MikeyD Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Combat Mission without any flamethrowers, Wasps or... Remember, a its not "Combat Mission without", its "Combat Mission without yet", most of the time. for instance, at the moment its "Combat Mission without SS". Wait a few weeks and it'll be Combat Mission with SS". All good things come to those who wait. Though you may have to wait til the final 'funnies' vehicles module, depending on what you're waiting for. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kanonier Reichmann Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Crocodiles and wasps would require FIRE to be coded into the game with all that it entails. I was kinda hoping the programming parameters that were set at the design stage of the engine would have allowed for this event seeing as explosions involve fire and can lead to spreading fires while flamethrowers were a reasonably common form of weapon in WWII. Much more common that (say) a Puma. I also reckon I understand the difficulty in modelling fire when using such a literal 'real life physics' game engine. How do you determine what damage fire will cause to a halftrack, a light tank, a medium tank, a heavy tank? There are no penetration tables to refer to or analyses of what effect a sheet of flame would have on various types of armour of varying thicknesses. So what do they do? It's the trouble with designing such a literal game engine when it has to try and deal with something that's hard to measure, whereas design for effect engines can conversely, deal with such a predicament without too much trouble. Regards KR 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Whether or not fire is hard to program does not affect my expectation to see a vehicle that was at the forefront of every major advance. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomm Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Crocodiles and wasps would require FIRE to be coded into the game with all that it entails. Yes, but that is a self-imposed requirement, not a law of nature. One could also try to get away with just modelling the flame and effects, some small residual fires (similar to those on the vehicles) and leave out, for the time being, the burning characteristics of the objects themselves. I guess that would actually cover a large area of application already. BFC decided to do it "right" all along the front, but it is their decision, not something that could be done differently, if so desired. Same with AAA in ground-attack role (disregarding interaction with actual airplanes). I am not saying that it would be better to model "flame without fire". But it could be done. Best regards, Thomm 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 If fire is such an insoluble problem from the designers' POV, then I'd rather see Crocs in the game with fire abstracted -- so that you hear the flamethrower sound, see the flaming jet, and see the flames only on the target (if hit) or as a blackened decal on the terrain (if area fired or target is missed). But at least the Crocs would be present and the Commonwealth forces would have the benefit of them when assaulting fortified positions, towns, etc. I can live without the spreading effects, burning objects and buildings, smoke, etc., if necessary. The operations around Caen were tough enough for the Commonwealth without depriving them of a tank that was standard (though limited) in their armored battalions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Juri_JS Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Yes, flamethrowers would be nice, but what I like to see first is Flak/AA that can shoot at planes. I had the most shocking wargaming experiences of my life when one of my platoons was caught in an open field by a strafing P-47. Within seconds every man was either dead or wounded and I didn't even had a chance to shoot back. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjkerner Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Yes, flamethrowers would be nice, but what I like to see first is Flak/AA that can shoot at planes. I had the most shocking wargaming experiences of my life when one of my platoons was caught in an open field by a strafing P-47. Within seconds every man was either dead or wounded and I didn't even had a chance to shoot back. I had that same experience with Allied fighters....when playing Americans! Just like real life. I'd like Flak/AA, but more for fighting ground targets. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Smash Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 ...Wait a few weeks and it'll be Combat Mission with SS"... MikeyD, are you sayiing that this game will be released in a few weeks?!? Bob 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostRider3/3 Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 I cant wait... but I will.. LOL Wooot! thanks BF. I have been creating many maps in and around the Caen area... and have grided out Villders bocage... This is going to be awesome!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ranger33 Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 +1 for some kind of compromise on the flamethrowers. Would rather see them in action with some decent firing effects and just throw some flames on whatever they are shooting at, looks fine on the burning tanks. I still think the CMx1 flamethrowers are fun to watch! Besides, the game has somewhat iffy performance as it is, just imagine adding more calculations, smoke, effects, etc. It would kill framerates if implemented fully. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Trying to make things "perfect" like in RL is near impossible unless you have a gazillion dollar DoD project with dozens/hundreds of well-paid techies operating the simulation. This philosophy of "if we can't make it perfect we'll leave it out" is baffling for an entertainment game product. I can't think of a single poster here over the last years who said "I don't want flamethrowers unless the physics are exactly correct.") 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Trying to make things "perfect" like in RL is near impossible unless you have a gazillion dollar DoD project with dozens/hundreds of well-paid techies operating the simulation. This philosophy of "if we can't make it perfect we'll leave it out" is baffling for an entertainment game product. I can't think of a single poster here over the last years who said "I don't want flamethrowers unless the physics are exactly correct.") To be fair, BFC clearly has been willing to compromise when a feature is critical to the game: we've seen this with foxholes and with fighting inside buildings, which involve various workarounds and abstractions. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javaslinger Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 To be fair, BFC clearly has been willing to compromise when a feature is critical to the game: we've seen this with foxholes and with fighting inside buildings, which involve various workarounds and abstractions. As I've said on multiple occasions, I still believe we should remove all buildings until such time as we can accurately model broken windows and the resulting wounds, paint chipping, wood chipping, and indoor plumbing... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted November 14, 2011 Share Posted November 14, 2011 Trying to make things "perfect" like in RL is near impossible unless you have a gazillion dollar DoD project with dozens/hundreds of well-paid techies operating the simulation. This philosophy of "if we can't make it perfect we'll leave it out" is baffling for an entertainment game product. I can't think of a single poster here over the last years who said "I don't want flamethrowers unless the physics are exactly correct.") I don't want flamethrowers unless........ hell I wouldn't even know IF the physics were exactly correct. I am tired of blowing things up - as Beavis says fire! fire! fire! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostRider3/3 Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 I dont really mind if we get flamethrowers... what I want to know is... Will there be the British Royal Marines in the Common wealth addition? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Echo Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Seems a bit pricey for an add on. I hope it has enough new maps and QB maps with AI plans to justify the price. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostRider3/3 Posted November 15, 2011 Share Posted November 15, 2011 Seems a bit pricey for an add on. I hope it has enough new maps and QB maps with AI plans to justify the price. I never have considered these just add ons, but complete games with more potential. After all, you will be able to play as the US, Brits, Canadians I beleive not to mention you will have more German options, Heer, Luftwaffe field troops, Fallschirjager, and Waffen SS. Basically you will most likely just be playing this version until they come out with the Russian front... which probably wont be for another year or so. I will defentiely pay the 35.00 gladly, and put the disk in my Collectors Tin. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Schultz Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 All I want for Christmas is my Three Amigos from CM1 QBs... Wespe Lynx Hetzer The cheapest, deadliest combo I could come up with to deal with any threat. May you live again soon. woot! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sequoia Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 All I want for Christmas is my Three Amigos from CM1 QBs... Wespe Lynx Hetzer The cheapest, deadliest combo I could come up with to deal with any threat. May you live again soon. woot! Hetzer wasn't available until Sept '44 so we won't see it until at least the Market Garden Module. But in the words of Meatloaf, two out of three ain't bad. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Schultz Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Short-barrel JpzIV will have to stand in then. When does the IV/70 show? I don't know what is is about the Lynx, but I think it's a neat little beasty. Put a couple platoons of those against a zook-equipped Ami infantry force and watch the fur fly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 And of course, the tres amigas Cromwell, Churchill and Daimler isn't that bad either... Short-barrel JpzIV will have to stand in then. When does the IV/70 show? It first entered production in August, so probably September? If it made it to the western front immediately, I would think it'd be present in the Market Garden module then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 As for flame stuff... all good things take time to do. We are working flat out on a variety of stuff that doesn't involve flames. Think for a minute. If we know flame stuff is so important to our customers, and yet we haven't yet tackled it, what could be the reason? Anybody who has paid attention to how we have consistently operated over the past 12 years should already know the answer: Prioritization of the millions of things you guys have demanded (word chosen for accuracy) we put into CM. And of course you collectively want all of these things in the game yesterday. Probably with a solution to the European debt crisis and a cute potty trained puppy while we're at it Flame stuff is right up there with the big things requested, but there are LOTS of big things requested. Even with increased staffing we're still about 200 years behind where you guys want us to be. Anybody who thinks our games are unplayable until they have all these features should just steer clear of Combat Mission. All good things in good time. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medex Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Instead of a puppy I will take a cute potty trained kitty. Stick that into a Christmas stocking along with a copy of the commonwealth cd and everything will be peachy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 I'd settle for a roast turkey dinner with all the trimmings. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Medex Posted November 16, 2011 Share Posted November 16, 2011 Sorry BF is only giving out kittys and puppys for Christmas. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.