Hister Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I know it has not been much time from the release but have you noticed the main big problems to have been fixed in the new module? Here I mean the behaviour of soldiers who didn't get on the ground in time when under mortar attack, tank's optics/ radio being destroyed for no apparent logical reason and so forth... I suppose that those issues haven't been adressed since I don't see any of them mentioned in this list. I'm a little bit disappointed and hope it gets "fixed" eventually! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
para Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I know it has not been much time from the release but have you noticed the main big problems to have been fixed in the new module? Here I mean the behaviour of soldiers who didn't get on the ground in time when under mortar attack, tank's optics/ radio being destroyed for no apparent logical reason and so forth... I suppose that those issues haven't been adressed since I don't see any of them mentioned in this list. I'm a little bit disappointed and hope it gets "fixed" eventually! That list is only a brief one.There is supposed to be a full comprehensive list of fixes etc...but for the life of me I cannot find it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 OK, I really hope it got fixed. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdeaL Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 I doubt it as my Panther still loses its optics every battle 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 Uh, that's not good news. They had enough time to fix it from when it was first reported didn't they? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Enough time? Kind of depends on what it would take to fix it, how much time would it take to fix it, what kind of time a very small team of people had with everything else they are working on. I'd say given all that and the fact that it isn't in we can assume the answer is no. :-P For a less snarky answer - I think most of us, myself included, have no idea how inter related and complex things are under the hood and BFC is extremely wary of how they fix something to make sure they do not break something else. I suspect the very nature of the issue folks are pointing out having to do at least partially with how ballistics is traced is very fundamental to the engine and that BFC will take the time to make sure they get it right. I would definitely not assume they haven't looked at it, but they seem to rarely discuss how they are approaching an issue. For example the bunker issues in pbem were raised, there was a brief confirmation that it had been picked up on and then nothing since. It wasn't even included in the list of fixes even though it actually was corrected. So keep your hopes up, that they aren't discussing it and it wasn't included in this patch means not a whole lot other than it is likely more complicated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Some changes were made to subsystem damage. That doesn't mean there aren't still issues - it's an incredibly huge amount of data. Also, changes were made to mortars. Again, that doesn't mean there aren't still issues. That also doesn't mean that everything you see if necessarily an issue. Unless you're running a well-structured test a few hundred times, chances are what you're seeing is not representative of the system as a whole. And if you're *expecting* to see things go wrong, confirmation bias comes into play. With mortars in particular, a) actual trained mortarmen, some with combat experience, seem to agree in general with how mortars work in CM and our data is based on actual... data. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong if you disagree, just that it would take a statistically significant set of tests to indicate that our system is fundamentally incorrect or in need of "massive" changes. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted March 7, 2012 Author Share Posted March 7, 2012 Thanx to both of you - especially to Phil for taking time to answer. I guess I'll have to wait for more test reports then - glad that tank subsystem has been partially fixed that's for sure! Consensus about mortars was that they were represented okay but the problem was on the receiving end - men didn't hit the deck in time and kept getting up - that was the reason that caused too many casualties in respect to real data reports. Fix that and you have whole mortar aspect as it should be. What about squads of men not deploying properly in fox holes? That got fixed? Phil, this isn't meant to be non-constructive criticism - I'm sure you guys are doing your best - I'm just sniffing for info on what most important issues have been fixed and what is still left to be "fixed". 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OrdeaL Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Thanks for the reply Phil. I must say i dont really know much about tanks but i would of thought it would be a stroke of luck to take out someones optics? Seems to happen frequently enough that a lot of people mention it is all. But once again i dont know enough about it and im sure you guys at BFC have it sorted 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 Thanx to both of you - especially to Phil for taking time to answer. I guess I'll have to wait for more test reports then - glad that tank subsystem has been partially fixed that's for sure! Consensus about mortars was that they were represented okay but the problem was on the receiving end - men didn't hit the deck in time and kept getting up - that was the reason that caused too many casualties in respect to real data reports. Fix that and you have whole mortar aspect as it should be. Ahh, okay. The problem I've seen mentioned most often in relation to mortars was that mortars were regarded as being overly accurate. In terms of the receiving end: that's something that would need to happen in the TacAI, which means it's a pretty big change that would take some time to make. What about squads of men not deploying properly in fox holes? That got fixed? Not as far as I know. Phil, this isn't meant to be non-constructive criticism - I'm sure you guys are doing your best - I'm just sniffing for info on what most important issues have been fixed and what is still left to be "fixed". Yep! Thanks for the reply Phil. I must say i dont really know much about tanks but i would of thought it would be a stroke of luck to take out someones optics? Seems to happen frequently enough that a lot of people mention it is all. But once again i dont know enough about it and im sure you guys at BFC have it sorted In terms of optics, "destroying" them doesn't necessarily mean that the optics themselves have been physically destroyed. They could be rendered useless without the stroke of luck that would be necessary to utterly annihilate them. So it's a *bit* more likely than it might appear if you think of it as having its capability destroyed rather than the sight itself. You don't need to throw both tracks and have a flaming zombie climb inside your engine block to be mobility-killed. That said, we're always looking. If we find issues that require fixing we'll surely fix them. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wreck Posted March 7, 2012 Share Posted March 7, 2012 With mortars in particular, a) actual trained mortarmen, some with combat experience, seem to agree in general with how mortars work in CM and our data is based on actual... data. I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong if you disagree, just that it would take a statistically significant set of tests to indicate that our system is fundamentally incorrect or in need of "massive" changes.The changes that you made (pictures are in another thread) are good, and should be commended. In particular mortars now have a decidedly elliptical shot pattern, as they ought. And I have no problem with what mortarmen tell you, namely, that on the range they could drop a shell in a pickle barrel at X range. This, presumably, is what any "data" you have is based on. But let me point out another, broad datum: light mortars were considered light infantry support weapons -- not the primary platoon weapon. The infantry evidently did not find them super effective. And yet, in CMBN, they are very effective. We know that historically light mortars were not used as players can and do use them -- and to great effect. They were typically not fired direct, but indirect. There must have been some reason for this. IMO, the problem is semiborg sighting. The problem is not the accuracy of the mortar per se. It is that accuracy in combination with the ability of the player to order mortar teams to directly fire at spots where they have little or no reason to suspect they ought to fire. I don't see how I could produce any "statistically significant set of tests to indicate that [the] system is fundamentally incorrect" -- it is just common sense that men would not fire at nothing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hister Posted March 8, 2012 Author Share Posted March 8, 2012 Thank you for your answers Phil! Looking forward to another patch! 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.