BornGinger
-
Posts
867 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by BornGinger
-
-
1 hour ago, Bulletpoint said:
let go of the idea that people outside of this forum are generally stupid and unreasonable. There are all kinds of gamers on Steam.
What? You actually mean that? I always though that us here were the ones that should be fit to rule the world.
I heard that someone already is designing our rings of power and that they are heating up the furnace.
-
On 8/2/2020 at 7:14 PM, Probus said:
seem that updates to the Combat Mission Engine is going tobethe clear winner
Is this literally what is says? Updates to the existing game engine won over the option to get a new and up to date game engine? Or is the text I'm quoting just not written well enough and it should be saying that a new game engine won the poll?
If Battlefront is having a read of this thread and consider whether to follow the wish of the customers, I hope they decide that a new engine is better than updating the old one.
-
1 hour ago, t34577685 said:
First the CM 3D graphic may attract him,but when he play it,the complex system may let him give a “not recommend”. however，I hope this will not happen
I too hope that. And if people begin to down rate Combat Mission games because they find them too complicated, I hope Battlefront doesn't decide to go the way other game companies seem to have done and simplify the games because they see to amount of sales instead of good content.
Many games you find on Steam you can also find on websites for "free" games. How great is the risk of Battlefront games to become "free" if they are being sold on Steam?
The fact that Battlefront still is offering demos to try the games out before purchasing them is of course hopefully a way to prevent them from becoming "free" in the future.
QuoteAnd if we gain, so do you all because you know we're just going to plow the money back into CM products.
A new updated game engine here we come.
-
Yes, I found it. But earlier when I looked for a description of the M24 it was nowhere to be found in the manual. Or at least that's what it seemed like although I looked for it twice by slowly going through all the US tanks.
-
I found it in the game if I changed the date.
Strange that I couldn't find it in the manual although I checked by turning pages very slowly.
-
I don't find the M24 Chaffee in the list of available tanks and it seems it isn't mentioned in the new version of the Final Blitzkrieg manual. What's the reason for removing this tank?
-
A new game engine is the most important. One which is 64bit, so one can have three battalions in a scenario without the game lagging or crashing, and works well with new graphic cards. But it shouldn't require the newest cards but work well with those that are 5 to 10 years old too.
That is choise number 9 in the list.
9. One Engine - CMx3
-
Is this bout going to be on YouTube at a later time when the DLC is released? Would've been fun to watch it on my computer instead of looking at pictures.
-
On 6/21/2020 at 8:03 PM, RepsolCBR said:
reinforcements by trigger
That is something I have wanted for some time. The enemy enters an area, trigger line, and after a couple of minutes reinforcements arrive.
I think that option often would be better than having reinforcements arrive by how much time since the beginning of the game.
Reinforcements by a trigger shouldn't be allowed to arrive too early. Could be nice if there were different time spans to them arriving. The first could maybe be arriving within 15 to 30 minutes from when the triggering occured, the second time span 30 to 45 minutes from the time of the triggering and so on.
-
On 6/4/2020 at 4:57 PM, Battlefront.com said:
It's humbling to know they have so much faith in our system, especially because they've got a view of the insides in ways not even you guys do. We've always believed in honesty and transparency with you lot, but Dstl requires it to go much further than that for obvious reasons.
It would be interesting and fun if you guys in Battlefront could upload a video which gives us a little look on the inside of the studio and the people working there. But maybe that kind of insight is strictly for business partners.
-
10 minutes ago, MikeyD said:
It was just recently that we learned (to our great surprise) you can navigate through groups and orders using the keyboard arrow keys. How many scenarios have I made and I didn't have a clue about that! One of our merry band recently learned how the 'retreat' AI map marker works.
How do you actually do that? Is it to click on one choice and after that use the arrow keys to go up and down? If there are functions with the AI which many don't know anything about, I believe it's about time someone makes a pdf with them so people can use the AI tools better.
-
Quite a few years ago I wrote about having more possibilities to the AI editor in the game and was told that Battlefront won't make any changes.
But if military personnel are using this game to improve their tactical approach on the real world battle fields, as visible here, wouldn't Battlefront really want to improve their Tac AI?
*I wonder why the text to the video says "Enjoy our work with Slitherine Games" when they are showing Combat Mission Shock Force or Black Sea.
-
On 6/14/2020 at 7:14 AM, RockinHarry said:
But as said above you don´t want to get a larger friendly group fall back just because a tiny enemy scout unit moves onto the trigger.Or in case of V4.x, an enemy straggler evading forward. So again a number of "what-if´s" would come handy.
If there was a more than or less than option to enemies triggering that line it should also work.
Maybe something like:
Red triggers Line Yellow
If Red = > 50
then move back
If Red = 50 or < 50
then stay put
-
On 6/3/2020 at 7:59 PM, RockinHarry said:
Since I very much dislike map zones to be used as "victory objectives"(occupy)
How would you like those objectives to be made? Occupy objectives are sometimes necessary to control strategic and important positions.
-
As this thread is about the AI, I take the opportunity to bring up something about the AI plans for quick battles.
If we allow the AI to decide what enemy troops we are meeting in a quick battle we sometimes get funny results. Of this reason some, or maybe even many, of us pick the troops for the enemy and while we do that we might decide to give one or two tanks or other armored vehicles to one or two platoons. After we have made our preparations the game engine is preparing the quick battle with the map of our choice and we don't know what troops gets allocated to which AI group. So there is the possibility that some infantry men in those platoons probably start the game by riding those armored vehicles as they have been allocated to the same AI group by the game engine.
In connection to this I was thinking wether it's possible to somehow control which group(s) that will have infantry only while doing the AI plan for a quick battle. When we make AI plans there is the option to order a group to dismount passengers.
If I make plans to a group and keep the No Dismount order throughout the plan for a quick battle, is the engine taking that as a confirmation that there shouldn't be any vehicles in that group or is it going to put vehicles into that group and have the infantry riding those vehicles until they are forced to jump off them when being attacked?
I have only made a few quick battles and gave the order Passengers Dismount to every group just to make sure possible tankriders do get off the tanks in case the AI would put infantry and tanks or other armored vehicles in the same group.
-
I wish there was an option to withdraw troops a bit to deal with the situation they're suddenly facing if they would get attacked by a stronger enemy force. But that would probably require an if ... then ... kind of AI coding. The way it works now the attacked AI troops will either cower at the spot or maybe even run back a bit to cower further back. But it isn't possible to make the AI troops withdraw to another position and prepare for an attack or code it to try to avoid the situation by going another way.
The option we have is reverse. But as far as I understand that option only works with vehicles and could be used together with a trigger line and would order the vehicles to reverse if the enemy crosses a certain line. But that option doesn't give room for a surprise attack.
The option with if... then... coding could maybe be a little help in trying to make the AI act like someone in a H2H battle.
I also think we need more than 16 AI groups. We need at least 24 groups to be able to split companies into smaller groups on large and huge maps.
-
If CM3 is being made and is going to be a bit like CM2 I wish that the info about "Requires Forward Observer" we have when we choose artillery for QB also is going to show up when we choose artillery in the editor. According to QB artillery some pieces of howitzers need FO and some don't and US heavy mortars require FO but German ones don't. In the editor this info isn't given to us.
-
A new question concerning AI artillery and about on-map mortar teams in particular. What is required for AI on-map mortars on the move to get ready for use? Is it to stop their movement plus the time required to set the mortar up, so they can be used for indirect fire, or is it to spot an enemy team/enemy squad plus the time required to set up the mortar? Or maybe it is both of the two requirements or a completely different requirement?
-
9 hours ago, zmoney said:
For me I have not noticed this. Maybe it seems like they are dying more because you tend to notice those casualties more.
You mean that the AI can read his mind? That must be the most advanced AI ever made.
-
-
3 hours ago, RepsolCBR said:
would also need to be flashing or something to make them easily recognicable.
Why have fortifications easily recognizable? Wouldn't that remove the fun of the game?
-
The best remedy against the Covid-19 hysteria is to go to your local bar or pub and have a drink with people you are used to see there.
-
I really look forward to battle videos of this module on Youtube. I only hope I won't need to wait too long. Some people get those videos up quite quickly so it all depends on when the module is released.
-
11 hours ago, RepsolCBR said:
'Ditch trenches' could/should be used.
Aren't ditches easily spotted by the attacker if he scrolls to see the map from higher up? Ditch trenches would in that case be easily spotted if there are a few of them in an area.
Exciting news about Battlefront and Slitherine
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
That bit is actually the fun part of the game. You plan something and later on realises that your opponent was planning something similar but was a few seconds or minutes quicker than you and you have to try to make something not too bad out of the result.