about the nuances of tank combat. I've even received training on it. But I don't know how presenting data tables from controlled environment firing tests reflects into the virtual battlefield. Unless you know the angle and thickness of every plate on the 3D model of the tank, what good will the degree of optimal penetration do? It might give you a rough estimate, but how much does this differ from a gut estimate I don't know. If you are able to deduce the thickness of the plate you are likely hitting, the meeting angle and all the other variables of the shot being fired to actually make effective use of the data tables, you can probably deduce a rough estimate of whether it's a good shot or not without needing that data in the first place. Guesstimates are guesstimates.
(I'm not saying it wouldn't be a great feature to have, especially for people who are new to the game or those who haven't yet realized that memorizing the armour and firepower values of vintage AFVs is the best way to get girls, I can't help but to think that effectively utilizing this information is a lot harder in the hi-fi CMx2 than the rather simplistic in comparison CMx1.)
-
He is not blowing it out of proportion. This has been discussed countless times and the answer has always been along the lines of it being a lot harder to code than many people believe and not being that important in the West.
It has everything to do with opportunity costs, as everything in development, business and life in general. No opinion will change this fact of life.
CMx2 is a high-fidelity simulation so as such as "it's soldiers on tanks" isn't all that helpful. Soldiers in trucks need only a sitting animation and the disembark/embark animation and the truck doesn't have any weapons system nor does it fill the same battlefield function as an AFV. The TacAI involved is different. A truck under fire will start evading instead of fighting back. Synchronizing the TacAI of the infantry and tank is, I believe, the crucial part. How many players will complain when a Sherman loaded with infantry crossing an open field takes fire from a Tiger and instead of completing it's dash across to safety it stops to let the infantry disembark and gets taken out? How many players will complain when that Sherman keeps moving into an artillery barrage that wipes out the entire squad without stopping to let them disembark to avoid imminent danger? How many players will complain when a Sherman stops to shoot at the Tiger and the infantry doesn't disembark but instead wait for the tank duel to go on? The only thing I know is that I have intense respect for da man coding the TacAI. He has to come up with so much problem solving logic that it blows my brain. Charles rocks.
Do I want to see infantry riding tanks? Yes.
Do I want to see other features suffer so a feature that really isn't that important gets done first? Not really. (important as in didn't really happen in the West, AFAIK tank riding was something that happened on long marches, not in actual combat that the game simulates)
I hope it gets implemented some day, just like fire and Space Lobsters. I rode on Leopard 2A4s back in those mandatory military service days and all I can comment is that I hope infantry riding on tanks suffer some degree of fatigue while doing it, especially if the tank is moving fast. They should not be resting when they are holding on for dear life.
-
Whoa, talk about pessimism contrasting optimism. You make software development sound so easy, GJR144.
If BFC implements any half-assed feature there is bound to be numerous reviewers and customers complaining about it, calling BFC lazy hacks that outsource development to players. It's just the way things work.
Every patch/upgrade has contained improvements to the engine, there have been improvements to the UI too...Every module release has come with a free patch that has contained improvements. Also, they are not simply new models. They all require plentiful data and statistics to implement followed by extensive testing. You make it sound like every tank is the same apart from cosmetic differences.
No movement paths visible without clicking a unit? To me that is a good thing, if movement paths would be visible that would clutter up the screen big time. It's not like clicking a unit is very hard or time consuming.
I don't really understand the unit data issue. There is already the small info box that gives a general sense of protection level and firepower. The manual contains a lot of unit data and since Alt+tabbing works like a charm with CMx2 I'm not seeing the big difference between checking the PDF manual or an ingame encyclopedia...Is the issue with hit probabilities? In my opinion displaying them would break the game (not to mention it is exceedingly hard to print out an exact percentage because of the immense amount of variables. How would it work for anything other than at the start of the turn? How will the game predict at what angle and in what position and in what kind of state will the units be 10 seconds into the turn?) I wouldn't want the game boiling down to a cheesefest where the player who has the patience to check out probabilities for every shot wins. Maybe if it was a toggleable option by the host, but then we run into feature creep...For singleplayer I can see why someone would want it, but for me part of the charm is the chaos of battle. I don't want to play a game like I'm an accountant. I recently took out a Jagdpanzer IV with a Sherman 75mm from the front at 800 meters with a single shot, the Jagdpanzer was on pavement so the shot hit the ground just infront of it and it bounced and hit the bottom armour plate, exploding and causing a "Rear Bottom Hull Penetration" and first shot KO. Portraying this complex stuff with a single number....sheesh...It sounds easy in theory but when you get down to the nitty gritty details and hard labour it suddenly isn't anymore...
I'm pretty happy with the way BFC prioritizes features. Stuff that is IMO "icing on the cake" takes second place to actual gameplay and engine improvements. Market Garden isn't just about pretty bridges, as has been revelealed it contains a lot of engine changes that likely completely change the way the game plays out. I can't imagine how hard it is to implement new features to an engine of such complexity as CMx2 without breaking something. Moveable waypoints and the ensuing bugs come to mind.
Every minor change to the engine has to be tested extensively so it works as intended and does not affect other areas of the game. Things simply don't happen overnight, especially when we are talking about a small company. Yes, even tiny improvements take "ages" because the engine is very complex. I mean very very very. How many games feature relative spotting?
-
When a TC is hit, once the body is out of the way the crew members shuffle locations, AFAIK a common way is that the gunner becomes commander, loader becomes gunner, assistant driver becomes loader...So even with one crew member missing, there will be someone peeking through those visors. If the optics are damaged, then it's different.
Also do note that it is a BETA AAR. Work in progress. And the AAR was started a while ago, I assume they are playing with an older version.
It looks to me like that team is in a sort of frontal vision cone from the turret. They're also silouetted against the sky on a sand dune. Seems like a case of plausible spotting.
-
While everyone else is busy eagerly waiting MG, little girls in Finland have started driving Stugs as a hobby.
-
We live in a broken world, but I think singling out Dropbox is a bit alarmist. Pretty much everything on the net gets intercepted, do you use Google or Facebook? Even better, have you bought a smartphone? In the future we will see people use more and more signal jamming equipment to maintain even a modicum of privacy. I know engineer type people who claim to have acquired relatively inexpensive gear capable of jamming common frequencies...I personally hope Google Glass will be banned by law, I know several workplaces that already stricly ban anything even remotely resembling it. It has already become standard practice to have people place their electronics in a container during business meetings, but recently you start to notice that normal people demand smart devices be put the **** away when things of sensitive nature enter the discussion. Normal microphones aren't that bad, but what worries me are advancements in laser microphone technology...
If you are alarmed by Dropbox, you should start using Thor or somesuch and steer the **** away from any major website. Or the net in general.
If you think anything mainstream you do on the net is secure, be prepared for some bad news...You think your email isn't getting scanned for flags?
Yes, I think it's BS that privacy is worthless these days, but it's been like this for years. I laugh at the people who only went "Eureka!" since these latest leaks...If you mentioned ECHELON 10 years ago people would laugh and call you a paranoid tinfoil type...
Who knows, maybe they're watching your PBEM turns here: http://mondediplo.com/2010/09/04israelbase
-
Ah...ok. I forgot that they were all made by humans.
Still, there should probably be an option for this as some people like hills and some don't. Wouldn't be difficult to classify a scenario as to what type of hills to expect.
The map preview function fills this need nicely, it means you get to see what kind of terrain in what kind of conditions will be fought in before you buy any units or commit to the battle. Classification is always a tricky grey area. I've made maps that have hills in one end and desert in the other, I don't know how to classify that. (it's a very small text box where you need to convey this kind of information)
-
This is supremely cool.
Thanks for taking your time to do this.
-
Cool stuff Bil, thanks for doing this and the AARs!
-
While I do agree that exiting from a window is a fine choice if the option is getting burned, shot or blown up, I don't think it should be the normal mode of transit that troops use by default. (in the sense that it would be a fast, effortless and risk-free way to move from building to building)
Jumping from heights while wearing 10-50 kilograms of combat gear (just making rough estimates, I have no idea about the loads of WW2 soldiers, this is based on modern peacetime training. CM players have a tendency to stack their squads with the maximum amount of ammo, grenades and rockets possible) with an unbalanced load distribution can often end up badly. It's not very hard to fracture your legs on a hard landing or break your nose with your rifle.
Ofcourse modern special forces will infiltrate and exfiltrate through windows like a light summer breeze, but they spent quite a lot of time practicing it.
EDIT: I made some quick & rough calculations about modern wartime loads for an antitank soldier...Assault rifle 4kg + 6 loaded magazines at 1kg each (a mere 180 rounds), 2-4 antitank mines at 10kg each, 4 LAWs at 2,5kg each...
This is already at 40-60kg (88-132lbs) and it doesn't include stuff like helmet, shovel, armor, grenades...
EDIT 2: I just noticed John Kettler has threads about infantry loads both on the CMBN and CMSF forums, will check them out.
http://www.45thdivision.org/Pictures/General_Knowlege/combatload.htm
The site lists a rifleman's load as 82.02 lbs = 37.3 kg and a BAR gunner's load as 98.69 lbs = 44.9 kg. Ofcourse not all of the common equipment will be carried into actual combat, but the end result is still pretty damn heavy and will impair mobility.
Anecdotal evidence, Finnish Army in 2008, urban combat training for mechanized infantry, doors were the primary points of entry and exit, windows were taught as being slow and dangerous most of the time.
-
Does the Sten have a bayonet lug?
-
Most of the time Russia has the balls to say that they are working for their own benefit. Even if they give another reason the smirk always gives it away. Russians don't have any illusions about Putin, they see through him. But from what I've seen and heard, many actually believe the rhetoric of the talking heads in the US & EU. That's the big difference.
The US speaks hypocritically of "human rights & democracy" when they're looking to improve their own economy and sphere of influence. How's that whole human rights & democracy thing working out in Egypt? Oh, wait, I forgot, we are supposed to divert attention away from it and not comment on it.
Use of nukes? Check. Use of chemical weapons? Check. Propping up evil dictators? Check. Destabilizing foreign countries for the sake of own interests? Check. Telling other countries to not do the same backed with threats of violence? Check.
The US shifts alliances how it suits them. The US helped to create and arm mujahideen to fight the Soviets, then it fought them in Iraq & Afganistan and now the US is prepared to act as Mujahideen Air Force in Syria. I don't blame them, its' realpolitiks.
(I could also list a billion things that are wrong with Russia, but right now I'm more than annoyed that Mr. Nobel Peace Prize is ready to play with fire for money and power.)
This whole thing smells, it's gas alright...A bit like Iraq & WMDs.
If the US was open about things and would say "Hey, we're gonna bomb Syria a bit to ensure that our military-industrial complex keeps spinning, oil & gas prices go up so we can sell to Europe and we lure Iran into defending Syria so we get a justification to bomb them too because the Israelis keep asking about it" I wouldn't be as annoyed, but it's that fake smile and the smell of bull**** that gets to me.
Also, Soviets/Russians fought in Afganistan/Chechnya/Georgia with mostly low grade troops and equipment. Call it smart or stupid, but the US sent a lot of good troops and equipment to the grinder for very little gain...
Sorry for veering into the verboten flaming politics territory, but I've had a bad week followed by a bad day and I'm tired of the constant BS on the news. I simply could not resist the Siren's Call. I am weak. Had to let some steam out.
Here's a smiley.
To lighten the mood, I think the worst Hizbollah could do is open a hundred fast food chains in the US. More damage than any conventional weapon could inflict.
Also, I don't approve of dictatorships or killing innocent people. Or killing in general. Nor do I think Assad is a nice guy. But I also don't approve of trying to profit and gain political leverage from the plight of others, usually further destablizing the situation and causing even more death and suffering.
-
Great find, thanks. Lots of interesting info, for example this and also the post about the captured MILANs and AT-14s
"Relatively few BMP-2's are lost compared to the Syrian Arab Army BMP-1's. Simple explanations can be given for this fact. First of all, the Republican Guard is using superior tactics compared to the Syrian Arab Army. The Republican Guard using the vehicle for fire support, evecuating wounded and bringing supplies to the front line. This all in an organized matter and covered by infantry and T-72AV's. The Syrian Arab Army mostly using the BMP-1's charging trough cities without any infantry support, thus being an easy prey for Free Syrian Army anti-tank teams."
-
but I'm wondering about those users in this forum who are not members of the Battlefront Team (or company) but always declare themselves to be experts about BFCs intentions and capabilities.
I often read: "No, they won't do this and that" - "this is too complicated" -"BFC is so small, they don't have the time" and so on and on.... :confused:
Gentlemen: "SORRY WE CAN'T" is not the slogan that made Obama President or America a super power. You know what I mean?
I'm trying to give reasonable feedback and input to the game makers in order to help improving this game.
These forums contain enough feature suggestions to spend a small lifetime working on. Just because your feature suggestion, no matter how quick or small you consider it to be, is not implemented or acknowledged right away doesn't mean you have to be offended in any way by it. Feature creep is a very real issue and anyone familiar with software development should know this.
Constructive feedback is always welcome.
New Modern Game "Bone Basin"
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
Will it involve lobsters of extraterrestrial origin? What about the Finns?