Glubokii Boy
-
Posts
1,984 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
7
Posts posted by Glubokii Boy
-
-
21 minutes ago, akd said:
Unless you are talking about using height-map data for buildings, this should matter very little in most circumstances (save for mountain top removal in future CM: West Virginia Mine Wars).
Here in Sweden they are planing to 'move' the better part of an entire city of 25000 people (Kiruna) to allow for the mining in the area to continue...
Quite a project
-
3 hours ago, domfluff said:
In terms of what I'd like from an actual update there though - the main thing is a 3D map editor. That would make the whole process an awful lot faster and more pleasant, particularly if everything could be done in 3D mode (including the AI plans).
As a more ambitious suggestion, being able to snip something from Google Earth, automatically importing height data and creating a terrain overlay would be an enormous timesaver as well, but perhaps that's overly ambitious.Being able to both work on the mapdesign and manage AI programing in 3D would be very nice...YES !
Things like tweaking elevation in 'real time' in 3d would be most helpful...
The google earth idea you mentiond would be awsome...
-
I guess that the most difficult thing with a map editor feature like this would be...
How these templates would handle - elevation changes.
Other then that i can see no real problem to implement something like this.
-
11 minutes ago, womble said:
If you could import segments of maps into other maps, there'd be scope for people to work on wee vignette bases that could more readily attain a high level of detail. It's so intimidating to make a whole map that's keenly detail, that it's a barrier to entry. If people could just work on "a farm yard" or "a sunken road" or the like, and then others could import them into their own broader frameworks, there would be scope for modular development of maps, and that can't be a bad thing.
No...It can't be a bad thing
Using templates might be of somewhat less value when making a fully historically correct map but when making a fictional or semi-fictional map i belive it will be very useful...
For example...Lets make a village map with some farrms and forrest sections...
- import 2 to 3 different VILLAGE templates and complement them with some additional features.
- import a number of different complete farm templates with flavoured objects and all and plink them down on the map.
- import a few different forrest templates and do the same...
- Maybe import a chuch template complete with cemetary and all...
- Make some simple additons to the map...
And you're ready to go...Playing on a nice looking, detailed map...put together very quickly.
-
8 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:
I do think improving the editor (mainly by making it much easier to produce maps a lot faster) would be a massive improvement overall. Maps and their development tend to be the largest bottleneck when it comes to players and custom content.
Agreed !
One thing i have wished for for a long time now is the ability to use templates when making maps...
Such a feature would speed up map creating significantelly...
Being able to import/export/share a whole variaty of different 'map slices' covering different types of terrain features would be very nice !
Being able to import such map slices (templates), rotate them as desired and then possibly make slight tweaks to them instead of designing such map features from scratch...
17 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:I definitely agree, though it is important to remember that the vast majority of players do not interact with the scenario editor at all.
That is part of the reason for me wanting an improved scenario editor...It is functional as is but it is not a miracle of user friendlyness currently...A more capable and 'simple' scenario editor might very well bring more scenario designers to the table..
-
6 minutes ago, IICptMillerII said:
Completely agree. I think this is one of the single biggest things that could be done to improve the experience of playing CM. Allowing the player to do more with less clicks would be a massive improvement. Anything that reduces the administrative burden on the player is good.
Streamlining the player workload would be nice but imo two other things would be far more important when it comes to improving CM...
1 Improving the AI.
2 Simplyfying the scenario editor.
-
2 hours ago, Combatintman said:
... but then you knew that already ...
Yepp !
-
I have no doubt what so ever that this map and any future scenario/campaign that might come with it will be a true work of art... as usual.
Thoroughly impressed !
-
But an annoncement of CM2 CMBB 2 would be even better !
CM2 is still holding up fairly well imo....but we need more of it....
-
The rumors of CM3 actually being a thing has been floating around this forum for many years now...It has never been confirmed by BFC as far as i know that such a game is indeed in development. The closest thing to a confirmation that i can recall was some postings made by one of the BFC guys a while back sort of confirming this but those postings got deleted hastely...Never to be seen again
...
An official confirmation of CM3 would be a rather nice christmas present indeed
-
57 minutes ago, SlowMotion said:
I would like a new option to Scenario Editor. It would make it possible to have good force balance in all 3 playing modes: H2H, human vs Red AI, human vs Blue AI.
I think this could be done if each unit would have an option that can be selected "only for AI player".
If this would be checked, this unit would appear in the battle only when the AI is playing this side. Otherwise it would not appear. By default the option would not be selected.
This way you could first select units that would create good force balance in H2H mode. Then add more units for Red/Blue side that would allow AI to compete against human player. And check this option for these AI-only units.
I think this would be a very simple way to do it and you could get good force balance in all modes. Now usually balance is good in one mode, not as good in the other 2 modes.I kind of like this idea...It may not give the AI any additional AI-groups to play with but it would strenthen the ones it has...
Providing and increased challange vs the AI regardless of wich side you play...
Like you said...SIMPLE and neat...
Good suggestion...Perhaps not the perfact solution...but a good one imo
-
23 minutes ago, Probus said:
I'm guessing you really hated Cold War, CMSF2 and Black Sea since they are not strictly historical?
1 hour ago, Glubokii Boy said:BFC should continue to produce amazingly detailed and realistic historical-... and likely would-be scenarios for us to play...
-
Given the very limited resources of BFC i most certainly hope they will never waste any time on a 'toy' like this....
Let other companies make stuff like that...BFC should continue to produce amazingly detailed and realistic historical-... and likely would-be scenarios for us to play...
-
45 minutes ago, George MC said:
Its a passable workaround.
It is
...but having to rely on workarounds is not desirable. As a designer...being able to specify timings,duration, intensity etc, etc and to also be able to asign specific targets to specific assets would be preferable..a little bit less of this random behaviour would be really nice imo.
Perhaps also being able to link bombardments to triggers...
Having some more controll over the AI-artilleryprograming would also make the scenario editor somewhat more newbie friendly i belive...Not needing to rely on these workarounds.
Updating this AI artillery is one of those fairly simple things to add i would think...and one that would have a pretty significant impact on scenario design...Atleast as far as user friendlyness goes
...As well as providing a more challaging/realistic AI...
It will primarely need some UI changes to the editor...Not that much more...
-
I did a quick test of this in CMRT...placing 1 on-map german mortar on the map...
I'm sad to say that even this feature of the AI artillery programing is...RANDOM ! it seems...
It made no difference with what ammo level i set or witch bombardment option i chosed (destroy, suppres, damage)...
Sometimes the AI mortar used up all its ammo...The next time it did not...Next time again...it did fire all it got...
Random, random, random...The AI artillery programing gives the scenariodesigner awfully limited control of how to design an AI artillery plan....
I really, really hope BFC will have a look at the AI artillery programing...soon. Because this is not good.
-
When the map is finished i will try to make a small campaign on it...Sort of a static campaign using only this map...
The player will be the commanding a company sized force supported by some additional battalion/regiment assets...
Each mission will have rather specific objectives that needs to be completed and the player will be able to 'tailor' his company to some degree by
requesting additional support assets from its organic battalion/regiment...These things might be engineers, assultguns, additional AT weapons ect, etc...
Comanding only a single company the goal of the player will obviously not be to conquer the entire city by him self but rather fighting in other parts of the city will be
abstarcted to simulate other friendly forces in those areas...The player will be given an area of operations for each mission that will be his responsibility...The player will be allowed to move outside of his assigned area to some degree but it might prove costely to do so...The enemy will not be sleeping
...As for defence...The assigned area will be all that the player needs to care about.
In addition to the assigned support avaliable at mission start the player may also request reinforcements from the battlion reserves at any time during the missions if he feels he needs it...These reinforcements will not show up at ones at the player HQ bu will indeed need to move there from the battalion possitions....While doing so they may come under fire from the enemy and not be able to reach its intended location.
That is the plan...Hopefully RL will not get in the way...I'm making no promises but i will give it a try to get a campaign like this finished...
-
Hello...
I've been doing some more work on this map to increase the size of it...Things are moving smoothely forward and my goal is to have this map finnished
in time for christmas for anyone who would like to try it out....
The map has pretty much doubled in size...Giving some more room for manuever around the city...What i have left to do is to finish the south east part of the town, complete the increased factory district and make some final toughes to a customly made costal battery fortress located on a hill to the far south east of the map...
Some WIP pics of some of the new areas...
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/u8.bmp
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/u7.bmp
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/u6.bmp
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/u5.bmp
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/u4.bmp
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/u3.bmp
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/u2.bmp
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/u1.bmpThe coastal battary fortress (as it currently looks)...
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/UF.bmp
A pic from the editor...
https://hosting.photobucket.com/images/i/glubokiiboy/UE.bmp
The size of this new map will be about 1600 X 1300 meters...
-
Stuff like that seems like a perfect fit ! I second this request...
Adding some partisans to Normandy would also be nice...
-
2 hours ago, Artkin said:
Jeez, I know VR has it's minor flaws. If you ever want an alternative, TrackIR works really well once you have it set up properly.
Yes...On my previous gaming computer I have been using Track-IR for many years and it works very well...If VR was not a thing i would be fully satisfied to continue playing this way but needing to buy a new gaming machine i felt that a would take the plunch and go all in ! Bying a machine that will be able to handle also VR...
It looks really cool and most players seems to agree that it takes it to another level
....
Playning some F-18 carrier ops and Apache strike missions in 4K VR would be ridiculesly cool i'm sure...and being Swedish...Some low level strikes with the Viggen offcourse
..
What i've been considdering is something like a 10900K, Nvidia 3090 combo...That seems to be able to handle things nicely...A machine like that is pricy but it is not utterly ridiculous...
-
6 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:
Very playable. No problem at all.
Glad to hear it !
6 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:If it encourages a few players to buy faster rigs then you did them a favor. Everybody's happy.........
Except their wifes perhaps...The poor old guys having spent their vacation budget on a new machine...Hopefully i will not get attacked by a mob of furious women that found out where i live ...
6 hours ago, MOS:96B2P said:Check this one out. Looking down from the second floor through a damaged wall.
Same tank, street level.
Those are some really nice screenshoots ! and i really like the one with the four Tigers moving past the car in your previous post...Some serious firepower approaching while under heavy fire...nice !
6 hours ago, Artkin said:Upping the Ghz on your cpu will give you big improvements to your fps!
That is my goal...The current machine is just a stop gap for my next gaming machine...My goal with that machine is to be able to play DCS using the Reverb G2 VR-headset at full resolution...It will need to be quite some machine i fear...Some RL issiues have prevented me from spending that kind of money right now but things has been sorted...so soon ! ...
6 hours ago, Commanderski said:I'm working on a scenario using this map. Lots of possibilities with this...
Nice !
-
MOS:96B2P, Many thanks for your feedback... Nice screenshots !
I have seen simular FPS values...My computer is fairly new but it is a pure 'budget machine' with fairly low specs...IMO the FPS is playable with shadows off but only barely...
Hopefully the average newish machine will see somewhat higher FPS values...
Do you considder the map playable with these numbers or do you find them to be a bit to low to be enjoyable ?
I have done some more work on an expanded version of the map but i have not really commited to the project fully as of yet because of uncertanty of playability with regards to FPS...The map would benefit from increasing its size somewhat to allow for some more room for manuver and i would be happy to do it...If the map is considdered to be playable ...
-
22 hours ago, Gary R Lukas said:
I am truly at a loss for words after seeing what u created, it's a 10 out of 10, Awesome Job.
20 hours ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:Just discovered this.....Wow!
Thanks guys...
I have been meaning to try and put a scenario together for this map but RL has gotten in the way...With the summer over i will ones again have some spair time so i will try to get this done...In the meantime...please feel free to play around with the map as you chose...
-
14 hours ago, MikeyD said:
Its a bit ironic that people are demanding the game code be opened when so many don't bother to try the game tools that are available. If you're bored learn how to create proper AI orders sets to direct AI opponent forces in attack or defense. Learn how to build proper maps. Give the community some 3rd party scenarios set in Berlin or with Americans' backs to the Rhine, or hiding in the spa town of Baden-Baden. The game editor is 2/3rds the fun of having the game! Before you ask for 'more' first make use of what you've got.
Most likely there is some reason as to why most people don't decide to spend hour after hour in the editor...
Honestly, it can be kind of 'clunky' when first starting out...Players might get an idea for a scenario into their head and decide to give the editor a try only to find one or several hurdles that prevents them from achiving what they had originally intended to do...Having this experience a few times might push them to loose intrest in scenario design...
The editor is indeed functional but it takes some experience to get to grips with what you can actually do with it and what you can not...The limitations can be pretty frustrating at times...causing would-be designers to loose intrest...
Atleast when it comes to the editor...ADDING MORE...Would be a good thing imo...
-
This is a cool idea and i'm sure some rather neat things can be made with a set-up like this...
It is a bit of a shame though that one of 'the completally unneccesary' limitations with the current editor will limit the player options/game result (from previous battle) to only two different choises....I feel that this limitation of TWO...will limit the flexibility and potential fun of a 'free' campaign like this...
If only the campaign script would allow for a wider branching than TWO options...That would have been great to allow the designer to represent various combat results and a wider variety of player options...To be limited to only two options might be somewhat...limited
I have a dream that the universal BFC will have the idea of expanding CMRT in the future
in Combat Mission Red Thunder
Posted
Nagg, nagg, nagg......Naaaaaahg, nagg, nagg, NAAAGGGG !!!!................................................................Nagg !