what is this?

[Medex]

I was just thinking the RT crowd wouldn't have the time to watch all the little hand to hand battles/animations that could possibly go on. They may miss out completely on this.

Or else they would be too busy watching GI Joe do his Kung fu moves on Jackie "Hans" Chan and totally miss that their left flank is caving in.

[Childress]

I like the game, I just feel neglecting close combat is laziness on the developers part.

You're aware of the infinitesimal amount of close combat incidences, or 'wet work', that were recorded in WW2? You want Kung Fu? As far as bayonets are concerned their use peaked in the 18th century. During the US Civil War the bayonet was ultimately responsible for less than one percent of battlefield casualties. The bayonet has endured to the present day in some formations for the purpose of drills and unit morale. And, yes, I'm familiar with the accounts of Goose Green.

On the other hand, lurching around ammo-less like zombies isn't completely satisfactory.

[vonRocko]

I'm aware of the stats on the frequency of it in WW2. But in the game, in my experiences, it happens more frequent than real life. Anyhow, I know this has been discussed before. My first post was strictly in response to the original video, and I didn't mean to rehash the hand to hand issue. It is what it is.

[Guest]

But the players would know that those casualties came from the close combat, and a simple rifle swinging animation would be all that is needed to show that close combat is taking place.

With an animation, yes, it would make sense. But adding a new animation, however simple, is non-trivial. And there are other bits that would take a while too.

When I originally said it would take "months" that wasn't for sync-kill awesome close combat - that was for very basic CC with an animation to indicate it. Lots of design work and AI need to be coded. Do units avoid CC? Do they seek it out? Which units prefer which? Which soldiers can participate? Can they participate if they switch weapons? What if they have ammo - should they use it? How do morale, experience and training factor into these? We're suddenly talking about a fair amount of research and a lot of code before you even start looking at artwork and animation.

[c3k]

LOL. I was totally fixated on the FO team. I didn't even notice that the OTHER team was the enemy. Expectation bias.

Glad we've gotten the insulting language (and attitude?) eliminated.

Here's a quick idea about how to leverage existing animations into - what I think - will be cool hand-to-hand combat animations.

1. The engine must come up with an algorithm to determine who fights with whom. (I'm biased to a 1:1 matchup, with spare men dogpiling on an existing 1:1.)

2. Determining who wins. Obviously numbers would count first. 2:1 would favor the two men, very strongly. 3 on 1, etc, should be result in the lone guy dying (or surrendering?). Fitness/fatigue should be next in importance, perhaps tied with experience.

3. Trickle effect: If it's 7 on 4, then that'd be 2:1 x3, and 1:1 x1. Once a 2 man group kills their opponent, they should "tag in" and help their solo buddies. This would create a cascading effect favoring the larger group.

4. Finally, the engine would have the results. Say 7 guys (A, B, C, ...) fight 4 guys (1, 2, 3, and 4). It could start as:

( A+B v. 1, C v. 2, D+E v. 3, F+G v. 4)

Next round, just a few seconds later, after poor 4 dies,

(A+B v. 1, C+F+G v. 2, D+E v. 3)

Obviously 2 won't last...

(A+B+C v 1, D+E+F+G v 3)

Etc...

Animations? That's simple.

The engine knows who's going to win. That calculation happens at gigahertz speeds. Therefore, knowing the outcome, the fight animation is scripted.

Have the unarmed men face each other and use the bolt-action reload animation! C'mon, one arm out (trying to hold a non-existent rifle stock), the other, strong, hand waving around near their chin! It's like the friggin' Marquess of Queensberry rules! You KNOW this is the way it must be...

Next, since we know who loses, have that guy fall down like a casualty. The winner(s) would then crowd around him using the "buddy aid" animation. Their kneeling posture with "laying on of hands" animation would simulate choking, brain bashing, or stabbing.

The animations exist!

I just about wrote the entire code, right above!

This is the direction to take!

Ken

[para]

With an animation, yes, it would make sense. But adding a new animation, however simple, is non-trivial. And there are other bits that would take a while too.

When I originally said it would take "months" that wasn't for sync-kill awesome close combat - that was for very basic CC with an animation to indicate it. Lots of design work and AI need to be coded. Do units avoid CC? Do they seek it out? Which units prefer which? Which soldiers can participate? Can they participate if they switch weapons? What if they have ammo - should they use it? How do morale, experience and training factor into these? We're suddenly talking about a fair amount of research and a lot of code before you even start looking at artwork and animation.

What's going to be implemented for the Eastern Front module? I ask this, because I understand that H2H CC took place quite often there, particularly in Stalingrad. The Russians favoured using sharpened entrenching tools especially.

[sburke]

Let's try not to insult each other, guys. That said, when I spent my third son's first week in the hospital sitting in a hospital chair making final builds of CMBN (and the next week working out of a surgery bed), calling me, or any of us, "lazy" feels pretty insulting. Maybe lay off the personal attacks on all sides, please.

Well I can't speak for anyone else but you have thoroughly shamed me about bugging you guys to speed things up.

As to the topic of the thread, you have to make a choice. Get all the possible details in the game you want (tank riders, flames, hand to hand etc etc) and be willing to wait another few years probably before we see the game...and hope BFC likes living hand to mouth before they see some income...or you accept what you have knowing they had to make choices and move on. We've known there is no hand to hand for a year now...I think it might be time to move on. And if I dare say it - It was that way in CMSF.

I have yet to have a situation where my pixeltrruppen didn't have some means to kill one another so while it might be nice to see some occasional hand to hand, it certainly isn't breaking the game for me.

[Dark Knight]

This has doubtlessly been brought up before, but what would be wrong with implementing the old system for melee where there's a smacking sound and two soldiers fall over dead on one side, then another smacking sound and maybe one soldier on the other side falls over, etc etc until one side gives up or is annihilated?

[Wodin]

Someone must really hate the game to set up that test and go to the trouble of uploading it to Youtube. It takes the glass half empty just about 10 miles to far. The person responsible must be one miserable moaning old man in day today life.

The game won Wargame of the year (voted by wargamers) because it was the best wargame released. Simple.

I find it quite laughable that those who enjoy the game are supposed to watch that and go "Oh the horror, the game is pure rubbish, I shall never play again, how wrong I've been, my faith in CMx2 and Battlefront is forever shattered and cast into a thousand pieces, and why oh why did this now so obvious piece of coding junk win Wargame of the year, when we had so many other GREATS to choose from!" Yeah right.

Watching it it felt like some kind of anti CMBN propaganda campaign...Goebbels would be proud.

[sburke]

Watching it it felt like some kind of anti CMBN propaganda campaign...Goebbels would be proud.

Mmm maybe a line too far, but if you really want to have some fun, go view the poster's (triccor)4 other posts on youtube, particularly the "Lady Panther".

I won't go into anymore detail on my thoughts having watched, Phil is trying to get us all to stay on the high road...sorry if we keep failing ya Phil. :-P

[herr_oberst]

This has doubtlessly been brought up before, but what would be wrong with implementing the old system for melee where there's a smacking sound and two soldiers fall over dead on one side, then another smacking sound and maybe one soldier on the other side falls over, etc etc until one side gives up or is annihilated?

As mentioned above, abstracting it out to a sheer numbers game might be the cleanest and easiest approach.

[ serious off]

I vote for sound effects from the old 'Three Stooges' show.

The occasional slap, poke, or bonk noise with pixeltruppen falling down... an instant classic.

If we're going to abstract it, you might as well have fun.

[serious on]

[c3k]

I am distressed that there has not been a groundswell of support for my implementation, upstream. C'mon, I've already done all the heavy lifting.

I will now withdraw upon myself, pout, and refuse to press F5 for at least 2 minutes.

Ken

[sburke]

I am distressed that there has not been a groundswell of support for my implementation, upstream. C'mon, I've already done all the heavy lifting.

I will now withdraw upon myself, pout, and refuse to press F5 for at least 2 minutes.

Ken

It was too dang funny to comment on, especially the buddy aid section.

[para]

I am distressed that there has not been a groundswell of support for my implementation, upstream. C'mon, I've already done all the heavy lifting.

I will now withdraw upon myself, pout, and refuse to press F5 for at least 2 minutes.

Ken

It was quite good and made me laugh whilst at work, which is very rare.

[Rocky Balboa]

I have never had a situation when all my troops ran out of ammo completely and to be honest, I was under the impression that like in CMx1, troops would never run out of ammo but just get to a point that their ROF was drastically reduced at very low ammo levels.

IMO that's all BF needs to do is to implement similar code to simulate very low ammo levels and then a circumstance like this would never occur. The troops would continue to reload and fire until one unit was defeated.

[Vanir Ausf B]

LOL. I was totally fixated on the FO team. I didn't even notice that the OTHER team was the enemy. Expectation bias.

Glad we've gotten the insulting language (and attitude?) eliminated.

Here's a quick idea about how to leverage existing animations into - what I think - will be cool hand-to-hand combat animations.

1. The engine must come up with an algorithm to determine who fights with whom. (I'm biased to a 1:1 matchup, with spare men dogpiling on an existing 1:1.)

2. Determining who wins. Obviously numbers would count first. 2:1 would favor the two men, very strongly. 3 on 1, etc, should be result in the lone guy dying (or surrendering?). Fitness/fatigue should be next in importance, perhaps tied with experience.

3. Trickle effect: If it's 7 on 4, then that'd be 2:1 x3, and 1:1 x1. Once a 2 man group kills their opponent, they should "tag in" and help their solo buddies. This would create a cascading effect favoring the larger group.

4. Finally, the engine would have the results. Say 7 guys (A, B, C, ...) fight 4 guys (1, 2, 3, and 4). It could start as:

( A+B v. 1, C v. 2, D+E v. 3, F+G v. 4)

Next round, just a few seconds later, after poor 4 dies,

(A+B v. 1, C+F+G v. 2, D+E v. 3)

Obviously 2 won't last...

(A+B+C v 1, D+E+F+G v 3)

Etc...

Animations? That's simple.

The engine knows who's going to win. That calculation happens at gigahertz speeds. Therefore, knowing the outcome, the fight animation is scripted.

Have the unarmed men face each other and use the bolt-action reload animation! C'mon, one arm out (trying to hold a non-existent rifle stock), the other, strong, hand waving around near their chin! It's like the friggin' Marquess of Queensberry rules! You KNOW this is the way it must be...

Next, since we know who loses, have that guy fall down like a casualty. The winner(s) would then crowd around him using the "buddy aid" animation. Their kneeling posture with "laying on of hands" animation would simulate choking, brain bashing, or stabbing.

The animations exist!

I just about wrote the entire code, right above!

This is the direction to take!

Ken

BFC, hire this guy!

[fabiovir]

Mmm maybe a line too far, but if you really want to have some fun, go view the poster's (triccor)4 other posts on youtube, particularly the "Lady Panther".

I won't go into anymore detail on my thoughts having watched, Phil is trying to get us all to stay on the high road...sorry if we keep failing ya Phil. :-P

very funny...i,m triccor alias fabiovir

[fabiovir]

Someone must really hate the game to set up that test and go to the trouble of uploading it to Youtube. It takes the glass half empty just about 10 miles to far. The person responsible must be one miserable moaning old man in day today life.

The game won Wargame of the year (voted by wargamers) because it was the best wargame released. Simple.

I find it quite laughable that those who enjoy the game are supposed to watch that and go "Oh the horror, the game is pure rubbish, I shall never play again, how wrong I've been, my faith in CMx2 and Battlefront is forever shattered and cast into a thousand pieces, and why oh why did this now so obvious piece of coding junk win Wargame of the year, when we had so many other GREATS to choose from!" Yeah right.

Watching it it felt like some kind of anti CMBN propaganda campaign...Goebbels would be proud.

very nice....miserable moaning old man in day today life

[Otis]

Is everyone sure they were out of ammo? It is possible somebody simply dropped a contact.