Chad Harrison Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Great to see another AAR, especially a QB one. Thanks for putting it together for us! Three quick questions about the new QB system: 1. Is there any kind of point reduction for elements that belong to a larger formation? ie. Do I get a discount for how much a vanilla rifle squad costs if its in a larger formation as opposed to purchased as a single unit? Or is the cost of a rifle squad always the same? (obviously with the same experience, motivation, ect.) 2. Is there an option for different levels of ammo for QBs? Whether as a setting upfront, or a purchased option? I did not see one in the screens so I assume 'no' to both. 3. Is there an option for depletion in QB's? I know its ingame for scenarios, but is it for QB's? Thanks in advance! Chad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bil Hardenberger Posted March 19, 2011 Author Share Posted March 19, 2011 Opening Moves PART 2 (here is the link to Part 1: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1238847&postcount=100 ) 2nd Platoon: From those screens you should be able to get tank commander (TC) names, experience, command and control (C2) status and type of comms to its leader (on the left of the UI you will see a radio and an eye icons, these tell you that that tank is in radio communications and can see his Platoon leader (PL), so has two types of command links active), rank, etc. I’ll let other BETA testers jump in and answer any specific question on the UI so I can concentrate on the battle itself. I am going to be giving a minute by minute account of this action as you will see it will become important as it unfolds. Minute 1 You can see my initial orders in the screens above, at the end of the first minute the positions are as follows: 1st Platoon: No contact. Tanks 1 and 2 have taken up hull down positions and are the blocking element and providing overwatch for tanks 3 and 4. Tanks 3 and 4 are driving through the blocking element and still moving towards their final positions in the tree line as indicated earlier. There is a beautiful ridge that 1st Platoon tanks take up some nice hull down positions on: 2nd Platoon: No contact. Tanks 1 and 2 are in their final positions and watching for any movement down AA1. The rest of the tanks in the force remain in their start positions. They will not move out until I see how Warren is maneuvering his force and can make some informed decisions. Next: First Contact! First Blood! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Ahhhh... skirt armor... I never tire of looking at it Chad, 1. Is there any kind of point reduction for elements that belong to a larger formation? ie. Do I get a discount for how much a vanilla rifle squad costs if its in a larger formation as opposed to purchased as a single unit? Or is the cost of a rifle squad always the same? (obviously with the same experience, motivation, ect.) Yes, similar to CMx1 you get a point reduction when you buy "in bulk". It's not huge, but we all know that often times a few points separates us from that last HMG we wanted to get. 2. Is there an option for different levels of ammo for QBs? Whether as a setting upfront, or a purchased option? I did not see one in the screens so I assume 'no' to both. No, we do not allow people to mess with the ammo levels for QBs. That's something that can be manipulated for Scenarios only. 3. Is there an option for depletion in QB's? I know its ingame for scenarios, but is it for QB's? No, not yet. There were a lot of tricky balancing issues we had to contend with to make the headcount reduction feature work reasonably well for CMx1. We definitely didn't want to put it into CMx2 until we were sure those issues were reasonably addressed. Frankly, we didn't have the time/energy to focus on it for the initial release. Steve Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Looks absolutely gorgeous (of course). However, I also was surprised that the default gives everyone the same ammo levels. I liked the CM1 default that gave all vehicles varying ammo (as in RL). There also seems to be an opportunity for each crew member to have his own abilities, the gunner, driver etc. Would that be something that could happen in the future? It's the sort of thing that enables players to ID with and get emotional attachment to individual units. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredrock1957 Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 A quick and possible dumb question maybe someone can answer for me... on the User Interface in the Command and Control area (C2 in CM:SF) I see and understand the Eye Contact and Radio Graphic, but what is the Soldier Graphic in the HQ unit stand for... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GSX Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Screenshots do indeed look very good. The interface looks better than CMSF, more akin to the nice one in CMA. One thing though, why persist with the damned awful looking 'Green' weapons icons, cant you just let scipio do you some to ship with the game? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chad Harrison Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Steve Thanks for the quick reply Steve. Obviously it all looks amazing. If all CM:BN was the QB system, I would not say a word of complaint. Will all those options and variances, you could play that forever. Not to mention PBEM Chad 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JasonC Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Fredrock - I read that as "I don't need to *see* the leader, I *am* the leader." 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt. Smash Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Bill, I love the introduction to your forces. Thanks for that detail. I don't see an obvious difference between the Pz IVH (late) and Pz IVH (early) models based on the control panels. Can someone elaborate on the differences? Bob 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sergei Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 I don't see an obvious difference between the Pz IVH (late) and Pz IVH (early) models based on the control panels. Can someone elaborate on the differences? Bob I don't know about Ausf H, but some of the late war models had very subtle differences such as the commander's cupola not being able to rotate due to a shortage on ball bearings. It could be something like that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeyD Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Looking at the screenshots I think "Ooooh, so that's what the game looks like with a decent graphics card!" 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pvt. Ryan Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 A quick and possible dumb question maybe someone can answer for me... on the User Interface in the Command and Control area (C2 in CM:SF) I see and understand the Eye Contact and Radio Graphic, but what is the Soldier Graphic in the HQ unit stand for... The unit has visual contact with its commander, but it is further away. The eye contact, at least in CMSF, means the two units are close enough for verbal communication, while the soldier graphic means they are close enough for visual communication, i.e. hand signals. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Since you show Tanks 1 and 2 taking hull-down positions, that raises a question: Did you give them some sort of "seek hull down" order in that vicinity of the overwatch location? Or did you pre-scout the terrain in your preview QB mode with a ground-level view to find this little ridge, and then order those tanks to that specific spot manually? I would prefer the automatic hull-down, since getting tanks into just the right spot can be very fiddly (and often times the game units can see and "know" their own microterrain better than we the players do). In so many other games (AP:K, PC, TOW2), I've gotten very frustrated trying to get tanks into hull-down positions, only to discover that I've overdone it and they can't even see over the ridge to shoot. Then I tweak and tweak to get them a LOS, only to accidentally expose them and watch as they take a fatal shot to the hull or belly. These sorts of experiences can spoil an ordinarily good game, since it's something the tank crews themselves should have the AI to be able to do without a lot of micromanagement by the player. Hope this is true for CMBN! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Broadsword56 Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 I like the variations in the way the different tanks' skirt armor is displayed (some missing panels, not all the panels perfectly aligned, etc.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Col Deadmarsh Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Steve, Going back to the purchase screen for a second...in addition to there being a rarity point pool for units, is there also a rarity point system in place for experience? I would think it's just as gamey to cherry-pick an all 'crack' force when those never existed. Are there measures in place to prevent players from doing this? Also, if the computer selects your force, will you get a mix of regular and veteran units with the occasional 'crack' player thrown in? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Crowley Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 No, we do not allow people to mess with the ammo levels for QBs. That's something that can be manipulated for Scenarios only. Steve If I recall correctly, and I may not be, didn't ammo mixes (i.e. AP, APC, HE etc.) come on a random or semi-random basis in CMx1 QBs? So, one of the same type of vehicle would have 40 HE and 40 AP; whereas another might have 45 HE and 35 AP. Is this really not possible in CMBN? On the face of it, doesn't seem a major piece of coding and gives a bit of individuality to each vehicle, in a realistic way. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfhand Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Since you show Tanks 1 and 2 taking hull-down positions, that raises a question: Did you give them some sort of "seek hull down" order in that vicinity of the overwatch location? Or did you pre-scout the terrain in your preview QB mode with a ground-level view to find this little ridge, and then order those tanks to that specific spot manually? I would prefer the automatic hull-down, since getting tanks into just the right spot can be very fiddly (and often times the game units can see and "know" their own microterrain better than we the players do). In so many other games (AP:K, PC, TOW2), I've gotten very frustrated trying to get tanks into hull-down positions, only to discover that I've overdone it and they can't even see over the ridge to shoot. Then I tweak and tweak to get them a LOS, only to accidentally expose them and watch as they take a fatal shot to the hull or belly. These sorts of experiences can spoil an ordinarily good game, since it's something the tank crews themselves should have the AI to be able to do without a lot of micromanagement by the player. Hope this is true for CMBN! With the enhanced spotting of CMx2 what is hull down in regard to one location might not be hull down in regard to another which makes a "seek hull down" command difficult to impliment. The way I seek hull down in CMx2 is to plot my waypoint and then click on it and issue a target command without selecting a target (this is the CMx2 LOS tool). This lets me know if I am hull down in regard to my target area or not (it is also why I'd like movable waypoints! because I frequently waste time plotting my new "trial waypoint" to the same action tile rather than a different one - hopefully this not being the desert will help with that). This method works really well and, IMHO, no hull down command is necessary. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PaulMG Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 With the enhanced spotting of CMx2 what is hull down in regard to one location might not be hull down in regard to another which makes a "seek hull down" command difficult to impliment. The way I seek hull down in CMx2 is to plot my waypoint and then click on it and issue a target command without selecting a target (this is the CMx2 LOS tool). This lets me know if I am hull down in regard to my target area or not (it is also why I'd like movable waypoints! because I frequently waste time plotting my new "trial waypoint" to the same action tile rather than a different one - hopefully this not being the desert will help with that). This method works really well and, IMHO, no hull down command is necessary. While some will say that is not realistic, this is a game and to me it abstracts a recon troop or crew checking the area. I suppose it gets tedious if you have a lot of units. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 ...what is hull down in regard to one location might not be hull down in regard to another which makes a "seek hull down" command difficult to impliment. Good point. Seems to me that overall the best course is to reconnoiter the ground visually and set the final position manually. You have to accept your chances the same way real life tank crews did. I doubt that they were able to find positions that gave them ideal cover from every possible angle either. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gryphonne Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Could you maybe also show screenshots of the tank's components and protection? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVulture Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 With the enhanced spotting of CMx2 what is hull down in regard to one location might not be hull down in regard to another which makes a "seek hull down" command difficult to impliment. That was equally true of hull down in CMx1 too. There is no such thing as an absolute hull down position, just being hull down relative to some other point. The hull down command in CMx1 meant you selected a target point, and the vehicle would drive forwards until it found a hull down position relative to that point (and if it never did, would keep on going with typically suicidal results). I can't see that the spotting system in CMx2 would prevent essentially the same command being implemented once the coders have chance to get around to it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 I would have thought that the tanks in hull down positions would have had their main guns slightly depressed, so as to align them with the terrain. I always remember in CM1 the delay, caused by barrel alignment, could prove fatal! Would it be better to have a raised hand, instead of a soldier for the third command icon, who knows for early to mid-war Soviets it could be clutching a flag! Otherwise, screenshots are quite amazing, I've just sat and savoured the images combined with the info screens, thinking wow, how far Battlefront have come. Thanks to all your hard work and curse you for making this game even more addictive! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfhand Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 That was equally true of hull down in CMx1 too. There is no such thing as an absolute hull down position, just being hull down relative to some other point. The hull down command in CMx1 meant you selected a target point, and the vehicle would drive forwards until it found a hull down position relative to that point (and if it never did, would keep on going with typically suicidal results). I can't see that the spotting system in CMx2 would prevent essentially the same command being implemented once the coders have chance to get around to it. Well, it has been so long since I've played any of the CMx1 games that I have forgotten the details of the UI I guess. However, my belief that a "hull down" command is unnecessary is unchanged since I've never had a problem achieving hull down in CMx2 - with the exception of the M707(?) which has no targetting feature and therefore no LOS tool. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melnibone Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Certainly never used the hull down command in CMx1 when playing against humans. Better results could always be gained by manually positioning. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Instigator Posted March 19, 2011 Share Posted March 19, 2011 Hi all, Did anyone notice the snake looking shortcuts through the main areas of trees from the overhead view? Knowing this is a ME type of battle, I might send a tank or two through and only pop out when an ambush opportunity arises. Just say'n. Kurt 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.