MAsta_KFC Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 As we all know, BFC have a tendancy to add subtle but enjoyable changes in their games which they don't specifically tell. From the CMAK demo that I have played atm, I have noticed gameplay changes. I invite you all to add any tweaks, real or imagined, so the rest of us can go hunting One of the changes noticed, and mentioned in the other thread, is that troops seem to surrender more readily. Unlike the 'fight to the death' mentality of the dirty bolshiveks (and axis), troops who are broken I find either do one of two things. Run like hell and either make it to safety, or get mowed down. The other is that they surrender. I've had almost full squads surrender and from what I have observed, their behaviour seems to be dictated by the squad's morale, global morale, leadership presence and proximity of enemy. *SPOILER* In the italian scenario, after defeating all the US tanks with my tiger and a significant number of infantry, there were a few remaining elements that needed mopping up. Expecting a grim and potentially weary building to building clearance, I was mildy suprised that my Tiger could almost literally drive through the remaining streets and the squads would put there hands up. For those that didn't, one or two bursts of MG fire changed their mind, regardless of casualties caused. This is most unlike CMBB, where you had to rout the enemy off the map when victory was near, like herding cattle. I find this change actually quite realistic and refreshing, although I did enjoy shooting fleeing squads in the back Tied in to the above, I commend the Ai for handling its captured troops. Whenever it captures a squad, it will pull them out of the front line and off their side of the 'board' thus eliminating a chance for them to be liberated (I recall somewhere that troops can be liberated, please correct me if i'm wrong). Anyways, this additional behaviour, which I didn't notice in CMBB, indicated changes to the Surrendering code are deliberate rather than imagined. Another thing which I noticed is that when tanks lose LOS of enemy armor, it seems to keep its turret trained its last seen location and potential popup spots. This is unless a greater threat presents itself. I was mildy surprised that when my tank was darting in and out of LOS in the italian scenario, the computer tanks continued to take pot shots. I remember in CMBB that whenever a tank lost LOS, it would automatically rotate its turret to the 'neutral' forward position. Maybe it's my imagination, due to my excitement, please correct me if I'm wrong. Lastly, although this seems to be less obvious, I keep imagining that when a tank faces an opponent, it seems to rotate its hull at a slight angle, as if to increase its chances of survival. In CMBB, a tank would face the opponent head on and although this would present the tougher armour, would not maximise the advantage of shot deflection. Anyways, I seem to imagine my tank facing the enemy at slightly off angles, not enough to induce a side penetration but taking advantage of those extra few degrees (about 10 or 15). Again, it could be my imagination. Anyways, I'm off to play the scenarios for the umpteenth time to see if i notice anymore. So what have you guys noticed as changes? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hoopenfaust2 Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Smoke from burning tanks. Its a great addition. When my stuart was hit and knocked out, a small fire broke (without any smoke) after 20 seconds the smoke went from a light grey to a thick black smoke. Great detail BFC. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebulon Pleasure Beast Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 SPOILER * * * * * * * * * * * * In the Last Defense scenario, I had a Sherman sling some 75mm AP into the side of the Tiger, but the round, much to my inconvinience, bounced off, but the text said "Side lower hull hit" and the Tiger, which was moving, ground to a halt and stopped showing any signs of life. I didn't have time to see if that killed him since another round brewed the Tiger up, setting the nearby trees in fire too Never seen anything like this before, did the spalling or the shock of the round knock out the crew? Oh, and, 37mm canister is really damn nice 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Faster turn rates although I couldn't really test yet since I literally operated my Windows computer from a movement box. I saw excessive amounts of gun damage, but that is for one game only. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zebulon Pleasure Beast Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by redwolf: I saw excessive amounts of gun damage, but that is for one game only. Heh, I only saw one gun damage in 4 games 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EZPickens Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Wasn't the wheel on our mouse (scroller) supposed to work to raise or lower the view elevation? EZ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordCalvert Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I ordered my Shermans straight forward just for fun. One of them was about to pass straight through a bazooka team when the team moved out of it´s way, walked 10 meters and sat down again. I think troops didn´t do that in CMBB or is my memory failing me (as per usual) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Tondu Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 For one change, the graphics are different to me. I like them a lot. The game interface seemed really nice as it was visually easy to see all the unit's information. The "GO" button is still too close to the map navigation buttons though. Another change is the sound. I mainly liked it better than the other CMs. (I really enjoyed hearing American voices.) On the negative side, there was this really annoying go-cart sound when any A/Cs moved in both scenarios. It was kind of like what you hear at one of those Malibu Raceways. Overall, a solid hit, IMO. A REAL good job guys. I'll take two. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Le Tondu Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by LordCalvert: I ordered my Shermans straight forward just for fun. One of them was about to pass straight through a bazooka team when the team moved out of it´s way, walked 10 meters and sat down again. I think troops didn´t do that in CMBB or is my memory failing me (as per usual) Same sort of thing happened to my German tank hunter teams when the Shermans approached to within 10 meters. Instead of firing at it (from a hiding position in it's foxhole), it simply got up and moved away. What's with that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I actually thought a lot of the American voices sounded too modern. Almost like surfer dudes (well, not quite). Well, what it sounded like was a bunch of generation X-ers trying to sound like WWII soldiers. The effect is about the same as when a 19 year old valley girl brat-pack actress tries to play Marie Antoinette. A bit hokey if you ask me. [ November 20, 2003, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: CMplayer ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Seanachai Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by Le Tondu: Instead of firing at it (from a hiding position in it's foxhole), it simply got up and moved away. What's with that? CMAK now models the ability to socially snub enemy troops rather than killing them. Getting up and walking away lets them know your unit doesn't think they're worth the effort, and puts all the others at the battle on notice that you've frozen them out. British troops will excel at this, and will even depart with a sniff and a muttered 'Not Our Class'. [ November 20, 2003, 11:57 AM: Message edited by: Seanachai ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
russellmz Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by CMplayer: I actually thought a lot of the American voices sounded too modern. Almost like surfer dudes (well, not quite). Well, what it sounded like was a bunch of generation X-ers trying to sound like WWII soldiers. The effect is about the same as when a 19 year old valley girl brat-pack actress tries to play Marie Antoinette. A bit hokey if you ask me. i generally liked the new sounds. but did anyone else hear a us guy yell "booyaa!" and is that historically accurate? (no, not joking, i am curious about it) the "tank pointing at last known position of enemy tank" has been around since cmbo i think. spoilers: . . . . . . . with 50mm rounds vs grants, i thought there would be more gun damage than not... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Radley Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I've only played the Axis attack so far, but I seem to have noticed quite a bit more sand than what i saw in CMBB. ...but maybe that's just me. (p.s. I think the voices sounded a bit modern, too.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 The voices did sound a bit odd to me, but I'll wait till the full version with better quality sounds to pass judgement. I like the new sound when a vehicle is immobilized. It sounds like a car knocking and pinging after it shuts off instead of a grinding noise. The sound of the clip ejecting from the Garand sounds cool. One weird thing was just after the first shots in a scenario were fired, a sergeant told his men to reload. This could have been happening in CMBO, but I wouldn't know it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 If you guys knew the combined military experience of some of the US voices, you might not think them so modern. As to the engine sounds for armored cars, those are from an authentic German PSW as I recall. The sample is a little short though so you hear it shift probably a little too quick so it tends to stand out more than the other vehicle sounds. The main tank idle sound is a US engine in a Stuart or Sherman but it *might* have been from a recording I have a Panther and StuG driving around, sorry but I made those almost a year ago and its hard to remember which one was used. As to the Booya, I think he is actually saying "Hooya!" but that actor is from the South and I can't understand much of what he says even when I talk to him today. The "reload" sound was probably uttered from either a gun or weapon crew. I don't belive infantry uses that sample, at least it wasn't originally meant for them. Now, the one sound that I tried time and time to replace, but could never find something appropriate, I speak of the bogging sound. Currently its this thick gooey muddy gurgling sound, which I guess is about right, but I never liked it as it has no mechanical component to it, which I think it needs. Maybe I will give it another stab sometime in the future. As to the weapon damage, actually its below historical averages. Studies I have seen and reports I have read showed that the average of units pulled out of combat or disabled due to damage to the gun systems was about 15%. I believe Belton Cooper in his Death Traps books also makes such claims, but I would have to check the book again to be sure. Its an awesome book, if you havent read it, you should. I once asked Charles about the gun damage/hit %'s and one thing he pointed out was just how large a porportion of a units visible/targetables area is actually taken up by the weapon system. On an average armored tank, the visible weapon barrel itself takes up about 11% of the total size of the vehicle. That doesn't even account for mechanisms contained within the armored hull or turret and the fragility of all the interconnected systems that are needed to function the weapon. Everything inside is bolted, welded or somehow fixed to the metal structure of the vehicle and when a incoming shell strikes the armor at hundreds/thousands of feet per second that shock is transfered throughout and secondary damage to those systems is quite common. Of course, like everything else in the game, we will continue to refine and advance the internal modeling of damage in future iterations. Madmatt [ November 20, 2003, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: Madmatt ] 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agua Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Matt, Was I imagining this or is there now the sound of reinforcements at the end of the turn immediately prior to their arrival? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Madmatt Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by Agua: Matt, Was I imagining this or is there now the sound of reinforcements at the end of the turn immediately prior to their arrival? Not that I am aware of, no. Madmatt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agua Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Active imagination then. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by Madmatt: Now, the one sound that I tried time and time to replace, but could never find something appropriate, I speak of the bogging sound. Currently its this thick gooey muddy gurgling sound, which I guess is about right, but I never liked it as it has no mechanical component to it, which I think it needs. Maybe I will give it another stab sometime in the future. How about, "Oh, crap!" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brent Pollock Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Actually, I've always liked the bogging sound: it's quite distinctive so you know when someone's in trouble. The one I'm not too fond of is the CMBO/CMBB immobilized sound, which always seemed like a tire going flat, which was a bit odd for tracked vehicles. Other than that, all I've noticed about CMAK is that I've pre-ordered one copy and received four e-mail notifications of the pre-order; if I see four credit card billings, there will be further communications :eek: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColdSober Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Other than that, all I've noticed about CMAK is that I've pre-ordered one copy and received four e-mail notifications of the pre-order; if I see four credit card billings, there will be further communications You must have got mine, as I ordered yesterday, and still haven't had confirmation. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedy Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 What I want to know is why those silly yanks upgraded from the uber-Grants to those crappy little Shermans? Had a green Grant totally surrounded by Mk3's and 75 HT's he suffered 12 ( I counted ) full penetrations from all sides, I'm not even bothering with all the partials, and still kept fighting and winning!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Redwolf Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 Originally posted by Madmatt: As to the weapon damage, actually its below historical averages. Studies I have seen and reports I have read showed that the average of units pulled out of combat or disabled due to damage to the gun systems was about 15%. I believe Belton Cooper in his Death Traps books also makes such claims, but I would have to check the book again to be sure. Its an awesome book, if you havent read it, you should. I don't think Cooper gives such a number, but I believe 15% is good. As I said I only played the Axis attack once and had many gun damages, I think 6. However, if those historical 15% are damages to the main gun, then CM with its model to always have the coax MG knocked out along the way might still punish players too hard. The problem in CM is that the remaining bow MG is a lot less useful than the coax, because the player cannot give target orders and it fires only rarely. Vehicles with only a coax MG are also punished hard. So for a realistic punishment I would say CM should assume a lower percentage of gun damages as was historically reported as long as the coax is always out of order, too. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nippy Posted November 20, 2003 Share Posted November 20, 2003 I just noticed that late war US tanks have "Gyrostabilization" listed as sight type. Very nice, I was wondering why my Shermans on the move were have better luck hitting their targets than CMBBs T-34 series. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
86smopuim Posted November 21, 2003 Share Posted November 21, 2003 Originally posted by Madmatt: [QB] If you guys knew the combined military experience of some of the US voices, you might not think them so modern. hmm, odd. I thought they sounded a little 'modern' too. I am not sur what that meant, or why, but that what I thought. As to the engine sounds for armored cars, those are from an authentic German PSW as I recall. Thats my favorite new sound. Overall, I think the sounds are f%^&*g fantastic, even down sampled. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.