*Buzzsaw* Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Hello Designers and Developers Well, I've shelled out my money, and got a pretty flawed game. You do have a chance to redeem this game, after all it does have pretty good graphics, and the tank game is not all bad. Here's what I believe needs your immediate attention. #1 Ability of Tank Crew when buttoned up, or even when opened up, to spot Infantry in prone positions needs to be reduced considerably. AI intel needs to be toned down. Fire by buttoned tanks should be most often limited to area fire. #2 Infantry needs to go to ground when fired on. No more of this continual getting up and walking into fire again, till everyone is dead. If fired on, Infantry should go prone, then remain prone and crawl to a position where they can engage if ordered to attack. And prone infantry should have considerable negatives applied to the ability of weapons to hit them, even in open ground. As anyone who has studied small unit tactics knows, most ground has dead spots, where the folds of the earth provide cover. #3 Infantry needs to have a better chance of taking out tanks with hand portable infantry weapons like Panzerfausts and Bazookas. In reality, a tank was very vulnerable to such weapons if it was maneuvering in close circumstances to infantry. Even infantry which is not equipped with these weapons had a chance to do damage with grenades and such like if they were close enough. #4 The effects of Camoflauge and Cover needs to be added to the AI routine. Yes I know most of the maps don't have heavily enclosed terrain, but a force on the defence did what it could with the available materials, and often was able to conceal things like AT Guns or even Tanks. Look at the battlefield of Kurst. Flat open terrain for the most part, with a some agricultural development. Yet the Soviets were able to conceal most of their AT Guns pretty well. At the beginning of a scenario, units should have a higher level of concealment, and less chance of being spotted until they move. #5 The limited numbers of trees on the maps need to have more of an effect on line of sight. Right now, they have little or no effect. Not only is this wrong, it detracts once again from the ability of players to maneuver and use cover. Even an orchard, with its regular rows of trees had a negative effect on the ability to spot the enemy. ----- Those are my personal pet peeves, I'm sure others have their own comments. This game has a chance to be redeemed, BATTLEFRONT should do itself and its customer relations and future sales a favour, take the time and put some fixes in place. Thankyou Buzzsaw Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destraex Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 I agree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillyBob Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Forget it. These bullies know they've been lumbered with a poorly-selling turd (disregard all their lying claims to the contrary, the reviews are out there and this game is being slated left right and center), and will do nothing to fix it's fundamental flaws. Why do you think Codemasters dropped it? Indeed...think about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reichenberg Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Good and well based points *Buzzsaw*. I hope that we will see improvment on all (?) of the issues mentioned by you. That would improve the game significantly for everybody who has deeper interest in a decent wargame. Uwe Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chanss Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 #2 especially is in need of attention from the developers, to avoid having that mindless suicidal behaviour they have now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chanss Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 (Not that the developers is sucicidal, the INFANTRY is!) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pascal DI FOLCO Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Yeah I agree, but having had just a look at the editor I suspect many things just won't be doable : indeed "terrain type" is a notion that just doesn't exist, you just have a map background and stuff planted here and there... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwncake Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 @billybob, sorry i am reading some post now (hadnt had time last days ) and the only thing i see you doing is bashing on BFC and 1C. PLS GO BACK TO YOUR REDNECK FRIENDS and tell them your story again and AGAIN. iam reading post about some troubles people have and when i see your name i know the only thing you say is negative about BFC and 1c again PLS GO BACK TO YOUR REDNECK FRIENDS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pwncake Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 sorry OT, @buzzsaw, point 1,3 and 5 are also high on my list as wanted to being patched Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Werner_U292 Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 Hey I'm a redneck you bastard @buzz I agree with most of your points but don't agree that the game is "pretty flawed". Sure there are some things that make me scratch my head but I'll play this before company of heroes any day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hammer-n-Sickle Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 well then you and billybob can carpool Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K9crump Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 I would personally like to see the ability of the tank crews to repair their broken tracks. It was actually done in battle, and sometimes meant the difference in them saving their hide. No need for a repair team or recovery vehicle for this type of duty. Just make it take a reasonable amount of time and add the risk factor. There have been many times I have had a tank with a busted track that was too far back in battle to make a difference anymore, but would have been great to have been able to fix track and rejoin the battle. Mike Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stic.man Posted May 1, 2007 Share Posted May 1, 2007 CMBO was patched over a dozen times before it was deemed by BFC to be complete. They are working on a patch. It just takes time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whaco Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Originally posted by stic.man: CMBO was patched over a dozen times before it was deemed by BFC to be complete. They are working on a patch. It just takes time. Yes stic.man many dissatified consumers are awaiting with much anticipation for the upcoming patch. Problem is, not much has been said by BFC on what can be fixed and what is coded and not doable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HardRock Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Originally posted by K9crump: I would personally like to see the ability of the tank crews to repair their broken tracks. It was actually done in battle, and sometimes meant the difference in them saving their hide. No need for a repair team or recovery vehicle for this type of duty. Just make it take a reasonable amount of time and add the risk factor. There have been many times I have had a tank with a busted track that was too far back in battle to make a difference anymore, but would have been great to have been able to fix track and rejoin the battle. Mike That never happened! You might stay with the tank and keep firing...or run..you wouldn't hang out fixing a track under fire. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xerxes the Great Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 @ U292: I agree 100% regarding CoH. This game is by far superior to Company of Heros. Unfortunately I bought CoH because at the time it was the nicest WW2 RTS and to be fair it has great eye candy and rich maps (albeit too cramped and hectic). Having played both games now, I would never go back to CoH again. There are a dozen things I would like to see added/improved/fixed on ToW but it is the best WW2 RTS and closest to real-life simulation than anything else on the market. Kudos to developers and QA given the tight resources they had. This will bode well on their resume! Over and Out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seppDieter Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Originally posted by K9crump: I would personally like to see the ability of the tank crews to repair their broken tracks. It was actually done in battle,... lol you have any idea how many tons each set of tracks weights? you need two persons to carry only one link of a tiger or panther tank. and mostly its the front of the track that breaks, so before the driver realises whats happened, he has probably already thrown the entire track in front of the tank. even a maintenence crew needs several hours to fix tracks. a new cool option might be to order the fleeing tank crew to set the tank on fire, or blowing it up. so the enemy cant re-use it. that was a common practice Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jippo Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Originally posted by seppDieter: ]lol you have any idea how many tons each set of tracks weights? you need two persons to carry only one link of a tiger or panther tank. and mostly its the front of the track that breaks, so before the driver realises whats happened, he has probably already thrown the entire track in front of the tank. even a maintenence crew needs several hours to fix tracks. [/QB]It is a about half an hour job for the tank crew to put the track on depending on the design. Track is not lifted on, but pulled by the engine. -jippo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Having changed tracks myself (It SUCKS), and those being much simpler tracks than the Germans had, I can tell you that the chances of this happening on a hot battlefield are so far out as to it not worth the time to code it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
seppDieter Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Originally posted by Jippo: [/QB]It is a about half an hour job for the tank crew to put the track on depending on the design. Track is not lifted on, but pulled by the engine. -jippo [/QB] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jippo Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 I've read multiple accounts from WW2 of crewmen pulling tracks on under fire, so it is possible in certain conditions. But I don't find it an important addition to gameplay. Timescale of the battles most often doesn't allow enough time to pull on the track anyway. -jippo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoaN Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Originally posted by K9crump: I would personally like to see the ability of the tank crews to repair their broken tracks. It was actually done in battle, and sometimes meant the difference in them saving their hide. No need for a repair team or recovery vehicle for this type of duty. Just make it take a reasonable amount of time and add the risk factor. There have been many times I have had a tank with a busted track that was too far back in battle to make a difference anymore, but would have been great to have been able to fix track and rejoin the battle. Mike According to information from veterans of WW2 it took about 40 minutes and full crew to repair tracks in perfect conditions. That’s why it’s not reasonable to make this feature available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
K9crump Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 Ok, I get it. Just that I had a tank that it could have been done to and it would have been nice to have that tank back later in the battle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
molo Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 SoaN, some of these battles take 2 hours to track down the last surviving infantrymen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChrisND Posted May 2, 2007 Share Posted May 2, 2007 I'm not sure Molo, could you exaggerate that just a little bit more? I think 3 hours would sound quite nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts