The inevitable 'when's the 1.06 patch coming?' thread

[Hev]

*chants*

HERE COMES THE PATCH HERE COMES THE PATCH

[Guardsman]

Sorry guys I feel I have to post. I hasten to add that Battlefront don't need me to fight their corner!

I have been a long time lurker with the occasional post, but I feel I have to comment.

The development team have just had probably one of the most hectic half year in their history, bringing a game that was obviously not ready up to the best wargame of it's type out there IMHO.

Yes, the low wall problem is an issue that needs resolving, but the game has come on so much that we know that issues like this will be resolved soon.

To quote Steve as saying a couple of weeks in mid December and then expect it to be out early part of January is unrealistic. Did you guys have any time off at Christmas?

I have no connection with Battlefront other than being a customer. I have no axe to grind with anyone on this forum, but people need to show a bit of patience. The inevitable outcome will be total silence from the team, and then more moaning that they don't respond to threads.

The patch will be out when it's out. there is nothing gained for battlefront by them sitting on it after it's finished.

Not meant to offend anyone, but I'm sure I've thrown a match in a dynamite factory.

Rant over,

Regards, Darren

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[SgtMuhammed]

If you can get an enfilade position on a trench line you can easily kill anyone inside. It is a confined space with little cover along the latitudinal axis. That is why real trenches have lots of kinks and redoubts so you can't defilad large portions of it.

To me the small HE stuff is actually under powered. The burst of a 40mm HEDP round is 5m and it can cause casualties out to over 30 meters. Currently the 40mm Mk19 has to achieve almost a direct hit and the 40mm 203 is nearly worthless.

Large HEAT is still rather overmodeled but getting better. A tank round fired into the middle of a squad should not normally cause the entire squad to go red. A bunch of yellow's and the squad supressed for a few minutes would be more likely.

{edited because I am getting old}

[ January 12, 2008, 08:48 AM: Message edited by: SgtMuhammed ]

[c3k]

^^^^^^^^

Agreed.

1.06,

Ken

[Topo]

Agree with Guardsman.

[aka_tom_w]

Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

When I said "weeks" I wasn't counting the week of Christmas So it's been about 2 weeks or so by my count.

We had a "hotfix" patch and rejected it for reasons that will become clearer when v1.06 is released. Don't worry, we aren't going to get into another prolonged kitchensink patch. Testing is going very well so far.

Steve

May I humbly suggest that in my experience here, Steve would not make this claim (or post) if it was not true and relevant.

Don't worry, we aren't going to get into another prolonged kitchensink patch. Testing is going very well so far.

That note should be greeted as good news by most.

My guess is the patience will be rewarded.

...remember, the patches are free, but when one is available for download, someone has to "pay the freight" on the bandwidth (unless someone out there knows how to get that much bandwidth delievery for free that I don't know about, so maybe (just a guess) Steve and Charles are just looking for good "bang for their buck" once the final v1.06 patch is ready for prime time. )

[Lethaface]

Eur 40,- / month for 'unlimited' (?) traffic, 1 dedicated server included, in DE. America even has cheaper options. Dont know what traffic BFC hit, but a few terabytes more or less wont form a problem.

However I guess them Ad-funded sites dont charge a lot of $$$ for their bandwith, if any. Remember to read 'powered by Multikabel', or any of that sort of things. ISP's have

'some' TB's 'lying around' doing nothing. Some are happy to share but will cut when they dont have enough. For example through gamershell Sometimes i get 1500kb/s from hosts in my country, the other day I get 600 from china host but from the same one as before in NL only 115k/b.

[Paper Tiger]

Guardsman:

no problems sir. I was only asking if it would be out before the end of the month. That's not unrealistic in the light of the quotes provided in my second post. I design scenarios, so this information is actually important to me and it's perfectly reasonable to ask.

And now, a quote from your post:

"The inevitable outcome will be total silence from the team, and then more moaning that they don't respond to threads."

I worry about this too sometime when read some of the things that are posted here. We're VERY lucky to have the game's designers and programmer posting in this forum and interacting with their customers.

A better example of posting that might have the effect we're BOTH worried about might be found in the 'CMSF is the best wargame out there' thread currently running. I am a little surprised that I'm drawing a "I feel I have to comment." response from you for such a mild enquiry.

Still, I'm occassionally surprised at the things that wind me up too.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Drusus]

At least the new Finnish 81mm HE grenade is supposed to be as effective as the old 120mm grenade. So, direct comparisons aren't possible.

I think the biggest problem with the HE lethality is that the squads are usually in the 8x8 action spot. This means that a direct hit to that spot will cause a lot of casualties if the round is modeled realistically.

Because we can't force the squad to spread out, I think there needs to be some adjustments to the lethality of the HE shells. Either just tone it down, or then make a hack where the first one in the squad takes the full force of the blast, and subsequent ones some fraction of the full blast. This is to simulate that in reality the rest of the squad would be further away from the explosion than the game allows.

[Thomm]

Originally posted by aka_tom_w:

My guess is the patience will be rewarded.

LOL, I also want to "guess"!

I know:

low wall bugs = :eek: - :mad: -

waiting for 1.06 =

I guess:

1.06 = :eek: - :cool: -

Best regards,

Thomm

[Guardsman]

Paper Tiger, firstly you don't need to call me Sir, I work for a living!!

I wasn't picking up on anyone in particular, just that this thread came along at the right time. I think most people on the forum are singing off the same song sheet ie ultimately we want the game as near to RL as possible whilst still being able to entertain.

You certainly don't need to explain yourself to me, you are entitled to post what you like. I'm just concerned that the more we bang on about "When is it coming" the less likely Steve and the gang will bother reading the threads.

Just my two pennies worth,

Regards Darren

[Paper Tiger]

Done banging on.

[SlowMotion]

Something new in sight:

http://www.battlefront-store.com:8080//index.php?option=com_myblog&show=Enhanced-vision.html&Itemid=213

[Pete Wenman]

Wow, can I say wow.

[Piecekeeper]

I never expected these improvements so fast when i bought the game...Great work!

[S2kde]

That does really sound great!

My current hardware is Intel E6600, 2048MB with single Radeon X1950 Pro and *even* if the "Enhanced LOS" technique should have an "acceptable" impact (meaning the game will running with a framerate ~15fps and upwards ) on game performance I would definatley prefer this new method instead of the situation (low wall bug) we have to deal with at the moment.

Sorry because of my terrible english.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Other Means]

Originally posted by S2kde:

That does really sound great!

My current hardware is Intel E6600, 2048MB with single Radeon X1950 Pro and *even* if the "Enhanced LOS" technique should have an "acceptable" impact (meaning the game will running with a framerate ~15fps and upwards ) on game performance I would definatley prefer this new method instead of the situation (low wall bug) we have to deal with at the moment.

Sorry because of my terrible english.

Why do people with excellent English apologise for it?

[Lurker765]

I would love to see the low wall bug and berm problems go away. Hopefully my Pentium M Centrino 1.7 GHz with 1 GB of RAM with a 128 MB Video Card can handle it.

Any idea what the new minimum/recomended hardware specs are?

[flammenwerfer]

When I was reading the blog, I kept thinking, Moon isn't usually this long winded.

[gibsonm]

Originally posted by Lurker765:

I would love to see the low wall bug and berm problems go away. Hopefully my Pentium M Centrino 1.7 GHz with 1 GB of RAM with a 128 MB Video Card can handle it.

Any idea what the new minimum/recomended hardware specs are?

“Minimum specs” tends to be a question of how much detail you want.

In a given scenario, setting “3D Model Quality” and “3D Texture Quality” both at “Best” will require a better machine to give the same performance as a less capable machine with settings of “faster” or “fastest” for both.

Your machine is probably fine if you want to run the smaller scenarios with the lower quality settings. If you want to run the big ones with the best possible “experience” then I think you will need to spend some dollars.

[Guest Guest]

deleted per user request

[Paper Tiger]

From the blog:

"We're talking about a potential 25 fold increase in one of the most intensive game calculations! Version 1.03's speed optimizations and the realization that most people have at least dual core systems caused us to risk coding Enhanced LOS now instead of later."

Sounds like a pretty big potential performance hit to me . I guess most of the scenarios I'm currently designing have been turned into unplayable monsters. Looks like I'll be upgrading my processor faster than anticipated.