para Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 OK. So now I´m a moron because I don´t have the same knowledge of weapons stats as you, MikeyD? How about tank ammo, armor thickness, vehicle speeds and weight, aren´t these just a five second google search away too? No need to bother having them in the game as well, I guess. Come to think of it, why bother with graphics at all? We all know what a Sherman and a SPW 251 looks like. And if we don´t, there is always google. Well, if your opinions had been prevalent in CM1, I wouldn´t have bought any other CM game than the first CMAK copy I stumbled upon. And I certainly wouldn´t have been around this forum now, having preordered CMBN. I'm with you umlaut, I aint got a clue about weapon stats be it vehicle or hand weapons. Anything in game that helps me enjoy the game more whilst also learning is all good. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredrik Wallin Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 I agree! Its not exactly like we're discussing exotic weaponry or that the game's being bought by morons who never heard of WWII. I agree most people won't bother to Google weapons stats - mostly because they already know the weapons stats. Have I missed something? I thought we were the customers and frankly, beng called a moron is hardly the way I expect to treated as a customer. I find MikeyD attitude and comment disturbing but hopefully not representative for BF's attitude towards paying customers. Suggesting to check up information via google is not realy a good idea when create a game, is it? One would, or at least I do, that all the needed information is in the game. BR, 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Joch Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 I agree! Have I missed something? I thought we were the customers and frankly, beng called a moron is hardly the way I expect to treated as a customer. I find MikeyD attitude and comment disturbing but hopefully not representative for BF's attitude towards paying customers. Suggesting to check up information via google is not realy a good idea when create a game, is it? One would, or at least I do, that all the needed information is in the game. BR, Dont get your panties in a knot, you're starting to sound like my wife. MikeyD did not call anyone a moron and has nothing to apologize for. As Marco Bergman posted above, the relevant info will be available in game. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sburke Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Dont get your panties in a knot, you're starting to sound like my wife. MikeyD did not call anyone a moron and has nothing to apologize for. As Marco Bergman posted above, the relevant info will be available in game. You've been checking out my panties again? Am I gonna have to get another restraining order? I think maybe we are looking for 2 different things here. As had been noted in a couple posts, effective range, max range and range under current conditions are all likely to be different. If you review the manual they do have effective ranges listed which will give you a ballpark on what is probably the max range you are gonna considering using. Cover, concealment, weather effects etc will all reduce that. I actually never really looked up and honestly couldn't tell you the effective ranges of weapons in CMSF, but in the process of playing a few scenarios I found a ballpark idea pretty fast. I would expect the quality of your troops will influence that as well so no matter what data we start with, you will need to adapt based on a lot of factors and there just isn't going to be a simple answer. I expect i will have a learning curve (that hopefully isn't flat) to know how to most effectively use my troops, how short to set my covered arcs to make the best of ambush potential etc. If you are looking for a targeting bar to show you with a color coded entry over distance how effective your fire will be, I suspect that is a bit much to expect to be coded. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
para Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 I agree! Have I missed something? I thought we were the customers and frankly, beng called a moron is hardly the way I expect to treated as a customer. I find MikeyD attitude and comment disturbing but hopefully not representative for BF's attitude towards paying customers. Suggesting to check up information via google is not realy a good idea when create a game, is it? One would, or at least I do, that all the needed information is in the game. BR, Fredrik, MikeyD is not the type of guy that would call members of this forum a moron. So i wouldn't get upset. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tactical Wargamer Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Affirmative. Double plus ungood. Michael +2 Triple affirmative. It seemed like CMSF had very little data for the user to access. I do miss those lovely data screens with a click of a mouse(enter key). Heading back to WWII the data IMHO should be back in the game.....it could be hidden from the newbie but accessible to the veteran player..... Really enjoyed reviewing the equipment with the slope armour data and the all important penetration #'s. Hope that is some how included. Could that be modded? I certainly hope so. Referring to excel spreadsheets is kinda dated. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tactical Wargamer Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 1. British would call it 0.315" (like .303) 2. they, and we and the Japanese who make the most cars, drive on the correct side of the road as it dates to ancient times when you needed your right arm facing in, in case there were wrong-doers on the road. Later a Pope decreed that the left side was the side to ride on then it was the French (of course) who in thumbing their nose at the Pope changed to the right. 3. Yes the "Mk whatever" is such a bad way of referring to things. I much prefer the American set up, it makes everything so easy. I can wake up to the ring of my M1, grab my M1, put on my M1's, go out through the M1, get into an M1 drive to the tank park and get into my M1, go and pick up my M1, M1, M1, M1 and M1 not forgetting my M1 of course and then head out to the range and test fire my M1 by loading it with an M1 and aiming with the M1 and shooting at an old M1. I can then have a coffee in my M2. Now that is really really funny!!!! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Guys... you're taking that "moron" comment of MikeyD's out of context. What he's saying is all of you have some sense of what these weapons are capable of, unlike people who have think Company Of Heroes is the most realistic wargame they've ever played. Now, I don't think it was good form for MikeyD to call those guys "morons", but it wouldn't be the first time I've seen a wargamer speak ill of our twitch gamer brethren In fact, what MikeyD is actually saying is that if you're here you AREN'T a moron. So it's a backhanded compliment of sorts. Which is badly phrased and open to misinterpretation, obviously. Our official stance on stats displays is to not have them to the extent possible. Turning games into spreadsheets is what used to happen with old wargames. Our philosophy has always been anti-stats compared to traditional wargaming. Sometimes a little too anti-stats, I agree, but erring on the side of too many numbers would be harmful. Can we do more to show people relevant, meaningful numbers in the game without it ruining the game experience? Yes. Should we spend some resources on doing more with stats in that way? Yes. The next major release of CM will have a major UI overhaul and this is definitely something that can be worked into the design. Elegantly displayed, relevant to gameplay, and optional for those who don't want to see them. That's our philosophy. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fredrock1957 Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Wow, I am glad that is straightened out... For a minute I thought I was a moron for not knowing anything anyone posted in this thread... Now to go check on my Arisaka Type 44 carbine 6.5mm/h4 that my old man took off a dead one in Guam circa 1944 And thanx to Magpie Oz for that great link and also to Marco Bergman for showing that great mod... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WineCape Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Yes to Marco Bergman's Silhouette mod showing (roughly) my AFV's gun penetration and armour protection 'stats' I'm using now for CMBN testing! [/end plug for Marco's mod]. PS: I'll be charging 1 Zim Dollar PayPal for consulting fees. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincere Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Class response Steve, especially the balanced evolutionary approach to be "elegantly" displayed. thanks for keeping us informed. By the way as one who would regularly use a few more stats, I now totally get the danger of having a stat fest, and the beauty of CM increasingly playing out with some RL uncertainty. Wincape- can we download the all already? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WineCape Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Wincape- can we download the all already?I'll waive my 1 Zim Dollar PayPal consultancy fee if you repeat my spelled name repeatedly so in the face of dear Mr Peng in our ongoing CMBN PBEM test battle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincere Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 I'll waive my 1 Zim Dollar PayPal consultancy fee if you repeat my spelled name repeatedly so in the face of dear Mr Peng in our ongoing CMBN PBEM test battle. Thank you Whinecape. No problem, is that a slap in my face for a pbem challenge. Or are you being dastardly and tempting a clean forumite into a dirty pit (I've never had a warning by the way). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Bergman Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Now if you could just add in the ammo type for each weapon we would be good to go. Too cluttered for my tastes. But what the hell, it can be another option. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 The in-game ammo designation would probably be most useful 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Bergman Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 The in-game ammo designation would probably be most useful I'm at work, Jon. Got a slight lack of game to refer to... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chops Posted May 6, 2011 Author Share Posted May 6, 2011 Nice Marco. However, why should Marco have to go to all this trouble? Waiting until the next major release for some basic info that affects gameplay seems kind of crazy. Once again, why doesn't BFC just add the effective range and ammo type to the existing weapon name tool-tip? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClarkWGriswold Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Nice Marco. However, why should Marco have to go to all this trouble? Waiting until the next major release for some basic info that affects gameplay seems kind of crazy. Once again, why doesn't BFC just add the effective range and ammo type to the existing weapon name tool-tip? Not sure how much work it would be, but I think this is a great suggestion for the first .1 patch. It's obvious that a lot of us would find it useful, and it would keep the interface clean and uncluttered (though I plan on using those colored firearm icons for sure). 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Nice Marco. However, why should Marco have to go to all this trouble? Waiting until the next major release for some basic info that affects gameplay seems kind of crazy. Once again, why doesn't BFC just add the effective range and ammo type to the existing weapon name tool-tip? Because as soon as we do that someone will demand we put something else in there or demand we take it out because it's ugly. There are no easy answers to the eternal battle between information and information overload. We are not planning any half-arsed increase in UI before the overhaul. Steve 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 I'm at work, Jon. Got a slight lack of game to refer to... Sorry mate 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chops Posted May 6, 2011 Author Share Posted May 6, 2011 Because as soon as we do that someone will demand we put something else in there or demand we take it out because it's ugly. There are no easy answers to the eternal battle between information and information overload. We are not planning any half-arsed increase in UI before the overhaul. Steve Ok, thanks for the update. I understand not wanting to clutter up the UI. How about at least providing the complete information in the manual as referenced in my first post? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marco Bergman Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 The JonS Special Edition. Wounded units composited in for completeness. (Rank icons by Bil Hardenberger.) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AstroCat Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Hey, I need the game that goes with this mod! Thanks for doing this day 1 mod, looks great. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rune Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 I'll post the name of the book and author when I get home, but I was surprised to read an account during Cobra, where a Stuart advancing right after the bombing runs across a Panther, fires three shots, which of course all three bounce, and high tailing it out of there with a very surprised crew. Surprised because I would have thought they knew the 37mm pop gun isn't going to do much against a Panther, but guess not. Yes, it is an outlier, I don't think that was the norm, but still surprising. Rune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phantom Captain Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 The JonS Special Edition. Wounded units composited in for completeness. (Rank icons by Bil Hardenberger.) Make sure you designate the difference between .30 cal for the M1 Garand, 1919, BAR, etc and for the M1 Carbine. Yes they are both .30 cals but different ammo by far. The main groups fire the full .30-06 rifle cartridge and the M1 Carbine shoots .30 Carbine. Does the game designate the difference? It may not be such a big deal as there would probably only be 1 or so carbine per squad. Airborne, however, would be a different loadout and have more Thompsons/Carbines per squad. Oops, sorry, looking at it again (and closer this time), I see that you have! 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.