Soldiers in buildings?

[norman888]

I have been watching this game in it's various incarnations since the beginning and am glad to see Battlefront publishing it.

I have also been reading many negative posts based on the different AAR's. The most curious I find is the no infantry in buildings complaint.

In these smaller type of rural engagements wouldn't the supporting infantry try to stay away from any buildings in their LOS? We are not talking Stalingrad urban defenses but small tactical battles. Who would deploy for defense in a farmhouse only to become a tank/artillery/MG fire magnet-and losing most of their LOS capabilities?! Assaulting towns are a different matter, but it looks like this game is not that type of game at this time.

I just had to put in my 2 cents as the complaining does get tiresome. Let's wait for the game PLAY to get a final judgement.

[Tarquelne]

Who would deploy for defense in a farmhouse only to become a tank/artillery/MG fire magnet-and losing most of their LOS capabilities?!

Soldiers?

Quite awhile ago I was researching MoH winners for some reason and I remember two involving farmhouses in Italy.

I don't remember the names, but one involved an American attacking a farmhouse and shed housing multiple MGs, eventually taking the last Germans prisoners after throwing rocks at them. (!)

The other one involved heroics that, had I seen it in a movie, I would have thought the movie laughingly unrealistic. IIRC the medal-winner spent several hours traveling multiple times between a couple of American strong-points, taking out MG nests. He finally fetched up in a farmhouse and single-handedly (or almost so) held off a German squad or two. Pick up MG, fire till empty. Pick up SMG, fire till empty, pick up rifle, fire till empty...

Buildings outside of towns were used. Arty and tanks weren't ubiquitous, remember, and in an agricultural area a house might be the best cover around.

I'm pretty certain both houses above were two story, and I wouldn't be surprised if the first stories were stone.

By "these types of engagements" you might mean engagements featuring lots of HE. That may be. I hope all TOW scenarios aren't like that, though.

No troops-in-buildings won't, I imagine, kill the game. It'll still probably be more than good enough. OTOH, it's a significant flaw: If nothing else TOW won't be able to a decent job of handling scenarios in towns, which would be a real shame. The sooner fixed the better.

[ August 07, 2006, 12:44 PM: Message edited by: Tarquelne ]

[Pak40]

I agree that it won't kill the game yet it is a flaw.

If the goal of ToW is to be a combat simulator then I'd have to think that it will be added in some point in the future either by a patch/upgrade or perhaps an expansion pack. It's too important for 1c to leave out and call it a realistic combat simulator.

However, I don't want them to rush into developing the infantry AI that uses buildings as cover. Remember that debacle of a game called G.I. Combat and it's successor Eric Young's Squad Assault? Well neither of those games had an AI that effectively used buildings as cover. Trying to put a squad inside a building was like pouring water into a collander. A few soldiers would actually go into the house but the rest just hung outside ignoring the small arms and tank fire that they was receiving. Of coarse the result was that the soldiers outside would be cut down within a couple of minutes.

So, to sum up, I think infantry in buildings is sorely needed but they should do it right, which I'm sure they will. In the mean time, I'm willing to settle for the first ToW not having this feature, especially if most battles are rural in nature.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by norman888:

I have been watching this game in it's various incarnations since the beginning and am glad to see Battlefront publishing it.

I have also been reading many negative posts based on the different AAR's. The most curious I find is the no infantry in buildings complaint.

In these smaller type of rural engagements wouldn't the supporting infantry try to stay away from any buildings in their LOS? We are not talking Stalingrad urban defenses but small tactical battles. Who would deploy for defense in a farmhouse only to become a tank/artillery/MG fire magnet-and losing most of their LOS capabilities?! Assaulting towns are a different matter, but it looks like this game is not that type of game at this time.

I just had to put in my 2 cents as the complaining does get tiresome. Let's wait for the game PLAY to get a final judgement.

Two words: Casa Berardi.

But...the point has been made before, Tarq, and I'll make it here as well - Medals of Honor and Victoria Crosses are awarded for unusual circumstances and citations for same aren't a great guide to "how to make war" - wouldn't you agree?

[Sirocco]

I would think the best time to point out lack of interactive buildings being an issue would be now, rather than when the game is on the shelves. I'd like to see that in an update, but I wouldn't buy the game *depending* on that being the case.

[Tarquelne]

Medals of Honor and Victoria Crosses are awarded for unusual circumstances and citations for same aren't a great guide to "how to make war" - wouldn't you agree? [/QB]

Sure... whoops, no.

Strictly speaking, I think they're awarded for unusual performance, behavior, or outcomes. If by "circumstances" you mean the whole event, then yes the circumstances are unusual. But as far as I know the circumstances, in the sense of surrounding factors - such as the setting - aren't particularly unusual.

I wouldn't want to make the case that a soldier should, as a rule, take on a house full of a dozen enemy soldiers all by himself. That's not "how to make war" in the general sense. OTOH, as far as I know a house with soldiers in it isn't all that unusual. Probably not the rule, but not as rare as a MoH or a VC.

Is it? I'm not sure if you're simply quibbling about my use of MoH examples (You're right they shouldn't be seen as representative.) Or, maybe, you want to make the point that fighting in isolated buildings is rare and special and tends to lead to heroic behavior, and is thus over-represented in medal citations... or something like that.

[RMC]

Originally posted by Tarquelne:

Quite awhile ago I was researching MoH winners for some reason and I remember two involving farmhouses in Italy.

I was fortunate enough to meet Van T. Barfoot a couple of years ago at the Fort Lee gas station. He made it very clear to me that there are no MoH winners. They call themselves recipients.

Hate to quibble, but this is the Quibblers Anonymous forums, right?

[Tarquelne]

Hate to quibble, but this is the Quibblers Anonymous forums, right?

Of course. Quibbling is especially important now, when we don't have a lot of solid information about the game.

And good point, re: MoH.

[Kellysheroes]

{{I just had to put in my 2 cents as the complaining does get tiresome. Let's wait for the game PLAY to get a final judgement}}

It's too late then by waiting to play it, you've invested your money only to find out it doesn't have the features it needs. No refunds no returns has caused this nature in people to expect a FULL game instead of some half baked game. That will have the additional features in another sequel. Might just as well wait for the sequel then and get ALL the game for ONE price.

[Moon]

That's why we release demos, so you don't have to spend money before you know what you get.

Martin

[C'Rogers]

Moon, that was far to logical and simple of a reply for these forums.

Why don't you stick three or four paragraphs in front of it like some of us.

Its almost like the people with administrator tags want the forum to run smoothly.

[Arkel]

Originally posted by C'Rogers:

Moon, that was far to logical and simple of a reply for these forums.

Why don't you stick three or four paragraphs in front of it like some of us.

Its almost like the people with administrator tags want the forum to run smoothly.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Suspendisse feugiat lobortis velit. Nulla gravida bibendum lacus. Proin feugiat, risus et egestas hendrerit, diam lectus ultrices nisi, ac venenatis nisl turpis nec justo. Suspendisse potenti. Nam ultricies elit nec nisi. In malesuada pede in arcu. Etiam purus eros, adipiscing pretium, pharetra in, cursus ac, eros. Maecenas pulvinar tempor lectus. Praesent eu sapien. Proin non pede. Nulla facilisi. Etiam vestibulum, pede ac porta eleifend, odio sapien aliquam sapien, a dignissim nibh quam fermentum ipsum. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Fusce ut neque id pede dapibus porttitor. Sed ipsum. Sed fermentum, felis sed gravida sollicitudin, sapien pede tempus nibh, ac posuere sapien nisi nec nisl. Donec pulvinar.

Curabitur pretium ante sed lacus. Aenean laoreet mi. Proin dictum fringilla quam. Vestibulum ante ipsum primis in faucibus orci luctus et ultrices posuere cubilia Curae; Etiam quis lectus. Quisque aliquam leo ut mauris. Duis aliquet. Aliquam urna lectus, molestie id, ullamcorper vitae, venenatis sit amet, arcu. Aliquam blandit, neque eget auctor placerat, est arcu scelerisque metus, non rhoncus felis mi id tellus. Nulla enim. Cras vel nisi sit amet nisl viverra pulvinar. Donec lacus odio, tempor quis, feugiat eget, elementum nec, orci. Etiam et libero. Maecenas ullamcorper arcu quis leo.

Curabitur condimentum tincidunt risus. Cras sagittis sem sed tortor. Integer congue, orci eu vehicula suscipit, elit lacus vehicula lorem, a nonummy pede felis ut lorem. Aliquam urna justo, rutrum a, interdum non, eleifend id, massa. Nam augue est, aliquam pellentesque, euismod nec, rutrum quis, massa. Suspendisse ut velit vel lectus tristique tincidunt. Aenean at purus eget enim dignissim accumsan. Etiam dapibus. Phasellus tincidunt elit at nisl. Mauris ullamcorper. Maecenas nec mi sit amet nisi adipiscing egestas.

Nullam faucibus dui a elit. Maecenas iaculis cursus neque. Suspendisse vestibulum. Curabitur vitae velit et augue semper tincidunt. Morbi lectus. Nam luctus euismod velit. Nunc ut libero. Quisque facilisis venenatis odio. Fusce at magna ut sem sagittis porttitor. Aenean dolor. Sed posuere.

In Short, you could be right

[howardb]

Originally posted by Arkel:

Nullam faucibus dui a elit. Maecenas iaculis cursus neque. Suspendisse vestibulum. Curabitur vitae velit et augue semper tincidunt.

Good point

[M Hofbauer]

Originally posted by Arkel:

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetuer adipiscing elit. Suspendisse feugiat lobortis velit. Nulla gravida bibendum lacus. Proin feugiat, risus et egestas hendrerit, diam lectus ultrices nisi, ac venenatis nisl turpis nec justo. Suspendisse potenti. Nam ultricies elit nec nisi. In malesuada pede in arcu. Etiam purus eros, adipiscing pretium, pharetra in, cursus ac, eros. Maecenas pulvinar tempor lectus. Praesent eu sapien. Proin non pede. Nulla facilisi. Etiam vestibulum, pede ac porta eleifend, odio sapien aliquam sapien, a dignissim nibh quam fermentum ipsum. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Fusce ut neque id pede dapibus porttitor. Sed ipsum. Sed fermentum, felis sed gravida sollicitudin, sapien pede tempus nibh, ac posuere sapien nisi nec nisl. Donec pulvinar.

(...)

Nullam faucibus dui a elit. Maecenas iaculis cursus neque. Suspendisse vestibulum. Curabitur vitae velit et augue semper tincidunt. Morbi lectus. Nam luctus euismod velit. Nunc ut libero. Quisque facilisis venenatis odio. Fusce at magna ut sem sagittis porttitor. Aenean dolor. Sed posuere.

Pellentesque consequat, orci in laoreet ultricies, neque pede varius diam, sit amet porttitor arcu sem nec ipsum. Maecenas ut dui. Donec lobortis, enim vitae mollis euismod, neque orci imperdiet mauris, non tincidunt ante purus non magna. Nullam gravida dignissim lacus. Sed congue dictum nibh. Cras adipiscing scelerisque mauris. Mauris magna dolor, accumsan sit amet, congue eget, ornare in, felis. Suspendisse non velit. Nam tincidunt neque facilisis lorem. Aenean sed neque at augue semper tincidunt.

[Michael Dorosh]

Originally posted by Tarquelne:

Is it? I'm not sure if you're simply quibbling about my use of MoH examples (You're right they shouldn't be seen as representative.) Or, maybe, you want to make the point that fighting in isolated buildings is rare and special and tends to lead to heroic behavior, and is thus over-represented in medal citations... or something like that.

As Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...but any of my presumed motives appear valid on the face of it. Respond to the ones that interest you most.

[Tarquelne]

As Freud said, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar...but any of my presumed motives appear valid on the face of it. Respond to the ones that interest you most. [/QB]

Lets see if I can make up something sufficiently filthy to fit the often puerile interests of the board, but not so filthy as to get me banned.

[C'Rogers]

Lets see if I can make up something sufficiently filthy to fit the often puerile interests of the board, but not so filthy as to get me banned.

Go to the Our Soldiers got Company thread in CM:SF forum. There is talk from KwazyDog about the modifying the crotch plate armor do to it not working with the "boning process".

I believe there are plenty of comments to be made that you won't be banned for.

[ww2steel]

Not to sound like a broken record... damn, too late.

The buildings need to be occupiable. (Is that a word?) Moreover to be really cool, modifiable.(to allow use by PaK, at the cost of structural stability)

Just make 'em semi transparent. It works fine in CMXX.

Mike

[Moon]

ww2steel, the buildings in TOW can already be partially or fully destroyed. Making soldiers enter intact buildings is possible with the engine and perhaps something we'll be able to put into one of the expansions. Personally, I'd love having the 1C guys make a "famous city fights" expansion some time

What works in CMXX may totally not work in TOW. CM is abstracted in many ways. If your try to pull the same thing off in TOW you'll break immersion and gameplay and add a lot of GUI issues. Ever wondered why so many other WW2-RTS games failed in the past? A good game design is crucial and it's a LOT more difficult to come up with one and know what compromises to make and what to put in than you can imagine.

There are MANY people out there who played a 1000 times more CM than Steve or Charles combined, or played much more IL-2 than the 1C dev team. And yet they would not be able to make a game like CM, IL-2 or TOW.

Martin

[Sammy_Davis_Jnr]

Im new to this forum so i give my greetings to all.

On the subject of soldiers in buildings one would think that TOW will have that available to gamers.

I guess we have all had our 2 cents worth so i will add mine. I think structures that can provide cover such as houses either in a rural setting or an urban environment would be occupied at some stage before a battle. I dont think a structure would be a magnet necessarily due to the fact that an armour unit wouldnt just go around blowing things up and giving there position away without knowing were the enemy is, and a smart player is always trying to decieve. I think the major point is we should have a choice. This would add another dimension to tactics used.

------------------------------

All warfare is based on deception

Sun Tzu

[gunnersman]

Hi Sammy. Welcome to the forums.

With that said, I thought you were dead?

Did you get that lazy eye fixed?

[Sfox28]

Getting back to the real issue here of infantry in buildings.....??????!!!!! If I remember correctly, all of the Close Combat games I-II-III-IV & V all had infantry occupying buildings. They even went several stories high. The number of the floor was evident. I'm an old fart and remember playing old Avalon Hill Squad Leader games. I was even a playtester for the original and we used to use a floor piece with a number on it to indicate which floor each squad (or more) were on. It sure seems to me that things are a lot simpler than the OLD DAYS! LOL! So it should be in the Game...one would hope. If this game is trying to start from the CC premise (which was one of the best games ever made...I'm still pissed that it is not being made) which is what most of the Devs and people making the game have said.....then "Let there be troops in buildings"!