M1A1TC Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 Without civilians and innocents on the battlefield there is no ROE. Every single person you see can be shot. I hate games like that. I think that takes away the realism of modern warfare. Please put civilians in the game 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steiner14 Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 Yeah, the lack of running around civilians and flying chicken in the lines of fire are a big problem! How the hell can Battlefront think, that an attack during rush hour without traffic jam could be realistic? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
37mm Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 Right this is what I don’t understand about some people… M1A1 TC is of course completely correct that civilians 'should' be in the game (though BFC have yet to confirm that there won’t be ANY rules of engagement i.e. don’t level the city) but as BFC have repeatedly said that... (a) civilians won’t be in this game ( that hopefully they will be in a future version of cmx2 © and we can expect lot’s* of games & modules One can only come up with a single conclusion... That the creation of a city like environment will take many weeks or more likely months of coding & that BFC will have to delay their release schedule by a considerable degree (costing them a whole load of wonga) to fulfil your request. Which begs the question… why on earth should BFC fulfil your request, and consequentially, why make such a request? • relative to cmx1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SD Smack Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 I agree with you M1A1. I think civilians in the game add a certain amount of tension, even more so than just looking for the enemy. Any idiot can blindly destroy every building on the map and then mop up the rest, but if you have to worry about civilians then you are more hesitantto shoot. You could also include something to the effect of friendly/hostile civilians. This would add stress as you try to figure out if the civilians are giving the enemy info or are just trying to keep their heads down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YankeeDog Posted October 21, 2005 Share Posted October 21, 2005 Originally posted by Steiner14: Yeah, the lack of running around civilians and flying chicken in the lines of fire are a big problem! How the hell can Battlefront think, that an attack during rush hour without traffic jam could be realistic? I *think* you're being sarcastic, but in case you're not. . . Check the so-called "Thunder Runs" on Baghdad in GW2. No traffic jams, not many civilians around. It all depends on the situation. There certainly have been events throughout history where an advancing army moved into an urban area so unexpectedly that civilians had no time to get out if the way. But in general, the seem to lie low when they have a bit of warning. While I would love to see civilians, and the challenges there presence brings, represented, I think some abstracted ROE stuff, so you can't just frag an entire town with heavy artillery and the like, is an acceptable substitute for now. At least, I'm willing to accept some abstract representations of ROEs like this, in exchange for getting the game next year, rather than in 2010. Cheers, YD 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Znarf Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander: ... I think that takes away the realism of modern warfare. Please put civilians in the game I respectfully disagree - not on game playability, but on practical grounds. Battlefront is trying to make a buck. Just imaging the lousy press if the game is misconstrued as a "US Military Goes On A Civilian Killing Spree" game. The left, the right, and the anti-American crowds would all be outraged. In short, 99.99% of the public would interpret the game as an inappropriate commentary... I'd rather put up with the remaining 0.01% of the disappointed grogs. At least they will still pay the $40 or so for the game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 It would also be cool, if you could recruit civilians to join your forces and then establish munitions factories to equip them, and build your own huge army. You would fund all of this by harvesting spice. And by cool, I mean totally sweet! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 OTOH maybe some people have missed a couple of points... 1) this is not a counter-insurgency operation - at times of conventional war, most civilian people have this habit of Staying Out Of The Way 2) Steve has told that there is ROE in that causing too much damage to the infrastructure can cost you a victory Considering these, I don't see what the point with the civilians is about. Still wouldn't mind seeing poultry, though... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PseudoSimonds Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Originally posted by Sergei: Still wouldn't mind seeing poultry, though... Only if you can kick them like you can in Fable. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Why kick when you can order MRLS/BM-21 to open on them? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hellfish Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Originally posted by Sergei: It would also be cool, if you could recruit civilians to join your forces and then establish munitions factories to equip them, and build your own huge army. You would fund all of this by harvesting spice. And by cool, I mean totally sweet! You forgot the ninjas. Noob. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 We'd like to have civilians included, but have already stated why they aren't. I don't recall any other wargames including civilians, so there is probably a reason. The reason is that simulating a city, its people and oddities, is an entire massive project all on its own. At least to not have the civilian element coming off as cartoonish. BTW, someone liked to 200MB vid that shows something like 15 minutes of three Strykers beating up someone pretty badly. Besides one guy on a bicycle and a dog there was no sign of life in the immediate area. Way in the distance, perhaps 1500m or more there was a bustling highway, but nobody in the immediate area. In fact, most of the video I've seen of current combat ops show few, if any, civilans. For some reason they tend not to like getting in the way of bullets and TOWs Now, for stability ops, where a crowd of regular people can sudden turn out to be camouflage for a few snipers... yup, civilians are a requirement. But we aren't simulating stability ops so that isn't relevant. Hopefully we'll have civilians in a future version. We'd like to be the first to have such a feature. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mace Posted October 22, 2005 Share Posted October 22, 2005 Originally posted by Battlefront.com: I don't recall any other wargames including civiliansI think they make an appearance in Point Of Attack 2? I think there's a scenario included that premises a US controlled air base being probed by insurgents from the surrounding built up areas. But out of all the scenarios provided that's the only time they are used. 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.