Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Well, its not broken, and its not perfect either. If we can all keep some realistic expectations, and play within the confines of the game's abilities, evrything will be fine. I dont want to "settle" for less than is achievable in the game, so I encourage people to bring up constructive criticism, but some people around here wont be happy until the game is PERFECT, and can do and simulate ANYTHING. Those people will never be happy anyway. Those people smell bad too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
silentsniper Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Is it getting hot in here or is it just me? ------------------ Be nice to your panzershrecks. [This message has been edited by silentsniper (edited 08-22-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Priest Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Is the game perfect? no. Is the game the best out? Yes. Will there ever be a perfect game? no. Is BTS trying to improve an already successful product? yes. Will Username: ever finish his game? NO....because he is too busy playing CM. Now somebody lock this now pointless thread. ------------------ Sir are you sure you want to go to red alert...it would mean changing the bulb -Priest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Pillar Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 I really like that idea about "Unit Missions" or general orders. Telling your tanks that you want them to be be "Anti Armour" or "Anti Infantry" etc. would solve many of the current "if/or" problems. It may be a lot of work to code, it may be TOO much work to code for now. But it's a good idea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest ACTOR Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Gotta go with the Captain on this one. It is great to suggest improvements that you might like, but that's all you can do is suggest them unless ofcoarse you are going to write the code yourself and submit it. I'm no celebrity but at some point you've gotta say CM 1 is about as good as it gets and move on. I personally have found that the targeting is better with 1.04. My tanks are NOT shooting at every infantry unit they see when AFVs are roaming around. Come ahead! [This message has been edited by ACTOR (edited 08-22-2000).] [This message has been edited by ACTOR (edited 08-22-2000).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Major Tom Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 Before this thread gets closed up, let me add my few words of discouragement I have tried this scenario with a few of the different patches, and found it difficult to inflict the casualties that Wittmann (SP) historically did on the British. First it was because of the slow turrets moving forward after a vehicle darts around (maybe these vehicles should be started off immobile?) then it was because the turret wasn't moving around to the centre (as a target would appear over on the other side). However, the only way of correcting this would to be having Ambush markers immediately overule any extra threat that appears against this vehicle/infantry. But, what if a BIG threat appears from the rear, like an enemy tank? Possibly this could be solved by having the Ambush markers overuled if the threat is imminent. Then there is the possibility of some unknown infantry appearing behind the tank, which is hereby ignored, and they turn out to be an Infantry AT group and knock out your tank. Of course this could be solved by not sending in a lone tank unsupported (I agree that Ambush markers should be of prime importance unless a greater threat, not a mere annoyance like a halftrack, appear on a different flank) Everyone give Lewis a break. Lewis give Battlefront a break. Problem solved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Germanboy Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Michael emrys: One thing I am finding out is that for one reason or another, CM is not too hot at reproducing historical battles. A discussion of why that is might be very interesting if you ever want to take it up. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I totally agree with you there Michael. I believe that a large part of the reason is 20-20 hindsight and the fact that even average players may have a better understanding of combined arms combat than some of the guys doing it in WW II, especially at the beginning in Normandy. All the hard truths that had to be learned there and paid for in lives, we can access in books. Since our opponent(s) rely on the same books, there is maybe much more of an even match. Oh, the crew thing... Dunno, don't care, hate tanks... ------------------ Andreas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
:USERNAME: Posted August 23, 2000 Author Share Posted August 23, 2000 Since I am taking advanced orders and charging credit cards immediateely..let me describe the game. Its a platoon/section east front game with Command/control/communications being key to realistic play. A pregame plan phase is very important and fun. You basically draw arrows on a command map to show how you plan to attack. This has an effect on play because units commanded to move towards/fire at these designated areas/routes have less delay of commands. Defenders can designate reserves and draw arrows where they can go. Delay is minimized for designated areas. Play is not wego but on an activation basis. Think of Talonsofts east front but the units on both sides dont IGO UGO but rather IGO a lttle UGO a little then IGO a little..yadda yadda yadda till all eligible units have moved fired. well led/in command/units can coordinate/fire/manuver more effectively. You basically "bid" an HQ and there is a comparison and a winner declared. Example: German wins an activation over the russian. He gets a HQ activated and points. Depending on the unit (how far from HQ, in radio contact, etc) they cost to activate. He selects 2 platoons of infantry a 81mm platoon and stug platoon. He uses the 81's to suppress some close by inf and is able to follow up the mortar attack in the same activation with the stug/platoons. The bad part is that the enemy can recover from one activation to the next. So you might use indirect fire in one activation, get some results but by your next activation the suppression has been reduced. Armor is in units of 2 tank sections 3/4/5 tank platoons and 10 tank companys. Commands can be the usual plus ambush, shoot n scoot, inf support, overwatch, recon. Map zooms from a realistic battle map that shows front line demarcation to medium scale "platoon" symbols down to an overhead wher individual vehicles are out lined and inf are represented in 3 man increments. You are only given a view from the ground from your Main HQ which represents you. You can scan around and checck out the real deal because alot of the time you can lose command of units. I have the game at a working cardboard stage with computer resolution of combat and giving out activation. Price? 89.95 and you get a poster. Customer support? email me your phone number and Ill call you right away and tell you to go to hell. Lewis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iggi Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 And I actually tried to understand that until you got to the conclusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest *Captain Foobar* Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 hmmmm...... ok, email me when the beta demo is out. I wont buy it if it doesnt have bouncing timed fuse HE smartbombs....That was the most important factor in the war.Can't wait... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Oberly Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Example: German wins an activation over the russian. He gets a HQ activated and points. Depending on the unit (how far from HQ, in radio contact, etc) they cost to activate. He selects 2 platoons of infantry a 81mm platoon and stug platoon. He uses the 81's to suppress some close by inf and is able to follow up the mortar attack in the same activation with the stug/platoons. The bad part is that the enemy can recover from one activation to the next. So you might use indirect fire in one activation, get some results but by your next activation the suppression has been reduced.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sounds a little like Victory Games old boardgame 'Panzer Command',maybe the best platoon level game I've ever seen.What's really cool about the 'activation' system is that superior German company level operations are easily modeled in a realistic fashion,as opposed to just giving them better morale,etc.That game was way ahead of its time. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Big Time Software Posted August 23, 2000 Share Posted August 23, 2000 OK, time to close this one up. The thing that really ticks us off is certain people that are bitching about certain behaviors were the same certain people pissing and moaning about us not having it in there in the first place Then we put it in and there is yet another bitch session. You budding game designers out there take note, especially the thick skulled variety... Simulating real life is VERY COMPLICATED. Everytime you put in a behavior there are likely situations where this new behavior won't work so well, even if it generally improves the larger skill set that is trying to be simulated. This is called REALITY, and we can't wait for the one who somehow manages to program their way around it. Those would be some billion dollar hands typing on the keyboard. So is the new behavior perfect? No. Is it an improvement over the previous behavior in most situations? Yes. Does it need a few tweaks? Sure. Could more be done to make the behavior even smarter when it is faced with some sort of 1 in a 100 situation? Always. But at some point we have to stop spending all our time trying to make one tiny feature work in all situations, the correct way, all the time. There are only so many hours in the day, and unlike some here we actually spend them working instead of playing games and insulting the people that make them. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts