Flipper Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 well what can I say that the thread title does'nt already ...don't you just love it when tanks gun's are destroyed or your infantry take's loss's an there not even in it really jive i must say just way too arcadish!..I guess they look really cool thou.Bad BTS BAD! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Yeah hopefully they can make buildings collapse in 2-3 stages in CM2. You just have to be very aware of the current building status in CM1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest KwazyDog Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Buildings don't explode in CM. What you are seeing is simply a graphical representation of the building collapsing. The graphics used are the same as those used in explosions, but the similarities end there. In CM2 we are hoping to increase the detail in the building model...more info here when it comes to hand. Dan [This message has been edited by KwazyDog (edited 02-11-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flipper Posted January 18, 2001 Author Share Posted January 18, 2001 well a "collapsing building" should'nt knock out a gun or kill infantry.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Offwhite Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flipper: well a "collapsing building" should'nt knock out a gun or kill infantry.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Maybe it's collateral damage from the shell that caused the building to collapse? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CavScout Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flipper: well a "collapsing building" should'nt knock out a gun or kill infantry.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Huh? Big bricks falling can certainly hurt people and machines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Subvet Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Why shouldn't a collapsing building kill infantry/knock out guns? Seems pretty realistic to me. What do you think would happen if a building fell on your head? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simon Fox Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 That's right after all no one get's killed in an earthquake do they. They just crawl out unscathed. Sheesh! ------------------ Muddying the waters as usual. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KiwiJoe Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Yeah if u think back to some of that war footage you often see big chucks of brick walls "peel" off buildings and land quite a distance away, like a tree being felled. I'd say if you were manning a AT gun 10-15m away from a building and the wall peeled off and feel on you, it would hurt some Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Fox, you make me remind the catascopic event just happened in Central America! Griffin. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Simon Fox: That's right after all no one get's killed in an earthquake do they. They just crawl out unscathed. Sheesh! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phoenix Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Flipper: well a "collapsing building" should'nt knock out a gun or kill infantry.. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How do you come about this theory??? A building that collapses can sure as hell injure and/or kill the people inside it. Ask some earthquake vicitims what it's like when the ceiling of the house your in falls, or the walls literally come tumbling down. [This message has been edited by Phoenix (edited 01-18-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grisha Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>well a "collapsing building" should'nt knock out a gun or kill infantry..<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Why? I'm at a loss. ------------------ Best regards, Greg Leon Guerrero Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Warmaker Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 I live in California with the few quakes here. Yes, you are definitely scared of your home/building collapsing on you. Especially if you have a multistory home. As far as combat, I'd be surprised if anyone came out in combat-worthy condition from a collapsed building. Not necessarily dead, but injured/ko'd/shocked. How do you expect anyone to survive a building being shelled by 5 tanks and artillery? Take care of your troops and pull them back from a certain grave when the time calls for it! ------------------ "Uncommon valor was a common virtue"-Adm.Chester Nimitz of the Marines on Iwo Jima Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Offwhite Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Although I disagree with Flipper, it should be pointed out that in his original post he refers to infantry/tanks outside the destroyed building taking damage. (Some of the responses don't seem to take that into account.) I've personally never noticed this in a game, but then again, when my buildings collapse the troops are either still inside or long gone. Or dead. Anyway, I do think it's reasonable for units near collapsing buildings to take damage from any number of the things mentioned above. ------------------ Yes, makin' mock o' uniforms that guard you while you sleep Is cheaper than them uniforms, an' they're starvation cheap - Rudyard Kipling, "Tommy" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GriffinCheng+ Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 OT about earthquake. I live in a piece of land where no major earthquake. But when I went to LA in 1995 to visit my younger sister there. I had the chance to experience a 4.1 scale earthquake and iirc, it was almost 2300. It was so minor or brief I didn't even know what happened at the time but her housemates, who experienced the great earthquake in 1991, were shocked. This experience still lives within my memory. IIRC, V1 and V2 rockets are so devesgating not because of their explosives, but their high speed, tanslated to great momentum, teared down building with sheer force. [scarism mode="on"/]I would suggest one reads the paper how a falling stone kills in construction accidents! Collasping buiding is kinda "DIY tomb"[scarism mode="off"/] Griffin. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Warmaker: I live in California with the few quakes here. Yes, you are definitely scared of your home/building collapsing on you. Especially if you have a multistory home. As far as combat, I'd be surprised if anyone came out in combat-worthy condition from a collapsed building. Not necessarily dead, but injured/ko'd/shocked. How do you expect anyone to survive a building being shelled by 5 tanks and artillery? Take care of your troops and pull them back from a certain grave when the time calls for it! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ------------------ "When you find your PBEM opportents too hard to beat, there is always the AI." "Can't get enough Tank?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Aitken Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Offwhite wrote: > Although I disagree with Flipper, it should be pointed out that in his original post he refers to infantry/tanks outside the destroyed building taking damage. Good thread on this subject: collapse cloud kills - blast rating? And generally concerning collapsing buildings: Buildings collapse too easily? Building Destruction damage to units. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silver Stars Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 my big problem with collapsing buildings is the fact that it invariably leads to people shelling entire towns into rubble for no reason. I don't know how realistic this is, but i don't think a platoon of sherman 75s would expend a healthy chunk of thier HE ammo on merely reducing an entire town or village into rubble... Hell, Fionn admits that he HAS to obliterate EVERY house on the map....no reason,nobody has to be in the building, he just HAS to..... I wouldn't mind seeing this worked on for CM2....especially since everyone is looking forward to Stalingrad battles....maybe a higher required shell caliber, longer collapse times, partial collapse of multi-level buildings, so forth......... oh well.....I must admit though.....it sure does look cool to watch em go BOOM.....hehehehe ------------------ "Life is pain. Anyone saying otherwise is selling something." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wilhammer Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 It was the doctrine of both sides to destroy buildings, especially when they were an obvious threat as a potential enemy OP or stronghold. This doctrine was practiced so much that American troops learned it was best to stay outside of the buildings, AMOF, they were often used instead as crappers. An order actually went out to the frontline telling American GIs to stop crapping upstairs. If they did stay in the building, it was the cellar, and the upstairs was too vulnerable in frontline combat, so since the guys upfront did not occupy the upstairs.... The reason for the order was that when the buildings became behind the frontlines, the officers and staff would occupy the whole house, and the upstairs was often for OP. Problem was, it had become the local sewer. AFIK, the order was pretty much ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Other than the large three story type office buildings, in the context of a Stalingrad type setting of blocks worth of urban streets. Buildings like tanks explode sometimes, and the collaterial damage possibility by flying debree, shrapnel, bricks, wood, frying pans, and chamber pots would I believe cause a great deal of damage to nearby witnesses. Ofcourse, someone could put this to the test. Just turn blow out the pilot light on the stove, turn it up on high, and walk outside to 25 or 30 meters, and wait. [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-18-2001).] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Space Thing Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Why then does a collapsing building have an ever expanding shock wave graphic that is similar to an explosion? It also seems like damage is equally expressed in all directions. After surviving earthquakes in California (and being an ex-firefighter), I've seen many collapsed buildings. I've evn watched them fall. They usually fall over in varying amounts in one direction OR straight down. It may be the graphical representation that is so confusing to everyone. I agree that there has to be abstractions to the game. Its just that this abstraction is a little far fetched IMHO. Flipper has a point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Space Thing Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bruno Weiss: Just turn blow out the pilot light on the stove, turn it up on high, and walk outside to 25 or 30 meters, and wait. [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-18-2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Bruno, What you are describing is an exploding building with a large amount of explosive force originating from the inside. Kwazydog was refering to a collapsing building. Something entirely different. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Weiss Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Yeah, I know that is what Kwazydog said, and I'm not disputing what is "supposed" to be happening, but I also see a shockwave, and an explosion, and collaterial damage that save for the fact that it is "supposed" to be collasping, otherwise all secondary indications are it is actually exploding. Same as the issue with knockedout armor hulls which are not "supposed" to stop small arms fire. While that is what they are not "supposed" to do, never the less I've seen them do it, and in one instance that stands out in my mind saving me an MG42 HMG, quite effectively. Manuals and rules not withstanding, all I know is what I see taking place. ------------------ "Gentlemen, you may be sure that of the three courses open to the enemy, he will always choose the fourth." -Field Marshal Count Helmuth von Moltke, (1848-1916) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Splinty Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Silver Stars: my big problem with collapsing buildings is the fact that it invariably leads to people shelling entire towns into rubble for no reason. I don't know how realistic this is, but i don't think a platoon of sherman 75s would expend a healthy chunk of thier HE ammo on merely reducing an entire town or village into rubble... Hell, Fionn admits that he HAS to obliterate EVERY house on the map....no reason,nobody has to be in the building, he just HAS to..... I wouldn't mind seeing this worked on for CM2....especially since everyone is looking forward to Stalingrad battles....maybe a higher required shell caliber, longer collapse times, partial collapse of multi-level buildings, so forth......... oh well.....I must admit though.....it sure does look cool to watch em go BOOM.....hehehehe <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I have to disagree with you on the policy of shelling entire towns to rubble here,although it's unlikely Sherman 75s would waste their ammo doing it,entire battlions of artillery would,if enough enemy forces were thought to be concentrated there.CAS aircraft would also do it,and let's not even bring up the "Scorched Earth" policy on thge Eastern Front. ------------------ Nicht Schiessen!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scooleen Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 Ive seen footage of wwII films showing tracer fire coming from tanks (.50's) bouncing off the street and buildings. The velocity of those bullets could easily penetrate walls, and destroy the interiors in a matter of seconds. Now imagine the devastation that a HE round, or nebelwerfer could cause! I say make the buildings go boom, but when they do, make em crumble, maybe spill outward onto the street etc... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted January 18, 2001 Share Posted January 18, 2001 <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Bruno Weiss: Other than the large three story type office buildings, in the context of a Stalingrad type setting of blocks worth of urban streets. Buildings like tanks explode sometimes, and the collaterial damage possibility by flying debree, shrapnel, bricks, wood, frying pans, and chamber pots would I believe cause a great deal of damage to nearby witnesses. Ofcourse, someone could put this to the test. Just turn blow out the pilot light on the stove, turn it up on high, and walk outside to 25 or 30 meters, and wait. [This message has been edited by Bruno Weiss (edited 01-18-2001).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>\ When I was a kid, some guy about a mile away from my house did this because he was losing his house in a divorce. You could feel the blast very firmly in our house - we thought someone had driven a truck up the front lawn and into a wall! But when we drove over to check on the house, it was pretty much intact - just lots of flames. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts