Combat Mission needs...

[RobVarak]

I have to be honest here. The smoke is just fine with me. Considering that there is a limited amount of time to create any game, I am extremely happy with the balance struck by BTW between graphics and gameplay. Improving the graphics any more, at the expense of ANY time spent on physics, AI or other gameplay concerns would have been a mistake. As long as the graphics in ANY game are sufficient to represent what's supposed to be going on, I'm happy. While graphics are certainly important, quality gameplay goes a lot farther in creating an immersive and engaging experience.

Rob

PS And as for Pirate's criticism, well... Take a look at his profile and you can see where he's coming from.

[Berlichtingen]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>What CM needs is a real time engine, and some good effects, and some cool flash bang<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

If CM2, 3 or 4 gets really flashy graphics... fine. The day that CM becomes real time will be the day that I stop buying it.

[killmore]

I don't care much about improved graphics but I do care about realtime and simulation accuracy. For example:

88 shoots at sherman. But before the missile get to that sherman another sherman blocks the missile path. The round goes directly through the the blocking sherman (without any damage). CM does not check for these situations. I would love to use some CPU power for that.

Besides it looks like by the time the game will be finally released we will all have P-II 400 at least. (BTS - Please prove me wrong!).

As for cutting off 50% of players if minimum system spec is P-II 400... Well history shows that most of these players upgrade to whatever is needed if they really want to play the game.

My friends complained that the game simply takes too long at times. They would love to have max of 30 minuts per games. And real time so there is no waiting for the opponent to finish his turn. I guess we want CC type game play with super realistic penetrations and unit specs... That might not be possible until P-III-800....

[dalem]

Man, I was going to keep my trap shut but I can't help it....

To the folks who keep referencing the smoke graphics, etc.; I know this is an open discussion forum, but c'mon, can't you see the writing on the wall? BTS seems to be very clear on what they *can* do versus what they *will* do. So no cool smoke or super-vivid explosions for you guys.

Yes, I'm one of those guys who've been gaming for decades and seen it all, blah blah blah... Yes, I still have a DOS machine so I can run Harpoon and the V4V series...

And I hope, for myself anyway, that CM continues to be driven by playability, accuracy, AI improvements and the like, rather than graphics. I personally don't give a doody whether muzzle blasts and explosions are rendered in the "correct" colors or not - that's completely irrelevant to my tactical or strategic planning and execution. AND I think that showing/modelling all the members of each squad and crew is incorrect at the scale CM represents, even if BTS could/would do it, and even if I had the superCray (or whatever) to run the result. You think a captain or major knows the exact condition of each of the men in his company or battalion (respectively)? CM is already pretty generous in the info it provides on each squad.

You couldn't manage all that information anyway - I daresay any of us could *really* manage the info that came at us the first times we played each of the demo scenarios.

So, I've typed, I've vented, I've offered opinion where none was requested. If you want super-pretty, play Unreal Tourney and have at it. CM is darn sure pretty enough.

-dale

[Doug Beman]

killmore wrote:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I don't care much about improved graphics but I do care about realtime and simulation accuracy. For example: 88 shoots at sherman. But before the missile get to that sherman another sherman blocks the missile path. The round goes directly through the the blocking sherman (without any damage). CM does not check for these situations. I would love to use some CPU

power for that.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

killmore, I've yet to see this come up. If it happens in one of your games, send me the movie file, as I'd like to see that.

Seriously, if we start demanding fixes for even the lowest-frequency stuff, the game will never see the light of day.

DjB

[Lee]

Richard III: Lol! Yeah, that Gordon Freeman is awful fierce

in close quarters battle for a physicist.

[Guest JonS]

Dalem wrote:

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>that's completely irrelevant to my tactical or strategic planning and execution<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I agree with most of your points about gameplay vs accuracy - and am well aware of BTS' position re: 'could' and 'will', I think accurate smoke IS important in terms of planning and execution.

Deliberate smoke screens are a fairly important tactical tool, and they way they are currently (ie in the demo) modelled doesn't do them justice - IMO

Regards

Jon

------------------

Ubique

[Wehrmacht]

As far as the Smoke issue goes, I agree with JonS. Smoke screens are a vital part in battlefield tactics. ACTUALLY, those plumes of smoke don't have to bellow that high! I would like to see shorter, more detailed plumes or puffs.

The Fire graphics around destroyed vehicles is adequate for CM and for what it's simulating. But the squared-off and hollow fire around terrain is a bit cheesy.

Actually, as for graphic tweaks, I'd like a small tweak to the tracers...They are a bit too thick, I think. That shouldn't be too hard to fix. And the tank and anti-tank projectiles look a bit hokey. Any way to improve those?

By the way, any body know for sure what those "Panzer" vehicles in Pvt. Ryan were in the last town battle? I know the two Tigers, but after looking a little closer, just this afternoon, they look like JagdPz IVs. (Pz IV chassis w/open-topped Anti-tank gun)

As for all you ninnies out there complaining about CPU speed...if you can't afford at least a 400 MHz CPU now, I feel for ya. That's the bare minimum speed now for new systems!

I've got a Celeron-433 w/128 MB w/32 MB TNT2 Diamond Viper V770. CM1, 2, 3, 4, etc would run just fine on this.

------------------

Wars are not won by dying for your country; Wars are won by making the other poor bastard die for his country.--George S. Patton

[Guest Zigster]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wehrmacht:

By the way, any body know for sure what those "Panzer" vehicles in Pvt. Ryan were in the last town battle? I know the two Tigers, but after looking a little closer, just this afternoon, they look like JagdPz IVs. (Pz IV chassis w/open-topped Anti-tank gun)

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I thought they were mock-ups of Marders. Kind of an odd rig to go charging through town with too...

[This message has been edited by Zigster (edited 01-25-2000).]

[Wehrmacht]

That's what I thought that at first too. The one that they knocked out with Molotovs might be, but the other one that Sgt. (Tom Sizemore) shot with the bazooka looks like what I suggested earlier-a JagdPz IV. I could be wrong though.

We'll just have to wait and see out BTS models those vehicles in CM, 'cause I've looked this up in the Unit Data tables in Talonsoft's **** Front series and couldn't determine "by the preponderous amounts of evidence" either way.

[Guest Captain Foobar]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Pirate,

Sorry if turn based doesn't do it for you, but as has been said umpty-skillion times it is not possible to achieve the high degree of realism found in CM in a real-time engine, unless you happen to own a personal super computer<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Its not even an issue of computer speed, the scale chosen for CM demands more thought than can be doled out in realtime. It may look realistic and be real-time, but your squads will end up acting like retards, because you didn't have time to give them intelligent orders. This game makes you stop and think. Some people play games for nonstop action. I like being able to play it like chess. It gives me stuff to daydream about while I'm at work.

[Guest Big Time Software]

Killmore, I really wish you would get off the RealTime kick. Not because you are wrong to have an opinion towards this, but because every time you bring it up I tell you why it is impossible. But instead of debating the reasons for our decisions I see (roughly) 1 or 2 posts a week from you asking/wishing for CM to be RealTime. So I ask that you go and read all the long posts on this issue and really think about the implications of RealTime for a game of CM's scale. You say you want both RealTime and a detailed sim... impossible for both hardware and playability reasons. Either you are chosing to ignore all this stuff, haven't read any of it, or aren't really thinking about the practical ramifications of a RT engine. So if you are that into RT you should really research why it isn't practical nor desirable.

Now, this also relates to smoke...

RANT MODE ON

Gamers have GOT TO UNDERSTAND ONE THING:

Playing games does not give you the experience and technical understanding to design and/or program them. What one game does and does not do is largely irrelevant. What the real world does and does not do is totally irrelevant. It all comes down to what CM can do given its unique nature.

Why can't we have realistic smoke like the real world? Because no CPU on anybody's desktop could handle this *and* the rest of the game. If you disagree with this, please go make a game of your own and prove us wrong. Sorry to have to be so blunt about it, but I am really tired of hearing what we can do from people that don't know what they are talking about. I don't mind at all that people would *like* us to simulate smoke like the real world, but do not expect us to. The former has a point, the latter is just annoying because there is only so much we can do and people WAY overestimate what computers are capable of.

And if people would reread the 5 or 6 long threads on smoke that have come up from time to time I wouldn't even have to answer this whole thing again.

And Pirate, if you are still reading here, you have no clue what you are talking about. None. So before you want to call me and ignoramous for what I posted, see above advice about making your own game and THEN call me wrong.

Sorry for the rant, but people need to get a clue that wants and reality are VERY far apart sometimes. Accept what we have and that we will make improvements as time and hardware advances allow. Remember, the GAME is the important thing here, not "flash bang". And if someone thinks we don't have enough "flash bang", I hearby sentence you to 6 hours of playing West Front or PITS

Steve

[This message has been edited by Big Time Software (edited 01-25-2000).]

[Doug Beman]

Spot on. FFE.

DjB

[Major Tom]

Oh no! Steve forgot to turn off Rant Mode!!!

Rant feeling spreading, can't stop myself, must fight it, rage increasing, logic dissipating, must, start, ranting!!

Anyway, I have seen series of games that come up from the same company get flashier and flashier graphics but less and less gameplay or individual strategy. If CM went to Real Time all you would do was point and click. You wouldn't have time to independently set up ambushes, check fields of fire or plan an assault. In reality CM models more than just a battalion commander, you are a company and even possibly a platoon commander. You cannot get that kind of detail with real time, nor could you have that large of a number of battles. I have played the game "Homeworld", very cool graphics and very large, but, it is RealTime and is very hard in making good tactical manuvers. With Real Time you have to rely a lot more on the Tactical AI to win your battles rather than personal deployment skill. Who ever wins real time games has only the ability to process things faster, or can use their mouse very quickly other than having some sort of military or tactical skill. Real Time strategy games are the product of individuals with short attention spans, as Killmore stated his friends can only spend up to 30 minutes doing one thing at a time.

Honestly, if you despise Turn based games so much, WHAT THE HECK ARE YOU DOING HERE!!? Do you think that if you insult the creaters of this wonderful game so much that they will cave in and make it Real Time??

Can it be real time

NO

Can it be real time?

NO

Can it be real time?

NO

Can it be real time?

IF I SAY YES THAN WILL YOU QUIT BUGGING ME?!

[This message has been edited by Major Tom (edited 01-26-2000).]

[Dschugaschwili]

I fully agree with Steve here.

I don't care if the smoke looks kind of blocky and thick (btw. to all the people out there requesting translucent smoke, I thought the smoke was supposed to be blocking LOS. How do you do this with translucent smoke )

*tries to turn rant mode off*

Damn, doesn't work for a junior member

Also, for the system requirements needed for accurate smoke calculation, I suspect Steve is correct too. You could make it looking better by adding more frames of animation or more surfaces, but people would still complain about the graphics. And getting the granularity so low that you almost have a particls system would indeed need exorbitant CPU power.

Dschugaschwili

PS: Steve, please turn the rant mode off again

[This message has been edited by Dschugaschwili (edited 01-26-2000).]

[Fionn]

My favourite part was where they told Steve he was wrong and an ignoramus for telling them the limits of what can be done.

I didn't know we had so many programmers and producers here

------------------

___________

Fionn Kelly

Manager of Historical Research,

The Gamers Net - Gaming for Gamers

[Thomm]

Major Tom wrote: "I have played the game "Homeworld", very cool graphics and very large, but, it is RealTime and is very hard in making good tactical maneuvers."

You are not doing Homeworld justice here, because you can stop the action any time to give detailed instructions in a turn-based manner.

As for the smoke: It would be nice to have different graphics for screening smoke (white ?, stays close to ground) and combustion smoke (black, rising up like it does now). But I sense that the topic has died long ago.

By the way, did you read what Atomic employee Eric Young wrote on a CC board: "[...] reinforcements would just pop up like in Combat Mission. That sucks."

Interesting what sucks nowadays, isn't it ?

Regards,

Thomm

[Guest Pham]

Just to add my $.02 here on the smoke issue:

"To put in smoke that you would find realistic NOBODY'S system would be able to handle it We could put in translucent smoke sprites, but different colors, patterns, etc. are out of the question. So we don't think the CPU hit would make anybody happy. And I hate to tell you a P200 is the low end that would be cut out by stuff like this. We are already overtaxing these systems, although the frame rate is OK. But play on a P400 and you will see a whole different game!"

I currently play Panzer Elite on a weak ol' P233 w/ a V2 card and it runs very playably. I only bring this up because the smoke in PE is pretty cool(esp. when you drive into it. completely obscures your view) and it doesn't tax my system any more than the game does when there's no smoke on the screen. My framerate doesn't drop more than .2 fps when artillery smoke missions are dropped across a wide area.

My advice, rip off the smoke from panzer elite and put it in CM. I doubt they'd mind if you didn't tell them.

[Das Boot]

Pham,

Please re-read BTS' answer earlier in this thread.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> What one game does and does not do is largely irrelevant. What the real world does and does not do is totally irrelevant. It all comes down to what CM can do given its unique nature <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

[Fester]

>>Playing games does not give you the experience and technical understanding to design and/or program them<<

WHOOP WHOOP!!!

YOU GO GIRL!!!

Seriously tho, the best idea Ive seen to date was brought up earlier in this thread (792 messages ago)

"Full length movies"

Smoke? yeah it could be improved (graphically) but so could a bazillion other little graphical elements of the game.

I measure a game's quality by how "Immersed" I get into it. Very few games Ive played offer the Immersion level of Combat Mission.

So yeah, the smoke doesnt look like the work of ILM, but it "works" in here.

For what its worth, "Pirates" (the old version) is best damn game in world, and it's graphics sucked! I played it for 36 hours straight *wipes a tear* god I loved that game...

Anyway.

I want my damn full length movie, and if I dont get it, then Steve's an ignoramous

-Fester

[Major Tom]

You can always find things that aren't up to a few individuals taste in just about any game. Sure, they could have done something else, but, possibly other people would have complained in their place. BTS is stuck between a rock and a hard place with people criticizing their work. I have really noticed a decay in the happiness of Steve's, most probably because he is getting all of these rude posts stating that they think that what he has produced isn't up to snuff. These guys worked long and hard, they shouldn't have to deal with such insults right before they finish their product. Haven't you ever worked on something for a long time, taken pride in it, and know how it feels when some total stranger comes by and points out all the 'flaws' that they see in your project? Have some respect, and let your complaints rest!

PS. I mentioned about the full length movies, and unless you want to see Fester cry I would suggest you implement them into the game

[killmore]

Couple of comments:

0) I do not want BTS to make CM1 realtime.

1) Sooner rather than later hardware will be fast enought to make CM-X realtime.

2) Can game degenerate into point and click if it is RT - maybe. I guess that why I slow down games like TA. I want to be able to react to the situation and assign targets. In real life you can't do that. But then again units in real life have brain of their own.

I wonder if most people simply want to move from table-top games to computer. They are used to that style of play. Both side give commands, then there is resolution phase...

3) We can't handle games over 30 minuts not because of short attention span but rather because we got only max of 1 hour per day to play. (We have got other things to do). And comming back into the game next day or later after a full day of writing code is not easy.

And BTS - let me repeat again:

I am not asking you to make CM1 real time. But please keep it as an OPTION for CM-X.

[Los]

This smoke thing is all about understanding the CM environment.

"I currently play Panzer Elite on a weak ol' P233 w/ a V2 card and it runs very playably. I only bring this up because the smoke in PE is pretty cool(esp. when you drive into it. completely obscures your view) and it doesn't tax my system any more than the game does when there's no smoke on the screen."

First off I like PE

In a typical CM battle Say like the one I was testing last night, (Villers-Bocage) I had about 30 fires going for most of the scenario, burning vehilces, burning buildings, tank smoke pods firing, etc, etc. There's an immense amount of smoke that could be modeled in any given battle. Not including actually firing off smoke barrages. If you implemented quake-like smoke or PE-like smoke it would clog the system. PE models a small fraction of the smoke usage and circumstaces that CM does. (Though it sure looks nicer with the little that it does.)

Keep in mind that your typical large quake level or FPS level where you are seeing this wonderful smoke is essentially maybe what? 200 meters long, a small CM map is 4 x 8 times larger than that, yet is still essentially 3d modelled world just like a quake level. So now start thinking about modelling smoke like that.

In Panzer Elite you are talking a few vehicles 10 or 20, (of which you control a platoon), plus the 2d grunts. Not too often do you see a tank blow up and spread smoke all over.(just enoug for atmosphere) More over you very rarley see a whole PE level from your cupola (sp?) you see only a portion of the map. Battles supposedly happening somewhere else are probably not modelled in any detail at all or even shown graphically unless you can see them in your FOV. Most dead vehilces you do see will spew a bit of smoke or just lay there dead. Sure you can fire your smoke pods but how often does the PE AI fire off smoke? Not too often. PE is modelling a fraction of the smoke that CM does. In CM AI units are tossing off smoke ALL the time.

In CM There's a tremendous amount of smoke modelled. And if you want to model the battlefield more realistcally there's even more smoke needed since anyone who's ever been to the range in the summer knows that after a few minutes of firing tracers there are usually fires going and you have to stop what you are dong to put them out. Any casual viewing of a WW2 documentary shows smoke form fires, smoke pods, burning areas, and dust obscuring large portions or even the majority of the batlefield. Then there's the wind and other EC manipulating and effecting the smoke.

Given the huge 3d area being modelled in CM, (It just looks small because we are normally veiwing it from 100-200 hundred meters in the air) realisticly portrayed smoke is not doable without a severe hit on all the other important elements. Steve's basically said this a hundred times already.It's their job to looka at everything holistically and see how t make it work or come up with a workaorund. At this point Steve and Charlie a re triaging tons of factors well past teh point that the ER is already shut down! (In case I'm not clear they're going way beyond that extra mile for the porduct and for us) However the tactical aspect of the smoke's effects are being tracked and modeled.

Sure I'd love to see PE/FPS-like smoke and hope some day that we will. In fact I'd love to see better or more numerous smoke graphics as they are now. I think we need to see two types of smoke plumes, the kind from your burning vehicles or houses that looks like what's in CM today, and a new smoke graphic that depicts a smoke cannister or smoke round whehich spreads out more along the ground covering the area which is actually blocks LOS. It might make things look nicer without all the 3d smoke issues.

Cheers...

Los.

[This message has been edited by Los (edited 01-26-2000).]

[Scott C]

Killmore,

It will, sometime in the future, become possible in terms of hardware to make a game as detailed as CM real-time, yes. Probably even relatively soon. However, you seem to be totally missing half of the issue here. Even if computers could handle it, HUMANS couldn't. There is simply too much information to handle all at once. Realize that, in CM, you are filling the following positions (for a largish battle) - 1. Battalion commander. 2. ~3 Company commanders. 3. Platoon/team level commanders, say about 6 of them active at any given time. Thus, you are filling ~10 full-time jobs. NO human is capable of doing this in real time. This, quite bluntly, is why RTS games inevitably turn into clickfests decided by who can move faster, not who has a better strategy. (BTW, I know quite thoroughly what I'm talking about... I've been playing RTS's extensively since Warcraft, and currently have a record of about 150-40 in Starcraft.) Does this mean RTS games have no place? Of course not. Does this mean that making a future version of CM an RTS would require giving up everything Steve and Charles have been trying to do, and everything most of us are here for? YES. No offense, but PLEASE shut up about this. You only demonstrate ignorance and an almost total lack of thought by persisting.

------------------

Questions, comments, arguments, refutations, criticisms, and/or sea stories?

[This message has been edited by Scott C (edited 01-26-2000).]

[Wehrmacht]

**BEWARE**

RANT mode ENABLED

Okay guys, as far as the smoke issue goes, Steve's right.

Let CM be CM. Yes, I've played Panzer Elite with the cool terrain graphics and SpFX **BUT** you know what? I got bored of it after a while because it all boiled down to Panthers or Tigers going after Shermans. With CM huge diversity of Armored Vehicles modeled very similarly to Panzer Elite minus the suspension effects. CM will be a much better game because of several reasons.

1. For one thing, I don't really consider CM as turn-based. It's more of Order Phase and Resolution Phase. As stated many times before, this is necessary for well thought-out tactics. I have several real-time games and they piss me off because sh*t happens off screen that I can't see and do anything about. Mainly because today's AI is still not powerful enough for all the units to do what is necessary to survive **UNTIL** CM has come along!

2. Secondly with all of the nationalities and vehicles being portrayed, I think we should give BTS their Kudos for all the research done into modeling all these. PLUS you get to control all of these, unlike Panzer Elite where you're limited to just the MBTs.

3. I'm especially interested in the add-ons planned for expanded theaters like North Africa, Italy, & Russian Front.

So let us all just chill, and let BTS finish the game for all to enjoy.

P.S. Yes, I'm also guilty for ranting on the smoke issue, but as I keep reading comments about it, it's really not necessary for great gameplay.

Also, the full movie playback would be a great feature. If not in the initial release but in a patch would be grateful.

------------------

Wars are not won by dying for your country; Wars are won by making the other poor bastard die for his country.--George S. Patton