Jump to content

Exciting news about Battlefront and Slitherine


Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

That's true, but they made it so.

They started with making a tank sim, and then changed it to be more of a tactics game. BFC has a tactics game ... it would be great if they added some more tank sim stuff. Like tracks breaking, etc.

I too am looking forward to that - I've always felt that this forum has been severely lacking threads discussing the merits of whether a T-34 should have shed its track on such a such piece of ground at such and such rate of movement with such and such experience levels in such and such weather conditions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 374
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Obligatory question for when this happens:  have you decided whether to issue Steam keys to current customers to let them transition over to that platform?   In case anyone hasn't used Steam and

It'll be interesting to see how successful this is. Sacrificing CMSF2 to the gaping maw of Moloch might be worth it in increased brand awareness alone. I can't tell you how many times I've had this

I for one welcome the potential influx of new forum members. This forum could do with some fresh blood, otherwise it runs the risk of getting stale. And frankly I find the cliquish attitude a bit sad.

Posted Images

4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

That's true, but they made it so.

They started with making a tank sim, and then changed it to be more of a tactics game. BFC has a tactics game ... it would be great if they added some more tank sim stuff. Like tracks breaking, etc.

Tracks can “break” in CM.  That is one of the potential causes of a permanent immobilized status for the scenario.  Now, I’ve only toyed around with Graviteam a bit, but my recollection is that the real difference would be graphical representation of a track break and that they allow the crew to jump out and fix it in combat.  Does it take from 30 minutes (probably extraordinarily optimistic) to a full day to fix in game?

Edited by akd
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, akd said:

Now, I’ve only toyed around with Graviteam a bit, but my recollection is that the real difference would be graphical representation of a track break and that they allow the crew to jump out and fix it in combat.  Does it take from 30 minutes (probably extraordinarily optimistic) to a full day to fix in game?

If one track breaks, most AFVs can rotate/pivot. Graviteam simulates various tank steering systems, and mobility depends on that (and suspension, power plant, etc.). The damage system allows a track to be blown into track links.

The crew fixes AFV tracks, in the rare case they've been out of combat for ~15 minutes, and generally take 20 minutes up to eternity. If the damage is too extensive, or the crew stressed out, it will not happen at all. The game has an operational layer, where repair units will fix most of your damaged AFVs.

One downside to Graviteam is that there are significantly less AFVs to play with, as all of them have to be sim-standard. Another downside is that the AI has more autonomy and can often get itself stuck on morph-able terrain.

In regards to CM:SF2... I've recently noticed DiplexHeated was making SF2 videos again:

He responds very positively about the game, and I've heard universal praise from youtubers (from Chieftain to Matsimus). I don't know why people are getting defensive over hate/bad reviews.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, chi-chi said:

What I find interesting about "realism shooters" outside of Arma is that they all ignore force density to a large extant. I know when playing Combat Mission the force I have relative to the combat area can really determine how I play a battle. A mechanized company on a 1.000 meter wide map is going to see a lot of bang bang as you use your firepower to clear your way. While that same force on a 3.000 meter wide map leaves a lot of room for maneuver warfare.

Then you look at Post Scriptum and there are 80 guys on a 16km^2 map...

That's true.  One of the big issues with first-person sans bots is achieving proper troop density.  With PS, you're looking at basically one platoon of infantry facing off against one enemy platoon, with a few vehicles in support on each side. Coming from CM, that's a tiny force, with the AFVs not even able to achieve a true platoon formation, due to spawn limits.

IMO, the biggest realism killers for tactical FPS play revolve around morale and speed of play. In order to make first-person fun, you have to keep folks in the action. However, the available tools of things like suppression effects and ticket limits cannot properly model the degradation of morale. What this does is effectively nerf otherwise very-accurately modeled equipment like MGs. For example, in CM, if a player stumbles on an MG hardpoint and a couple of his squads get mauled, the remaining squad members will have suffered a loss of morale, the global morale of his force could be effected, and he has permanently lost assets -- just like in real life. However, in a tactical FPS like PS/HLL, as long as tickets aren't very low, the attacking players can quickly respawn and try again with no effective loss in morale. Therefore, defenses/equipment that would stop the enemy cold in real life or CM are routinely quickly overrun.

The required speed of play to make FPS fun also adds a major handicap to using real world team tactics. In CM, we split our squads, have a base of fire and maneuver teams and the pixeltruppen sort out all the required team chatter and internal commands amongst themselves. In a tactical FPS, things are generally moving too fast, the comms workload is too much, or there is a lack of willingness to comply with orders, making a real-world level of coordination impossible. I've read game clan threads where PS veterans were throwing cold water on gungho newbies' expectations for trying to use detailed real world tactics. "We've tried. They don't work. Keep it very general."

Ultimately, tactical FPS play is more flavor than substance. Sure, there are moments of magic and the VR buzz can be awesome. But, I think by nature they can't come close to the level of realism that a well-made third person experience like CM can. That's why CM is my steak and potatoes, while PS/RO/DH are occasional milkshakes. 🙂

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, DerKommissar said:

...In regards to CM:SF2... I've recently noticed DiplexHeated was making SF2 videos again:
He responds very positively about the game, and I've heard universal praise from youtubers (from Chieftain to Matsimus)...

Oh, cool. I'll have to look for the Chieftain video. I really like his stuff and appreciate his attempts to correct myths about the Sherman.

DiplexHeated is very likeable and it's great that he's into CM and spreading the word. Watching his CM videos can be interesting, though. I always get mental images of cases of Jolt cola and replacement elbow and kneepads filling his trucks to help his troops deal with the 100+meter slow crawls he is so fond of. 😁

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Combatintman said:

I too am looking forward to that - I've always felt that this forum has been severely lacking threads discussing the merits of whether a T-34 should have shed its track on such a such piece of ground at such and such rate of movement with such and such experience levels in such and such weather conditions.

No, that would be silly. And I think you know I was talking about the damage modelling of tanks taking damage from getting hit. By weapons. That is, in combat situations.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

No, that would be silly. And I think you know I was talking about the damage modelling of tanks taking damage from getting hit. By weapons. That is, in combat situations.

Trust me, those discussions will happen or we'll get 'Why did my veteran crewed tank on a slow movement order shed a track on dry open ground' type observation.  This will generally be from someone who has never crewed an AFV and has no idea how often it can occur in seemingly benign conditions.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

He responds very positively about the game, and I've heard universal praise from youtubers (from Chieftain to Matsimus).

About a year ago or so I played a SF scenario against Chieftain. He gave up and seemed to be pretty frustrated because his troops didn't respond as intended. As an ex tanker he was plotting some elaborate vehicle moves an they just don't work very well given the issues with the pathfinding. Maybe he cooled down since then and got a new perspective on the game? 😉

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Combatintman said:

Trust me, those discussions will happen or we'll get 'Why did my veteran crewed tank on a slow movement order shed a track on dry open ground' type observation. 

We already have tanks getting immobilised.

Again, just in case you missed it, I was talking about tanks getting their tracks shot by enemy fire.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Ivanov said:

Maybe he cooled down since then and got a new perspective on the game? 😉

13 hours ago, Macisle said:

Oh, cool. I'll have to look for the Chieftain video.

It was a Q&A, a month back or two, where it was asked what he played outside of WoT. He mentioned a handful of games, including Steel Beasts and Combat Mission.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

We already have tanks getting immobilised.

Again, just in case you missed it, I was talking about tanks getting their tracks shot by enemy fire.

Vehicles can be immobilized by hits to engine or tracks / wheels.

Edited by akd
Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, akd said:

Vehicles can be immobilized by hits to engine or tracks / wheels.

Yes. We all know that. But then they just stop moving. In Graviteam games, a hit to the track can cause it to come off, making the tank swerve side, exposing the side armour. That kind of stuff.

Edited by Bulletpoint
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, DerKommissar said:

It was a Q&A, a month back or two, where it was asked what he played outside of WoT. He mentioned a handful of games, including Steel Beasts and Combat Mission.

Thanks. I took a look earlier and didn't see a dedicated title. I remember seeing the Q&A in the list. I'll check it out. Much appreciated!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Quick note about the issue of tracks being damaged.

For sure Combat Mission deliberately simplifies this aspect of vehicle damage.  Waaaaaay back when we created the engine we decided there were more technical hoops to jump through than it was worth pursuing.  Everything that is put into a game means something else isn't.  It's all about picking and choosing what to include and we (correctly, IMHO) focused our time and computing resources on things that were more meaningful to the overall portrayal of tactical warfare.  Vehicles being only one element, perhaps not even the most important one, in that environment.  Games that instead focus on vehicles, and less on everything else, have different priorities and that is pretty apparent to an experienced gamer.

By and large any damage done to tracks in a combat situation effectively takes that vehicle out of combat for the duration of a battle.  There's a large number of reasons for this, including the terrain the vehicle is in, the angle, if the tank sank into the ground, running gear damage, drive damage from sudden momentum changes, lack of spare parts, lighting, weather, etc.  Enemy fire, of course, is a huge one that could nix a repair even if all other conditions were optimal.

In short, the conditions for successfully repairing a damaged track under battlefield conditions within a battle's time parameter is so infinitesimally small that there's very little point in simulating it.

That said, a vehicle that loses a single track without collateral damage to the other track (and drive, obviously) would not necessarily behave in real life the way all tracked vehicles behave in CM.  In very, very, very ideal conditions a vehicle *MIGHT* be able to pivot to some extent without throwing the other track.  At least a little bit.  More likely the vehicle would pivot a little and then dig itself in because tracked vehicles aren't designed to turn without tracks on both sides. 

A more likely situation that would warrant some attention in CM is having a moving vehicle come to a stop at an angle dependent upon which track ceased functioning, speed, terrain, weight of the vehicle, weather, and probably a few other conditions.  What this would mean, from a tactical standpoint, is a vehicle could be going in a straight line, lose a track, and come to a rest off center of the original line of travel.  This could have serious tactical implications in some situations, such as a tank charging directly at the enemy slewing to one side so as to expose it's weaker flank to enemy positions.  I'm all in favor of some day simulating this, but the rest?  Not worth the effort even if there is a sliver of realism to be gained.

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
On 9/25/2020 at 9:57 PM, MikeyD said:

My Little Pony iphone games for the Japanese schoolgirl market.

If it's necessary to feed and take the little pony for some exercise to make sure it stays healthy I'm pretty sure that Japanese men would play that game too. At least if I should base it on what some videos on Youtube shows.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/25/2020 at 10:57 PM, MikeyD said:

A standing joke of mine is one day BFC will abandon us and go for a big 'cash grab' making My Little Pony iphone games for the Japanese schoolgirl market.

I doubt that would be a success, because Japanese schoolgirls would probably not work for free to create content, do customer support, market the game on YouTube, and file lengthy bug reports.

Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Bulletpoint said:

I doubt that would be a success, because Japanese schoolgirls would probably not work for free to create content, do customer support, market the game on YouTube, and file lengthy bug reports.

And wait for years and years for the next game. 

God, I'm fed up with all this empty talk.

Edited by Aragorn2002
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...

I have a question for developers of the Combat Mission, did you think about making a single CM launcher and selling DLC in form of armies, theaters of war, era (WW2, modern, etc.). The era is needed so that the modern army does not fight with army of Second World War. DLC control is done as in DCS World or MFS 2020.

Edited by HUSKER2142
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...