Could we have 1st person view on CMAK?

[yb]

Right now the camera in 1+lock view is placed behind and above(depends on terrain)the unit being locked. It is pretty hard to check los with this view because it is 3rd person not a 1st person view.

It would be nice if we can have a 1st person view to check los with eye. It is lot more natural and immersive than zoom out to 2d map(6 or 7 view)to check it using los. Frankly I don't like using the los tool that much.

Please consider this feature for CMAK or CMX2. Thanks.

[Sailor Malan]

Originally posted by yb:

Right now the camera in 1+lock view is placed behind and above(depends on terrain)the unit being locked. It is pretty hard to check los with this view because it is 3rd person not a 1st person view.

It would be nice if we can have a 1st person view to check los with eye. It is lot more natural and immersive than zoom out to 2d map(6 or 7 view)to check it using los. Frankly I don't like using the los tool that much.

Please consider this feature for CMAK or CMX2. Thanks.

Has anyone ever said that the LOS was totally consistant with the view from a view 1+lock (or '0', or whatever your view would be called). I know you can get surprising LOS through the corners of buildings sometime.

[MikeyD]

Eyeballing LOS is a bit iffy, the buildings are abstracted and any LOS 'bleed-through' is meant to represent catching glimpses through windows, big holes in the walls, etc.( ) And remember, if you're checking LOS for a 9 man infantry squad spread over several sq meters, whether or not the lmg gunner has LOS becomes be a grey area.

And don't forget that hull-down, which is indirectly related to LOS, is binary in the current game engine. You either got it or you don't.

All that being said, I've always been happy with CMBB's LOS setup (though you're right -- a 'first person shooter' view would be nifty.)

[ June 12, 2003, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

[yb]

Player has experience on this game would know how to avoid checking LOS with eyeball on the house, forest or scattered tree since they are abstract with eyeball.

But, let's say if I have to check the LOS of an ambush AT gun using the LOS tool, I would switch to top-down view(6 or 7 view) that really make me feel I am playing CC. Making the game in 3D is not only for eye-candy I think and I hope CMBB developer would make even better use of there 3D game engine.

P.S. Some of the players say LOS tool is fine whenever camera or view suggestion get brought up. It might be fine for you all hardcore wargamers but I think there still alot of improvement could be done on UI and the camera view system.

[British Tommy]

PLEASE DONT TURN CMAK INTO ANOTHER 'FIRST PERSON SHOOTER'! there's enough games like that out on the market already.

[yb]

Not FPS.

What I really like to see is a system similar to Steel Beasts. Player are retricted to 1st or 3rd person view of the unit he has. No bird-eye view. And then a nice 2d topo map are presented to the player to check LOS or issue way-point move command. Player can switch to tank commander view(1st person view) of unit to get better Situational Awareness and better understanding of the detail of the terrain in 3D

that can't be presented well in 2d topo map.

I think Total War has similar system also.

[savagegoose]

hi there, im a newb here and to CM:BB, but i jumped straight into game without reading book.

and automatically went to 0 elev to check what hills , and LOS my unit had.

also moved to prospective placement areas and looked. to pick best areas to move to.

now after RTFM, and this talk about the abstract LOS. i see its not a great a way to determine los as i thought.

stil is really nice immersion checking LOS my old wayand helpfull but not definitive.

will certainly speed play for me tho

[Phemur]

I say keep the bird's eye view.

yb mentions that he wants better situational awareness. Fine. But one tool used in situational awareness assessment is the map. Crews and commanders often have a map on hand to figure out where they're going and what the battle plans are going to be. In CM, that map is represented by the bird's eye view.

Frankly, I'm a little puzzled with by the request. When I hit '1' on my key board then tab to lock my view on the unit, I can simply hit the up arrow a few times, and voila, first person goodness.

What's even more puzzling is why would you want to do this? Trying to get situational awareness from the ground is like looking through a straw. Command and Control is now done from the air, with good reason. Is it just for realism?

Phemur

[aka_tom_w]

OK!

I think this (next) idea is so GREAT it should have its own thread, (like this current thread not the one I copied this from) I would like to suggest this idea for the next game.

I would like a "special" view like click "Shift 1" (as in view level 1 "special") and tab to see a view from someone's Binoculars.

sort of like this:

I would propose that any unit with optics and magnification like any tank commander or any HQ unit or any arty spotter "should" be able to be selected by the player so you could get their "binocular" view and zoom in to see "special" things or objects.

Of course this would only be "cool" if the visual effect or the info from looking through the binoc's of that unit could ONLY be seen by selecting the unit and hitting tab and Shift 1 for that view, THEN maybe the player could see something that he would not be able to seen ANY other way.

Maybe an enemy tank that is not moving in the far off distance is actually bogged but the game (from any other view) wouldn't tell you that, but you might actually see it from Shift 1?

the idea being that the player would get info and intel about somethings on the battlefield only by looking through the unit with the binoc's that has LOS to the thing or object the player is interested in learning more about?

its JUST a thought

thanks

-tom w

--

posted June 05, 2003 12:30 PM

I like Tom's gunner's sight suggestion (and if he didn't actually suggest peering through the

gunner's sight he should'a!)

I wouldn't mind seeing historicaly accurate gunner's sights at proper magnification for each type of tank, though finding references on the sights used for Italian tankettes might be a challenge.

..Not that I expect anything like it before the next game engine, but a guy can dream.

[ June 05, 2003, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: MikeyD ]

aka_tom_w

Member

Member # 1515

posted June 05, 2003 12:43 PM

quote:

Originally posted by MikeyD:

I like Tom's gunner's sight suggestion (and if he didn't actually suggest peering through the gunner's sight he should'a!)

I wouldn't mind seeing historicaly accurate gunner's sights at proper magnification for each type of tank, though finding references on the sights used for Italian tankettes might be a challenge.

...Not that I expect anything like it before the next game engine, but a guy can

dream.

YES YES

I meant CMX2 NOT CMAK the NEXT big thing

there should be a view through binoc's and gunner's sites and it should be "special" and

useful to figure out what is happening down on the ground.

For instance if the ONLY way a player could actually see and know a enemy tank was bogged (it is obviously not moving) was to look through some "special" view 1 then that player should be able to SEE some extra graphic detail (ONLY available from that view) that would show the tank BOGGED (somehow? maybe just sunk in and stuck? or hatchs open as per the original suggestion in this thread ), otherwise from every other view the tank would look normal and just not moving.

I am suggesting a VERY selective and very special form of RELATIVE spotting that is only

available from a gunsite or binoc's or some rangefinding special optics with realistic and

historically accurate magnification (that shouldn't prove too hard to make accurate and realistic??? NOT! (yeah well I did not say it would be easy, it might actually be impossible, I have no idea) .

I like the idea A LOT personally!

-tom w

[ June 13, 2003, 03:31 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by yb:

Not FPS.

What I really like to see is a system similar to Steel Beasts. Player are retricted to 1st or 3rd person view of the unit he has. No bird-eye view. And then a nice 2d topo map are presented to the player to check LOS or issue way-point move command. Player can switch to tank commander view(1st person view) of unit to get better Situational Awareness and better understanding of the detail of the terrain in 3D

that can't be presented well in 2d topo map.

I think Total War has similar system also.

Have you tried Panzer Elite?

That is YOUR game if you want view level 1 ONLY and WWII tanks.

Its HARD I would say it is harder and not as much fun as CMBB or CMBO.

Your unit and your tanks can get ambushed quickly and die very fast from unseen threats, that you never knew where there. :confused:

Sometimes you have to play the scenario 3-4 times over and over before you find out what is killing you and avoid it or knock it out, or go around it if you can. :confused:

check it out here:

http://www.panzerelite.com/scrshots3d/scrshots.html

-tom w

[ June 13, 2003, 03:55 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Apache]

Control over friendly units in PE is crap too. Can't even give them a facing.

But, as for the topic, like the other guy said, pse no FPS view for CM.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Apache:

Control over friendly units in PE is crap too. Can't even give them a facing.

But, as for the topic, like the other guy said, pse no FPS view for CM.

yes

" Control over friendly units in PE is crap too. Can't even give them a facing."

agreed

I am not interested in a first person shooter, I am suggesting a special form of relative spotting where the player gets to see what the view from the magnified optics of a gun sight, range finder or HQ held pair of binoculars would actually show the unit looking through them.

This first person/gun sight perspective was done and done well in Panzer Elite and that was not really a technologically advanced "eartthshattering" game when it came out a while back before CMBB I think. (anyone? Was it earthshattering, ground breaking, or awarding winning at the time of its release? anyone? )

So that first person view/perspective can be done and has been done in a WWII combat game. (PE)

I am sure they will never make a First Person Shooter, I am not worried about that at all.

-tom w

[ June 15, 2003, 12:12 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

[Le Tondu]

Adding a locked tank commander's view won't turn CM into a FPS!

I want it for its "immersive effect" value.

[ June 15, 2003, 09:57 AM: Message edited by: Le Tondu ]

[Bone_Vulture]

I agree with the fact that 1st person view doesn't automatically mean FPS. But I'd like to refine the bird's eye view: like giving a "LOS indicator" option. This feature would a selected unit a color-coded "aura" that woud spread in all directions as far - literally - as the unit can see, with the colors defining the spotting capability at that distance.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:

I agree with the fact that 1st person view doesn't automatically mean FPS. But I'd like to refine the bird's eye view: like giving a "LOS indicator" option. This feature would a selected unit a color-coded "aura" that woud spread in all directions as far - literally - as the unit can see, with the colors defining the spotting capability at that distance.

this will be a necessity in the new engine, if what we hear about individual spotting comes to fruition.

[ June 15, 2003, 12:55 PM: Message edited by: Michael Dorosh ]

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Michael Dorosh:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:

I agree with the fact that 1st person view doesn't automatically mean FPS. But I'd like to refine the bird's eye view: like giving a "LOS indicator" option. This feature would a selected unit a color-coded "aura" that woud spread in all directions as far - literally - as the unit can see, with the colors defining the spotting capability at that distance.

this will be a necessity in the new engine, if what we hear about individual spotting comes to fruition. </font>

[MikeyD]

I just did some counting on my fingers and I've concluded BFC's got a LOT of work ahead of it (them) to get even a bare-bones CMAK done by the proposed release date. Unless they've decided to forego their summer vacations I can't see them tinkering too much with the basic CMBB engine. They simply wouldn't have enought time to test and correct any extensive changes!

But then again, who'd be surprised to see CMAK released a couple months late... just in time for Xmas shopping!

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by MikeyD:

I just did some counting on my fingers and I've concluded BFC's got a LOT of work ahead of it (them) to get even a bare-bones CMAK done by the proposed release date. Unless they've decided to forego their summer vacations I can't see them tinkering too much with the basic CMBB engine. They simply wouldn't have enought time to test and correct any extensive changes!

But then again, who'd be surprised to see CMAK released a couple months late... just in time for Xmas shopping!

oh :eek:

cup half full or half empty?

:eek:

I thought Dec 2003 WAS the expected release date:

"We expect CMAK to be available in the 4th quarter 2003.

Check out the CMAK section located here:

CMAK Website"

4th Quarter 2003 says Dec to me

-tom w

[MikeyD]

I'm getting my release dates confused. I thought CMBB on store shelves was slated for 4th quarter, and CMAK was sometime in September. I really doubt CMAK will see light-of-day by Sept., the Dec. released date does certainly sound more do-able.