BTS: graphics request for CMBB: seperate bmps for KIA Infantry

[Pzman]

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

Aitken--were is your rational!? Listen it is a VIDEO GAME after all the realisme, the graphics, in the end it all boils down to a VIDEO GAME--I dont think I have to repeat myself--war veterans play this game--I doubt a red spot on a soldier is going to make them get up a sue the damn company over a SPOT! I love to build WW II models, if I make a diorama of a shot up soldier--am I being disrespectful..NO! I am showing the true face of war! Is SPR disrespectful because it shows the realitys of war(well not all but still) No, it takes no respect out of the game, if you put in a little blood, If you think about it--when a sqaud gets burned to death from a flamer even in CM its pretty grusome, so no you are wrong--the only disrespect would come if it was to model the gore for a sales purpose or to make fun of those who fought in World War II, so no, they would in no way be disrespectful.

-Field<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

This isn't a video game... didn't you read the manual. It say right on page 6 or 7 thats its a tacticl simulator not a video game. So you are wrong.

[David Aitken]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Tiger wrote:

I want to have the option to mod a certain portion of the game that is not currently mod-able, for those that want it. Not to be told what I should be able to do based on someone's perceived morality of playing a game about death and killing that's good and wholesome and respectful, as long as you don't have to look at the ugly parts. Out of sight out of mind eh?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

CM is not about death and killing, it is about defeating an opponent in a realistic tactical environment. As I have said, if it really were about death and killing, I would not be interested, as in reality these are highly unpleasant issues – and I don't just mean the act of shooting someone and seeing them drop dead, I mean all the related factors of who you've killed, how they've died, and what the consequences will be.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Let's make a game about war but leave out the parts that are not 'fun' out of respect for those that died. Sounds more disrespectful than anything to me as you end up glorifying it when you leave out the bad parts. It's like the movie Schindler's List but with all the bad stuff cut out of the film.... and then you watch it for the enjoyment of knowing there's nothing bad in it you'll have to see.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Again, this is not a game about war. It is supposed to be fun. If someone were to program a game, for entertainment purposes, on the human factors of war – fear, suffering, death, guilt – it would cause international outrage. (Games like Doom based completely on fantasy have been controversial enough as it is.) As I keep saying, if you want the realities of war brought home to you, go out and experience it for real. I, and most of us here, want to enjoy CM as a game, not agonise over the implications of what we are pretending to do. There is no reason why we should be forced to consider such things, as long as these issues are not broached by the game – and in CM they are not. As soon as CM incorporates the human factors of war, then BTS must ensure that the subject is responsibly and respectfully dealt with, which in entertainment software would be impossible. Many of us are very learned about the Second World War, and war in general, but this pursuit is distinct from the playing of CM, and it is not BTS's job to educate people about the realities of war.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Having mod-able casualties is no more an issue than having mod-able tanks, vehicles, terrain, or uniforms. You still have given nothing but personal reasons Aitkens.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

As I have already said, this thread bar your original post is not entirely relevant to your topic. As such – as I have also said – I am not arguing that on no account should you be allowed to do the modifications you desire, I am simply representing my side of the argument which has subsequently developed in your thread. The problem is that you have read my posts and assumed that they are all directed at you, which is not the case. This is why I suggested that you bow out instead of attempting to summarily dismiss my arguments without actually justifying your assertion that I am speaking only out of "personal egotism". I have conveyed what BTS's response has been to such requests in the past, which deals with your original request; beyond that is irrelevant to your request, and as such you should not feel the need to defend yourself against what I am saying. If you wish to engage in the argument which this thread has become, then you should recognise that it is no longer specifically about whether you personally should be allowed to produce a unique bitmap for the 'dead body' markers in the game, and equip yourself with some better assertions than simply that I am "pompous" and "pissing into the wind".

[Slapdragon]

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

I want to have the option to mod a certain portion of the game that is not currently mod-able, for those that want it. Not to be told what I should be able to do based on someone's perceived morality of playing a game about death and killing that's good and wholesome and respectful, as long as you don't have to look at the ugly parts. Out of sight out of mind eh?

Let's make a game about war but leave out the parts that are not 'fun' out of respect for those that died. Sounds more disrespectful than anything to me as you end up glorifying it when you leave out the bad parts. It's like the movie Schindler's List but with all the bad stuff cut out of the film.... and then you watch it for the enjoyment of knowing there's nothing bad in it you'll have to see.

Having mod-able casualties is no more an issue than having mod-able tanks, vehicles, terrain, or uniforms. You still have given nothing but personal reasons Aitkens.

[ 07-22-2001: Message edited by: Tiger ]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

You ignored the entire point of my post. If you are modding for realism, then your mod will result in little green specks spread about the playing field. Otherwise, you are modding for purient interest and what you are looking for is cartoon violence.

As I said, I do not have any dog in the fight -- I just think you are missing the whole point of what the casualty figures are. They are the point at which an infantry unit ceased to be a fighting force, not the point where they turned into a heap of red and green guts spewing forth on the ground.

As for what the plane crash has to do with it, you can fool yourself that people die in differnt way between war (large explosions and ripping violence) and a plabe crash (large explosion and ripping violence) but Sioux City looked a hell of a lot like signal corp color photographs of Normandy with twisted wreckage and small clumps of humans in the grass.

As for whos is being disrespectful of the dead, both sides are full of crap. Tiger is not being disrespectful because he wants to paint some gore and froth on a dead body symbol, Atken is not being disrepectful because he feels it should be assumed rather than shown. This is a red herring.

The real point is: can a mod be used here to make a more useful or realistic representation of the battlefield. The answer is an obvious no because of the scale of the game. You "dead squad" that you want to portray as a pile of gore may have no killed members. It may consist of 3 guys who ran away, 3 seriously wounded, and the rest pulling the wounded comrads back to the rear.

You can ignore this sentence all you want Tiger, in fact other than sending a singing telegram I have no way of communicating other than saying the destroyed team symbol is not a mass a dead soldiers, but a marker that show the ;ast location that unit worked as a team. It could just as easily be a cross, a small square, or not even present. It is no more real than an ambush marker or a flag, and had about as much significance for modding as the little artillery shells.

Just because something could be modded, doesn't mean it serves any useful purpose to make it a mod. In fact, I would rather see the destroyed unit markers become little x's rather than a set of polygons at all, since they do not represent a pile of bodies.

Just in case, I will repeat the previous comments since it has been mentioned before by BTS. Casualty markers do not represent a pile of bodies, just the last place where a squad operated as a cohesive fighting unit. Otherwise, a squad would leave a string of wounded, fleeing, dead, and cowering men from its first point of contact to the point it ceases to be an active unit.

[Atlantic Wall Adolph]

some of these responses are too damn long!

[Pzman]

Yours is to short!

[BloodyBucket]

The casualty BMP should be replaced with smiley faces from the board. Thus, a terrible battle could look like this:

[LGMB]

Soldiers,

Wow. Now that this fosil question has again been raised and many have been flogged for raising it, or for supporting it and vice versa, lets just get back to the fact. CM is a graphic game. Graphics are what made me buy this game. Buildings do not explode in real life. But for some reason they do in CM, thats probally because it looks dam cool. Anyone who wants to restrict the graphics of the game must be out of there mind! Go play Close Combat! If CM was not ment to be a graphic game then why was the data folder made so easy to acsess and use?

I am 100% behind anything that even remotley increases the graphics in this game. Deadbody markers: Its not that big of a deal (unless you consider t from the stand point of censership or sales). All were talking about here is somthing that Tiger has asked for in the past. I belive he posted a picture of what he wanted it to look like. Dead body markers, and burnt out tanks that use sepertae textures from the standard ones. This would certainlly look much better. The only problem I can see is that when someone mods a tank/ uniform, they would have to make a secondary mod for the burnt out/dead texture. This is not that big of a change, and certainly not worth all the yelling that is going on in this thread.

I'm all for Hi-res, and better graphics. Whos with me?

[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: Lord General MB ]

[Slapdragon]

Now mods for dead tanks is completey different if the engine could handle the change is a smooth manner. A dead tank is visible.

As for the reasons why dead infantry should not be modelled, please reread my previous post.

[Kurtz]

The "eliminated" marker was added to game in a late stage of its development, there were no "eliminated" markers in the beta demo.

If there had been no such markers in the final product nobody (well, maybe somebody) would have missed them but suddenly it seems like it is the single most important thing that should be in the game!?!

And if there are moddable casualty marker there will be demands for different texture sets for different types of casualties. If I torch a squad with my Wasp I want a pile of charred, smoking (!) bodies, not a single soldier lying on his back with a chest wound (after having cried out: "Mein Bein! Mein Bein!")! :eek:

I think there are better uses for the VRAM and Charles' time and talent.

[mensch]

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

imagine no one in Germany being able to purchase the game!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

that is true my sir, not only that BTS would get a black mark against them and any games that would try to be sold in Germany would be checked with a microscope.. causing delays.. much nashing of teeth and moans from the gamers here.

on a side note here I'm not sure they would get flak for a basic model that has no blood, etc.. and if mod'ers do somefink to change that BTS is not responcible? hmmm hard call on these bloody (no pun intended) German laws.

[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: mensch ]

[Andreas]

I am having a bad bad case of deja vue here...

Apart from the sensible comments from Slappy, has anyone thought about how it would look like if someone wrote a review of the game that carried pictures which 'unfortunately' had the Blood&Gore mod done on them? Or would write in the text 'Yeah unfortunately the game comes without the splatter, but you can DL flying limbs and torn intestinal matter.' That maybe would not please BTS, and could also negatively affect their sales in what I assume to be their prime target market, mature war gamers. Quite apart from the effect it might have on the BPS in Germany, one of the largest markets for CMBO, AFAIK.

Just a thought.

Apart from that, this whole debate just emphasises the need for a working search function. Some people simply do not comprehend how CM works in terms of casualties. Whether that is actual stupidity and denseness or sheer bloodymindedness I am not sure and leave up to those who waded through this whole thread.

[Stacheldraht]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Again, this is not a game about war<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I want a refund, then. I thought it was about World War II Seriously, I understand your distinction, but remember that CM does try to represent actual historical battles. When you've read historical accounts, memoirs, oral histories, etc. about or by the individuals involved in these actions, the game doesn't as easily feel like a combat simulator that has nothing to do with the actual war and the people who died in it. I can't help but remember pictures of and details about actual individuals who died in these battles when I play certain scenarios. Now their memory, in CM at least, is reduced to little animated guys in a computer game. "Sorry that you had to kill and be killed for your country or principles, and sorry that your wife and children were left behind to lament your death, but now I'm going to have a little computerized fun based on the event that got you shot to death." How would these men or their families or comrades feel about this?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>anything that goes into CM goes in for the purposes of entertainment. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Perhaps, but the SS are in the game, and they're far from entertaining, even if just depicted abstractly as a computerized fighting force. The question I'm curious about, fwiw, is whether it's appropriate to take historical incidents, specifically those involving warfare and other tragedy, and strip them of morally charged, sensitive, or emotive issues and take the remainder as material for entertainment (designed to generate profits). I'm genuinely curious about what others have to say on the matter; I'm not interested in vicious arguments, but rather honest debates on the topic, for any who are likewise inclined.

I certainly don't think, btw, that BTS or anyone here would like any game to be disrespectful to anyone involved in WWII, but I don't think these arguments are so unimportant as to warrant being ignored, as it seems one or two people in this thread have suggested or implied. And just because they've been broached before doesn't mean they can't or shouldn't bear renewed discussion and analysis. Flames or ad hominems are a different matter, naturally.

[Echo]

This board is full of a bunch of over educated, limp wristed pussys. Go field dress a deer this season and maybe a few red pixels in a bitmap wont make you so squeemish.

As for Germany not selling it, that sounds like a problem YOU the people of Germany should do something about. Your freedoms are obviously being trampled on over there. We dont tolerate that **** here in the States.

[Andreas]

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

This board is full of a bunch of over educated, limp wristed pussys. Go field dress a deer this season and maybe a few red pixels in a bitmap wont make you so squeemish.

As for Germany not selling it, that sounds like a problem YOU the people of Germany should do something about. Your freedoms are obviously being trampled on over there. We dont tolerate that **** here in the States.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Always nice to have the considered opinion of what is obviously a well-educated, capable of independent thought person with an amazing level of tolerance.

[Slapdragon]

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

Always nice to have the considered opinion of what is obviously a well-educated, capable of independent thought person with an amazing level of tolerance.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

I suspect Andreas that he wears women's underpants and lipstick when he goes out on weekends, so you may want to go easy on Mister Goering. Since I have had a farm (up by Steve Grammont in fact) and did slaughter my own animals, I assume that he is just blowing smoke out of his ass. A bovine or deer is completely different when slaughtered than a human. At least, I found the sight of dead humans more disturbing than that of dead deer.

But then again, maybe his butt plug is in a little tight and merely needs a bit of ky to make it more comfortable.

[deanco]

Tiger,

I think that's a good idea, it would ADD to the realism of the game (hopefully I don't need to explain why, right? I mean, y'all are grogs, even though you might not have first-hand information, I'm sure you have extensive second-hand information about what happens on a battlefield). Unfortunately, given the small size of the dev team , these kind of considerations pretty much come last when it comes to making a 'to do' list. And that's too bad for those of us (an ever growing number, much to the chagrin of certain people here) who feel that graphic ameliorations are AS IMPORTANT as gameplay elements when it comes to selling, marketing, and enjoying a video game. Too bad for us.

I also feel that there are hidden agendas on both sides of this argument. As a long time board frequenter, I can smell a rat here. And this really makes me sick, y'know? It makes me feel like never coming back here, ever again. However, I know that if I did that, one of the 2 (teams' would say, 'rack up another one for the good guys, we got rid of him.' So no, I'm not leaving. I will continue to hang out and espouse my 'pro-graphics' views to anyone who will listen.

Really... this place is turning into the Battlecruiser 3000 boards. But instead of one Supreme Commander, there are a bunch of self appointed 'mini-gods' running around, setting people straight as to the One True Teaching of the Two Holy Ones. Y'all are doing HARM to these boards, you are discouraging the free exchange of ideas here, and you are scaring away newbies and probably harming Combat Mission sales in general, by doing this. In my humble opinion, that is.

Oh yes, I certainly hope that those of you who don't need extra eyecandy to enjoy CM aren't using any of my interfaces. You don't need to, right?

[Andreas]

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

Since I have had a farm (up by Steve Grammont in fact) and did slaughter my own animals, I assume that he is just blowing smoke out of his ass. A bovine or deer is completely different when slaughtered than a human. At least, I found the sight of dead humans more disturbing than that of dead deer.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Funnily enough, I actually helped slaughtering pigs a lot, on my grandfather's farm when I was a kid (used to stir the blood for making black pudding/Blutwurst). Those were the days.

I still don't think I would like blood and gore in CMBO though, because pigs and humans are a bit different for me. There's a conundrum - err, not really.

As for censorship in Germany, if anyone here thinks that there is no censorship in the US, they need their heads examined. Or maybe they should just stop reading Mr. Goose stories and arrive in the real world. Just different stuff being censored.

[Andreas]

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

Y'all are doing HARM to these boards, you are discouraging the free exchange of ideas here, and you are scaring away newbies and probably harming Combat Mission sales in general, by doing this. In my humble opinion, that is.

Oh yes, I certainly hope that those of you who don't need extra eyecandy to enjoy CM aren't using any of my interfaces. You don't need to, right?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

DeanCo, how about naming some names? Bit cowardly otherwise, isn't it?

As for free exchange of ideas, that is what we do. Tiger has an idea, and my idea is different. I also know that his idea is based on a false understanding of how the game works in terms of casualties, so I tell him. Now where in this chain do I impede the free exchange of ideas. Or could it be that to you free exchange of ideas consists of 'anything that I like should be allowed to be told, and anything I don't like should not be, because it annoys me'?

As for interface mods, I don't use yours. What that has got to with it I don't understand though. I thought that kind of logic (I don't like you, give me back my toy) should stop at about the age of six. Maybe I was wrong, or maybe you are a very talented six-year old.

[Spook]

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

I am having a bad bad case of deja vue here...

Apart from the sensible comments from Slappy, has anyone thought about how it would look like if someone wrote a review of the game that carried pictures which 'unfortunately' had the Blood&Gore mod done on them? Or would write in the text 'Yeah unfortunately the game comes without the splatter, but you can DL flying limbs and torn intestinal matter.' That maybe would not please BTS, and could also negatively affect their sales in what I assume to be their prime target market, mature war gamers. Quite apart from the effect it might have on the BPS in Germany, one of the largest markets for CMBO, AFAIK.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just to clarify, Andreas, what exactly are the "gore" limitations to PC games sold in Germany? Beyond the typical action games, there are others like the Myth & Jagged Alliance series that sport quite a bit of bloody splatter. (But I know that at least in the latter's case, the "gore" can be toggled off as a player option.)

[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: Spook ]

[Andreas]

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

[QB]

Just to clarify, Andreas, what exactly are the "gore" limitations to PC games sold in Germany? Beyond the typical action games, there are others like the Myth & Jagged Alliance series that sport quite a bit of bloody splatter. QB]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh, good question. I think it depends on what the guys at the BPS had for breakfast to some extent. The relevant paragraphs in the law are rather 'elastically' worded. There is a committee that decides on adjudication. I have not lived in Germany for seven years, and these standards are also dynamit. Wolfenstein, to give you one example, was put on the index, as was Beach Head II, which means you had to sell it to over-18s only, and it had to be in a special corner of the shop.

Basically, if you do a wargame (with real people) and have splatter&gore in it, you are asking for trouble.

[deanco]

Hey, Germanboy, if the shoe fits, wear it. Someone who DOESN'T have a hidden agenda would have read that line, thought, 'well, that person isn't me', and moved on. Or one would have thought. Or perhaps you are defending the rights of those unknown people who DO have a hidden agenda, if they exist.

As for the free exchange of ideas, that is NOT what is happening here in this thread. What is happening here is this. A guy has an idea that has been discussed to death, and because of this he is shouted down in a most unceremonius manner. It's not discussion, it's browbeating. I've seen real discussions before, and sorry, but this ain't that. The recent 'discussion' on variable length turns and RTS is a perfect example of what I'm talking about.

My point about the interface was not that people should stop using it, of course. My point was that my interfaces are unnecessary eyecandy as well, as are the hamster faces, the modded splash screens, etc. No tantrum meant at all.

[Stacheldraht]

It's painfully evident to anyone who frequents this message board that there are a few posters who habitually try to push/preserve their own narrow vision of what CM is or should be. They tend to employ the thin guise of logical argumentation to mask their maliciousness, or arrogantly assume the role of unappointed spokespeople for BTS in order to shoot down ideas that don't strike their limited fancy.

Apparently, some posters want to see CM/wargaming/this board maintainted as their own little club. Those who dare raise an issue that these persons have weighed in on before are quickly told to do a search (that function doesn't work for some of us, no matter how long we wait, btw), or are told that BTS said such and such so forget it, or that's not what CM is about so get used to it, etc. That's an embarrassing and detrimental bit of provincialism that does no one any good. As an aside, it's no wonder wargames have been dying out when even their purported fans are so eager to tear down instead of build up. This is not the sort of welcoming community in which a newbie would likely feel comfortable.

[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: Stacheldraht ]

[BloodyBucket]

Gentlemen:

I can see both sides of this arguement without casting aspersions on the motives of those making the case for realistic graphics or "clean" representation of casualties.

A completely authentic version of CM would render the player emotionally unhinged after an average playing time of six weeks, if you believe some sources on the capicity of humans to endure constant combat. That would be nasty. On the other hand, to be a game about war there has to be some elements of war in the game.

That there should be some thought given to the horrors that the game represents is a healthy thing, but I for one don't think that requires a gory casualty graphic. There can be an honest interest in the contest of combat without a morbid interest in the horrors of combat, but always with the thought in mind that real war, in a word, sucks.

Before CM, the Close Combat series got a lot of time on my playlist, and the slightly bloody casualty graphics did not bother me, yet I didn't point to them as making the game more immersive.

I don't think it dishonors the dead to remember WWII through gaming, if the simple fact that games are fun and war is awfull is not cast aside. To forget the dead and the survivors is more of a sin, and if gaming is a way to keep those sacrifices in the minds of the current generation, that is not a bad thing.

I understand the desire of some gamers to have an authentic experience. I don't think that makes them bad people. I do know that it was common practice for soldiers to put a shroud or somehow cover the dead when possible, and for BTS do do the same sort of thing with a "clean" casualty graphic doesn't bother me.

[Spook]

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

As for whos is being disrespectful of the dead, both sides are full of crap. Tiger is not being disrespectful because he wants to paint some gore and froth on a dead body symbol, Atken is not being disrepectful because he feels it should be assumed rather than shown. This is a red herring.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Kudos to Slap for his earlier comment here. The various pontifications offered here about the "horrors of war," "censorship of gore" (and by who), and "how a player is 'supposed' to interpret CM" are mainly hot air (with the exceptions mainly from Slapdragon & Andreas.)

Now, Tiger, by posting this query on a forum instead of to BTS directly, I feel that you should've anticipated that other gamers would offer differing opinions as to if adding "gore" SHOULD be allowed in CM.

But let's set aside the "should" for a brief moment. For whatever the reasons, Tiger wants the option considered; maybe just so to increase his own level of "immersion" with the game. And Tiger isn't asking me, or others, to judge his immersion preference. So instead, let's raise the issue of the "possible."

Would it be possible to do without much difficulty to BTS? Well, BTS would be the best authority to say, but I think that yes, it could be possible to do IF the gamer modsters would be willing to work up the bloodied uniform bmp's themselves.

An eliminated foot unit can reside in a CM battlefied as a 3D polygon object. And it uses the same uniform textures for the unit that was eliminated.

So if a "mirror set" of texture bmp's for all the uniforms was allowed (similar to those for winter uniforms), then it could be done. Uniforms exist in the "5000" bmp series, so perhaps a mirror set identified as "35000's" or "45000's" to reflect uniforms for "casualties." The unit's elimination status is used to call a file-swap routine for the higher-numbered file series.

There is a possible bug in the ointment, though. When should this file-swap be executed? During the RT turn execution (which MIGHT be a slight added drag to overall calculations & playback), or applied in the following turns phase? Well, seeing as KO'ed vehicles demonstrate their KO status immediately as a comparison, then automatic file-swap for foot unit elimination may not be such a problem.

Again, though, if this was done, it should be left to modsters to generate the "gored" uniforms (or even faces) themselves. That way, the CM version that ships still doesn't have "gore" packaged in it, because the suggested mirrored bmps would be identical to the regular uniform bmps. And those who want the gore can create it themselves or pick it up by 3rd-party download.

Again, I don't think this is OVERLY difficult for BTS to do. So do I think that BTS should provide this optional venue? Well, I can't argue for it personally, because IMO I don't think that blood-stained uniforms add that much more immersion in CM's scale. (Besides, the same blood-stain pattern on each "casualty" bmp, for the same unit type, would look tedious after a while.)

And it's ultimately the judgement call of BTS. If you feel strongly enough about it, Tiger, then e-mail BTS in person and make your case. And if BTS still disagrees, then you & BTS will have to agree to disagree.

[ 07-23-2001: Message edited by: Spook ]

[Jeff Heidman]

Would David and Co. be opposed to allowing a mod of the unit markers for no reason other than changing it from the disturbingly gruesome and sickening dead guy to a simple and respectful cross or other non-morbid symbol of a digital result that has no connection to combat?

I find the overwhelming lack of taste in the current scheme of representing a combat-worthy challenged unit as a body rather distasteful myself.

That level of "eye-candy" is, IMO, totally unecessary. I am hoping to convince Tiger to change it to something like the afore-mentioned cross, or maybe just a simple text description that says "This is the last spot at which the virtually represented playing piece bearing only a coincidental resemblance to a unit once used in a wartime situation was last able to be interacted with by the game participant". Something like that.

And when are we going to get the mod to replace those destroyed tanks? Is it really necessary to show them sitting there with their turret all askew? A simple label should be more than sufficient. Anything more is blatant sensationalism.

Jeff Heidman