Opinions of 1.05?

[Guest]

Agreed. Pathing seems to be improving a great deal.

When they came under fire I was somewhat dismayed to see that they still died like morons, though. Ten guys, all thinking that the streams of tracers that just nailed the guy in front of him to a wall won't hurt them. Fantastic.

On a related note, I set up a kill zone in Al Huqf (a custom scen with a full bn of reds), covered my flanks, and then watched as three separate squads of red troops walked into it at 10-second intervals, and died. No return fire, nothing.

[Thomm]

Steve,

the broken LOS in my earlier screenshot appears even without the knocked-out Bradley! This should be easy to reproduce!

More Al Huqf LOS samples:

Here is a good LOS:

And here is a bad LOS:

Best regards,

Thomm

[Zemke]

Battlefront is working very hard to correct the related programing bugs, 1.06 is proof of that.

I cranked up the game again, and it seemed even better, you are getting there, although my own issues have been design related, and not bugs. I always knew BF would fix the bugs sooner or later. I want so bad to recommend this to my old CM buddies.

If I may, will we see more enhancements to the game itself, I know you have said possibly better QB features in the future. I love the suggestion someone made about making Campaigns more like CC campaigns. Are there other features coming in patches or mods in the future?

Man I would love to have a cup of coffee and talk to you guys some day.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Battlefront.com]

Thewood,

Files received. As soon as I can cool down my poor little modem I'll send them off to Charles. Thanks!

Philip,

If you hit an enemy squad, in the open, VERY hard (and US Squads are quite nasty), there is a chance that you'll cut them down before they fire back. Morale, pinned status, etc. can be as equally negative as casualties. Still, we are looking into the cover/casualty thing again.

Rollstoy,

I'm going to look into this tonight. As you say it should be fairly easy to reproduce. And if it is reproducible, it usually is easily fixable. Note all the low walls around... I think this is not a coincidence!

BTW, Charles fixed the low wall LOS bug over the weekend already. It was a fairly easy thing to address.

Zemke,

Thanks! There will be mild improvements in game features, but for the short term mostly bug fixes and data tweaks. Significant features will come out with WWII. If all goes well the changes should be backwards compatible with CM:SF.

Adam1,

Thanks! The problem with infantry is that, far more than vehicles, often the FASTEST route is the best route. Because infantry has more flexibility as to what terrain it picks it's a bit harder to separate what is "better" than for vehicles. So it's a delicate balance which, I would say, we'll probably never get completely where any of us want it to be. More Waypoints is probably the best way to finesse things, but perhaps later we'll look into tweaking infantry pathing a bit. But like I said, usually most direct (i.e. fastest) path is better than better cover.

Steve

[Guest]

Hey Steve. Thanks for answering, and for looking into the cover / casualty thing.

The thing that bugged me in that particular scenario was the AI sending three squads to their doom, very slowly, with just enough time between them to think "hey... why are all those guys up there dead?". I understand that there are some limits to situational awareness for CM's AI, especially awareness for higher-than-squad-level AI (trying to avoid the borg and all), just wanted to see if there was something in the works for that, or working as intended.

Cheers.

[zmoney]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Note all the low walls around... I think this is not a coincidence!

BTW, Charles fixed the low wall LOS bug over the weekend already. It was a fairly easy thing to address.

While not a game breaker it is very annoying. Will you release this as a hotfix sometime soon or are you guys going to wait till 1.6?

[PanzerMike]

This is starting to look good. I have not played 1.05 (Paradox...) yet, but the posts on this forum are quite positive. God knows that has not been the case in the past months.

I have barely played the game since preordering it this summer. The game was not ready yet and it seemed a waste to play the game in it's unfinished state. I decided to wait until the game was "ready". I think the time has come. I will probably also wait till 1.06 (since it will come quickly) and then I will plunge in.

It is great to see the devotion of BFC to this game. You have really listened to your customers despite the somewhat harsh tone of some of the critics (it really got ugly now and then).

This engine is looking to become a winner after all. And that is good news as far as I am concerned! Good job.

[Sarjen]

Originally posted by PanzerMike:

...snip

It is great to see the devotion of BFC to this game. You have really listened to your customers despite the somewhat harsh tone of some of the critics (it really got ugly now and then).

.... snip

Would be greater if the same devotion could be said for the paradox and Gamersgate version/patches. This was the last time i bought games from Gamersgate.

[Zatoichi]

I am fully enjoying this game once again, having left it alone for a few weeks before 1.05 came out.

I have one complaint though - I've been late for work twice already because I wanted to see what would happen 'next turn'.

BFC - fix or do sumfink!

[JohnO]

Originally posted by Zatoichi:

I am fully enjoying this game once again, having left it alone for a few weeks before 1.05 came out.

I have one complaint though - I've been late for work twice already because I wanted to see what would happen 'next turn'.

BFC - fix or do sumfink!

I can fix it for you work from home or find a job that will let you play games all day like I do here at work

[SgtMuhammed]

I haven't played a lot of scenarios with 1.05 because I have been working on my own. Just did a complete run through with a large (about 2x2km) European map. It used to not even run now it runs nice and smooth.

Right now I am running it Blue on Blue with a Mech company plus half an armor company on each side. There are a few slowdowns but it is playable in RT and would be fine in WEGO. Now I did take away all the minor units and am running it at fastest graphics settings. I will bump things up to see what effect they have.

Whatever 1.05 did to fix the tree induced lag seems to have worked.

[Yskonyn]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

You are excused, but only because you are Dutch. Everybody knows you guys are stoned at this hour of the night and that means reaction times are reduced. And that's not an opinion... I've been to Amsterdam, so I know this to be a fact

Steve

I know, I know... late, very late...

I guess that only fortifies the statement about us dutchmen, but I just had to reply on this!

Nicely put Steve!

On a more serious note, though. We do tend to be looked at like that internationally. About the only reason people come to Holland is for Amsterdam (often thinking they've seen the whole of Holland) and the dope... Now with the red-light district going to be flushed out I don't think The Netherlands will ever get any tourists anymore!

Ok that might be slightly overreacting...

(Sorry for the highjack but it was too damn funny!)

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by Yskonyn:

Now with the red-light district going to be flushed out

There goes my last reason to go back to Europe. Well I guess there is still Frankfurt.

[Dennis50]

Is K-street in Frankfurt still the place to go for G.I.'s ? I was there in 1969 so i've been out of the loop for awhile.

Regards,

Gunz

[SgtMuhammed]

Not sure if it is the same place but the red light district isn't bad. Nurnburg isn't bad either. I prefered the Ku'damm in Berlin to both of them.

[Hawk66]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

Zemke,

Thanks! There will be mild improvements in game features, but for the short term mostly bug fixes and data tweaks. Significant features will come out with WWII. If all goes well the changes should be backwards compatible with CM:SF.

Steve

Hello Steve,

does that mean, that it is planed to get the new features (CM2 WWII) for free in CM:SF?

And will there be a 1.05 patch for paradox or will there be only a 1.06 one?

[Battlefront.com]

We intend to release a v1.06 patch within a few weeks. We need to fix a couple more of the pressing issues (low walls was the most important) and get it tested. Remember, rushing the last part of testing is why the low wall problem is there in the first place We also have to allow for an extra week just because of the Holidays. The problem with volunteers is that they can't be forced to work, the little buggers!

We HOPE that changes to CM:WW2 can be made available to CM:SF customers. At least some of the major structural changes. It may not be possible, though. I suppose if we have to put a lot of effort into getting the CM:SF data to work with the improvements we might roll them into a Module or an "upgrade". Time will tell.

My point here is that if we can pass new stuff backwards with little effort (no mistake about it, there will be effort involved) we will do so at no charge. If we have to devote significant resources to reconciling the old with the new, then we're going to have to ask for something in return. Not to worry though, it will be very reasonable if it comes to that. For one, I'm hoping we can just give the stuff away free

Steve

[SgtMuhammed]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

...changes to CM:WW2 can be made available to CM:SF customers...free

Steve

You heard it here folks.

[Hawk66]

Hi Steve,

thanks for the reply. Then I just wait for the 1.05 paradox version.

And regarding downporting of new functionalities to CM:SF. It's ok to charge for it in form of an add-on etc. if the features are significant.

My fear was only that CM:SF gets "abandoned" in the long term due to the WW2 set.

[Battlefront.com]

Thomm,

I played around with this scenario and I think I see what the "problem" is. It doesn't show in the screenshots you took but some of those houses are set down 1 elevation (i.e. 1m) into the ground. I found that the LOS tool found some of those spots incapable of targeting because of this. That's why you could shoot beyond, but not shoot at that particular spot.

I've sent this off to Charles to see if there is anything else going on there that I'm not seeing.

Steve

[Ritter_85]

Well, I patched the game with 1.05... and result was I have no sound anymore in game. no thememusic in menu, no music when loading a map, no sounds in actual playing situation. tried alt+s and it says "sound OFF" but wont give "sound ON" after second try. what could be the problem? I try to solve this...

EDIT.

No problem anymore...checked "options".. Sounds were off there stupid me...so very stupid me

edit.

Nice work indeed. I tried one mission and I liked how soldiers were doing in the battlefield. Oh how one of my squads got slaughtered after assaulted a room just to know enemy was behind a wall at the street...and shot my fearless little soldiers from the windows. Or how one of the machinegun team guys tried to heal their wounded buddies..with no result.

and one question:

is it yet possible to watch the whole fight in REALTIME after the fight like we can watch in WEGO mode after every turn? At least I dont remember that being possible.

I have to play more to get a better picture but at this point:

Good Work BFC!

[ December 20, 2007, 08:03 AM: Message edited by: Ritter_85 ]

[jomni]

Stopped playing since patch 1.02. Began playing again with 1.05. I'm impressed with 1.05. All is not lost.

The good things I noticed:

1) Squad AI now knows how to hug the walls and corners.

2) Crawl of death doesn't seem to exist anymore.

(Sometimes it turned to walk of death, but most would run instead).

3) Enemy AI (especially attackers) know how to suppress using one squad then attack using the other.

[mazex]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

We intend to release a v1.06 patch within a few weeks. We need to fix a couple more of the pressing issues (low walls was the most important) and get it tested. Remember, rushing the last part of testing is why the low wall problem is there in the first place We also have to allow for an extra week just because of the Holidays. The problem with volunteers is that they can't be forced to work, the little buggers!

We HOPE that changes to CM:WW2 can be made available to CM:SF customers. At least some of the major structural changes. It may not be possible, though. I suppose if we have to put a lot of effort into getting the CM:SF data to work with the improvements we might roll them into a Module or an "upgrade". Time will tell.

My point here is that if we can pass new stuff backwards with little effort (no mistake about it, there will be effort involved) we will do so at no charge. If we have to devote significant resources to reconciling the old with the new, then we're going to have to ask for something in return. Not to worry though, it will be very reasonable if it comes to that. For one, I'm hoping we can just give the stuff away free

Steve

Sounds good! I hope that Charles does some optimization he talked about regarding at least the "move" or "slow" commands to make the vehicles select the plotted path instead of making up "their own" way...

Example (version 1.05):

Allahs Fist - an initial simple order through flat plain desert with no obstacles. Observe that it is a "slow" order - the results are the same with fast, accept that the leftmost tanks forgot it's move order after getting close to the other tank on the left side and simply stopped (dropping the order)...

The orders:

The result (with added original orders) - trick question - which tank belong to which original path?:

I really do have problems with this - why do they NOT take the plain and easy route that I planned for them? Instead deviating A LOT and ending up zig zagging between the palm trees at two different places... The two leftmost tanks arrived a good time after the rightmost tanks - and exposed themselves in places I did not intend to!

I've read the 300 post thread recently about this and your answers to it, and a game does not need "super duper driving AI" to sort this out. It takes all the immersion away from me at least. Even if I plot the course with number of waypoints one of the tanks ended up among the trees!

EDIT - comments like: "A real commander would issue more detailed orders instead of 'long' orders like that" will be disregarded An order like "Advance slowly to the gap between the trees over there" should be prefectly realistic as there is only flat sand between the starting location and the gap... It would be almost impossible to give another order as it would be something like "drive to coordinate xy (somwhere in the flat sand on route) and then to...

Regards /Mazex

[ December 20, 2007, 03:38 PM: Message edited by: mazex ]

['Card]

I kind of like the way they wander around, to be honest.

Remember, this is a command-level simulation we're playing, so it's not supposed to give you the impression that you are driving four tanks. It's designed to give you the feeling of being in command, which means you call those four tanks on the radio and say "Hey! You guys go over there!" and then the tank commanders and drivers get from Point A to Point B pretty much any way they see fit.

...and take it from me, I've seen enough armored and mechanized units moving around to know that when vehicle drivers are trying to stay in contact with friendly units, maintain situational awareness, navigate across unfamiliar ground, and get from Point A to Point B, some pretty strange **** happens. Toss in the not-insignificant additional factor of having the constant potential of bad guys blowing your ass up, and all bets are off.