Battlefront.com Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 As promised, after some thinking I decided this would be a good bone for the moment... http://www.battlefront.com/index.php?option=com_myblog&show=Normandy-abridged.html&Itemid=213 As a reminder to you guys, a dedicated WW2 Forum will be set up when we are ready to focus attention on Normandy. Until then this Forum will serve double duty for both Modern and WW2. Enjoy! Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Wenman Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Oh yes !!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevinger Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Wow... That's... Unexpected... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikko H. Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Cue complaints from bridge grogs :-) Edit: I see you wrote Hauptmann with only one 'n'. The game will be fatally flawed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LuckyDog Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Sometimes it's very hard to wait! It looks awesome! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 18, 2009 Author Share Posted September 18, 2009 Damn, I forgot to check on the spelling of Hauptman. I knew I should have gone with Major. That's one I don't need to look up Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smaragdadler Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 What happens, when I try to move a vehicle over a bridge not allowed for? Or I have a big map divided with a river running through and say 5 different bridges. I have a mech battalion on one side and give just a combined hunt order to the other edge of the map to all my forces at once? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 If CM:Normandy is anything like CMSF then I suspect you'd be able to do that. Try building a wall with one opening or a stretch of marsh with one gap. Then give your Battalion a single move waypoint to the far side. By and large the units are able to figure out how to get from point A to point B... mostly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piecekeeper Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Great bone! Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 18, 2009 Author Share Posted September 18, 2009 MikeyD is correct. There is no special AI coding necessary for the new behavior. What we are going to have to do is make it clear which bridges can not take the weight of specific vehicles. The default way, which is in the game now, is to select a Movement Command and put the cursor over the bridge. If you get the dreaded "can't move here" cursor, then that tells you there's no way you can cross it. However, I would like to find a better way to communicate this information to the user if possible without it being a lot of work for little gain OR a nasty interference with the map graphics. I suspect the way it is now will be the way we ship Normandy, but nothing is for certain at this point. What is needed, within the code, are different Pathfinding Maps for each of the unit classes. Currently in CM:SF we basically only have two such maps, each of which takes significant computing resources to maintain. That's been the big reason we haven't had such types of terrain in the past. Now we have four types of Pathfinding Maps. In theory this allows us to have other types of terrain which are passible to some types of units and not to others. There's some overhead for such things, as well as user interface issues, but in theory we have the basics needed for other things. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Does the player always know what the weight classification of a bridge is? Or can it be unknown and you just have to try? So is it possible that you have to try if a bridge is strong enough for some unit and then the bridge collapses? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MeatEtr Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Finally, something to get us excited over, thank you very much. Lets see, I spot a M3 HT, M4 Sherman, M4A1, Priest, Wolverine, and a Stuart. Did I leave anything out? Ok, so now that you broke the ice sorta speak, any chance you can give us a list of vehicles that are confirmed? How about just one more screenshot? I'll buy ya case of beer. Come on now, you know you wanna bust out a screenshot of that Panther. Do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 What happens, when I try to move a vehicle over a bridge not allowed for? I see a potential use for the IED code. Instead of just disallowing a vehicle to move on to the bridge, every bridge could have an IED-like device under it that could be detonated by any vehicle exceeding the weight limit. Ideally there'd be some chance of a bridge not detonating/collapsing, to really spice things up. Perhaps a modifier for the weigt by which the vehicle exceeds the structural capacity. Then again, maybe it's too much work for one such feature. But it'd be cool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlowMotion Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Another use of the IED code would be if one team could place explosives to a bridge and it could be detonated at some point just like IEDs now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smaragdadler Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Each bridge should have its frequency of mechanical oscillation simulated. And there should be a new infantry move order: "Stechschritt". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Awesome pic Steve! Thanks for the bone! Any current estimates on a release? Its been almost two months since Brits came out, have you had time to get a better idea on how things are progressing? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 18, 2009 Author Share Posted September 18, 2009 It would be cool to have the bridges be "questionable", but I don't think that's something we're going to do. For starters the AI would be at a disadvantage because we'd likely have to tell it to not risk things. But that's only a part of the issue. The main one is that if a bridge can be variable then we'd have a lot harder time trying to portray the "fuzziness" of that. Is a Tiger more or less likely to fall through Bridge Type D compared to a Jagdpanther? Is a Sherman with extra armor on it more at risk of going through than a Sherman with stock armor? Etc. By and large bridge collapsing did not happen in a tactical environment. Sure, like just about everything possible in war it definitely did happen. Of that I have no doubts. But I don't think it happen enough to focus attention on it. What did happen, routinely, was a tank unit getting up to a bridge, someone climbing down and looking at it, then cursing loudly as he looked at his map and found that some cartographer noted the wrong bridge weight class on his map. Then a long and colorful description of the family lineage of the engineer and/or cartographer would follow, complete with some references which Charles Darwin would object to as physically impossible The player, obviously, will not have such doubts. You'll be able to look at the Bridges and instantly know "That's Bridge Type B... no go for my heavy stuff, but everything else will be fine". Well, at least with the manual and/or some mouse pointing. Common sense, however, will tell you that a narrow wooden footbridge isn't going to be a way of getting your tanks to the other side. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted September 18, 2009 Author Share Posted September 18, 2009 As for release we've decided we're not going to rush things to get it out by Christmas as originally planned. We would rather enjoy the Holidays Our goal, however, is to have it mostly done before taking some time off at the end of the year. That is still our plan and we're still thinking it is possible. We'll know much better in a month. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nicdain Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Very interesting! And the screen is quite nice! Sadly the wait is starting to be unbearable... Re bridges: the ability to pass under bridges seems to allow for very intriguing tactics such as ambushes. I suppose that with the commonwealth module, one of the scenarios will be about pegasus bridge. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 We would rather enjoy the Holidays Oooooh, you've got a point! I do seem to recall you guys pulling some nasty 18+ hour days at very inconvenient time of the year in the past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Our goal, however, is to have it mostly done before taking some time off at the end of the year. That is still our plan and we're still thinking it is possible. We'll know much better in a month. +6 months Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Wenman Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Lets see, I spot a M3 HT, M4 Sherman, M4A1, Priest, Wolverine, and a Stuart. Did I leave anything out? New road and ground textures, building with pitched roof, temperate trees, and it looks like there is squad in the rear HT. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Piecekeeper Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Maybe its been asked before but how will indirect artillery fire work?...i see a Priest there...will it be like brit mortars? And why a black/white pic? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzerfest Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 Looks good! Are fords going to be in? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elmar Bijlsma Posted September 18, 2009 Share Posted September 18, 2009 I doubt a Priest so close to the action as to be on map would be capable of indirect fire. Speaking of Priests, notice that the front Priest has an open drivers hatch, while the second seems to have it closed. Nice little detail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts