Stagler

Haha, it demonstrates the bug clearly. Is that not enough? So does my picture set. I went and provided evidence that was asked for. Does it make me any less wrong when the evidence is clearly there because I have an opinion?
 
Im surprised you took the time to find all the threads I have posted in. Well done. You missed my one about the BTR spotting though.
 
I can complain and argue all I want, someone has to on here. I also couldn't give a f about what people think about my opinion, I will voice it anyway, I think that should be obvious.
 
Also, wood, I feel as though you are directing most of your angst against me here, when Antares has similar conclusions. Is that some sort of personal vendetta I see developing there?
 
 
 
 
I say this because of what was said to Vladimir about the accuracy of GLATGM on page one of this thread, if that isn't someone glossing over something and underestimating a piece of kit, then I don't know what is :
 

It was funny when AI was brought up before, and peoples arguments against me that "artificial intelligence" does not exist - haha. I get the feeling that people dont play much outside of combat mission on here, it seems to be the gamers with the broadest breadth of experience with other games that are arguing for change.

Haha, it demonstrates the bug clearly. Is that not enough? So does my picture set. I went and provided evidence that was asked for. Does it make me any less wrong when the evidence is clearly there because I have an opinion?
 
Im surprised you took the time to find all the threads I have posted in. Well done. You missed my one about the BTR spotting though.
 
I can complain and argue all I want, someone has to on here. I also couldn't give a f about what people think about my opinion, I will voice it anyway, I think that should be obvious.
 
Also, wood, I feel as though you are directing most of your angst against me here, when Antares has similar conclusions. Is that some sort of personal vendetta I see developing there?
 
 
 
 
I say this because of what was said to Vladimir about the accuracy of GLATGM on page one of this thread, if that isn't someone glossing over something and underestimating a piece of kit, then I don't know what is :
 

'Murica!

Not the first time these issues have been raised.
 
As I said a while ago, engagement sequence in Russian MBT is as follows. Thermal, IR ,Dayoptic.
 
You look through thermal, oh there's thermal a return.
Can I see him with my IR optics, because they are slightly better than day optic in low light conditions. I can.
Can I see him with my day optic gun sight. I can.
Now I engage.
 
Accuracy with GLATGM will always be higher than gunnery, if your manually putting something onto the target around 100% is expected. You can guide it, duh. With regular gunnery on the move 100% accuracy is unexpected, I think that's where you might be mistaken. But firing GLATGM from stationary, yes that is feasible. If you cant do it right then your not doing your job properly and will be enjoying stint as driver mechanic for the next few weeks. All you need to do is fire and keep the aiming reticule on the target, and it is guided to its explosive end by the will of Putin himself.
 
BRM series requires an extra "crew" or team in its passenger slots to utilise the radar function.

Ha, inglorious HATO lapdog assumption!
 
BMP-3 basic model, BMP-2M, and T-90A.
 
Everything else seems fine. Especially the T-90MS.
 
Models are the same, but with modifications in the case of the BMP-2M. But the model doesn't matter really does it its the code.
 
Wood, try it without units in the vehicles.

This is all part of the game guys. Murica

My friend, welcome to battlefront forums. Where the past is always the future. Literally.

Haha. The 90s called, they asked if they could get any tips on game design from the future. I told them not to call here again it was a waste of time.

Haha. The 90s called, they asked if they could get any tips on game design from the future. I told them not to call here again it was a waste of time.

Haha. The 90s called, they asked if they could get any tips on game design from the future. I told them not to call here again it was a waste of time.

Haha. The 90s called, they asked if they could get any tips on game design from the future. I told them not to call here again it was a waste of time.

Haha. The 90s called, they asked if they could get any tips on game design from the future. I told them not to call here again it was a waste of time.

Arent all campaign maps available as QB maps in some way or another? They should be if not.

Haha. The 90s called, they asked if they could get any tips on game design from the future. I told them not to call here again it was a waste of time.

Haha. The 90s called, they asked if they could get any tips on game design from the future. I told them not to call here again it was a waste of time.

Haha. The 90s called, they asked if they could get any tips on game design from the future. I told them not to call here again it was a waste of time.

It was funny when AI was brought up before, and peoples arguments against me that "artificial intelligence" does not exist - haha. I get the feeling that people dont play much outside of combat mission on here, it seems to be the gamers with the broadest breadth of experience with other games that are arguing for change.

Actually, there is no AI per se above TacAI level. Everything written in AI plan is linear actions sequence and have zero adaptability.
Real AI woud be generatin it's own AI plans during the game as situation changes.\
 
It would be difficult to deliver good AI for this game though.

Based on my experience in this game so far, I found that the AI (regardless of factions) likes to push to the same way, same road, or same positions inside a scenario.
 
Once I firstly take the "sweet spot" of the map (some important buildings, important crossroad, or important openings in the woods, treelines) faster than AI, the AI get ambushed and took heavy casualties by my troops. After then, usually real world counterparts (and humans) choose different positions to attack, circumvent to hit the flank, or try to become far more sneaky with the plan B. On the other hand, it seems that the game's AI push his 2nd / 3rd wave with the very same points with the same attack speed and very same way with the first wave, though the AI knows his troops were annihilated there, and my atgm / tanks are hiding there.
 
It is very hard to describe or judge everything of AI about attack, since AI only "tends to" choice the same plan with the first wave, which means it is not "always" happening. However, I think (or I feel) AI likes to stands with his original plan of the first wave, doing no precaution with my already-known-ambushed positions (only arty shells + air strikes are everything I can expect). No flanking or no luring or no sneaky back-stabbing. ( If it was multiplayer, I should move my positions before any flanking attempts. )
 
I know it is hard to make AI very smart like that, but after I watched 2 atgm teams + 1 tunguska in good spot became the hero of Russian federation by murdering tons of Strykers + US riflemans in the same ambush position, (It was "rolling on the river" battle and I was playing as Russians) I wish the AI in this game more sneakier, deadlier, and smarter then now. They just keep pushed the same position with quick moving speed without any other supports over and over again to my AT nest. I was in warrior difficulty. Is it difficult to make AI back-stab or flank the player's position under specific conditions?

Sadly, there is no model or proven method of proving that any sensors ingame actually work. Its just an arbitrary chance based on time and distance it seems when your actually playing.

Sadly, there is no model or proven method of proving that any sensors ingame actually work. Its just an arbitrary chance based on time and distance it seems when your actually playing.

I'm 32 and I feel like the youngest one here where in regular gaming circles I am an old man. 
 
You can do all your "old man wisdom" crap, but honestly, this is about gaming and trying to educate people on new features that people actually like, because honestly you'd still be playing with 8bit hexes.
 
This is too stressful, I have Mulitple Sclerosis and stress makes my symptoms worse so just **** it. This isn't worth my time. I just posted an idea and all I got was hostile obnoxious responses.

This is all part of the game guys. Murica

Can it burke. Ain't nobody got time for your old man blather. Wiggum expects to get bugs looked at and fixed. He clearly means that he thinks the "ai" still is in red thunder configuration and still hasn't been changed in this iteration - maybe they are. Who knows. We are unable to look ourselves. His point is as valid as any of yours.