Scipio Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 It seems to me that the pathing has changed to, but my observation is something else. When a vehicel ends his move, its rather difficult to predict it's facing in dense (urban) terrain or when other vehicels are close. It often ends up making stupid moves until it shows it's back towards the enemy and such things. To use a facing command doesn't help, since it is exectuted not before the movement commands is completed. It's just a feeling, but this seems to be worse in 1.1. Also still a problem (since the very beginning of CM) are two vehicels cross their path. I have two ideas that may help and are maybe even feasable : We have a target spot marker for infantry movement now, maybe it is possible to have on for vehicels, too? Make it two coloured, green is the front, red is the back for example. For the second problem - since we have now a chain of command as a must, all units have a 'rank'. They have, BTW, anyway, when youuse the keyboard to click to each unit one by one. Wouldn't it be an idea (in program terms) that the vehicels with the lower 'rank' must stop, while the higher ranked vehicel can drive first? Would maybe also help to end the chaos when two or three vehicels try to reach the same target... Just ome thoughts 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 There definitely were many refinements and improvements to the pathing over the course of the v1.10 development. Plenty of bugs were found along the way, and then verified that they were fixed. The only thing I can think of is that there was a tweak made to the last build and that we were so busy with the finishing touches on the Campaign and verifying other bugs were fixed that we somehow missed that something was still wrong. We'll get whatever this is fixed if we haven't already. The saves you guys have been sending us definitely help. Having said that, there's no way that a dozen or two dozen testers can test something as complex as CMx2 and have the same rate of bug finding as a couple of thousand people (which is probably the number of active forum goers at any given time). Something simplistic like Checkers... sure, but not a program with the mass of stuff CM has. A saying I've had for a while now is... if people want perfection, we can do that. But the resulting game will look a lot more like the wargames of the 1960s, complete with 2D cardboard looking counters and all of that. Personally, as the game designer, I'd rather chop down trees for a living. It's more challenging Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paper Tiger Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Steve I have the save file as I was really surprised by that too. (file size - 2.8MB). Where do you want me to send it? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 Excellent. I've sent you an email. Thanks! Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scipio Posted October 18, 2008 Share Posted October 18, 2008 ... A saying I've had for a while now is... if people want perfection, we can do that. But the resulting game will look a lot more like the wargames of the 1960s, complete with 2D cardboard looking counters and all of that. Personally, as the game designer, I'd rather chop down trees for a living. It's more challenging SteveI have no problem with that, but there's still a a difference between 'not perfect' and 'not realistic'! 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.