You win. I'll stop posting.

[womble]

How hard is it for a scenario maker to simply put a patch of dirt under a bocage break? Prob realistic, as well, as it no doubt gets a lot of transit.

Makes a lot of sense when the gap is one that's there 'to be used' in day-to-day operation of the landscape, but I can certainly see that it's plausible that a given gap is more marginal/accidental/serendipitous and so shouldn't be that easy to detect.

[igbee]

I would say this game is not for everyone. Might not be for you.

I love the history of WW2 and have played strategy games for a very long time now.

This game is very hard to get into and could really benefit from a real tutorial especially if the company wants to reach out to new users.

You are always going to get those on every board that are very helpful and those that are not. We are lucky in that most here want to help those newcomers learn the game.

You have to stay with it though no matter how hard or frustrating the game is.

[Sergei]

How hard is it for a scenario maker to simply put a patch of dirt under a bocage break? Prob realistic, as well, as it no doubt gets a lot of transit.

Errh, am I supposed to see something special in this picture? :confused: Maybe it's because I'm somewhat red-green colour blind, but I cannot see any difference in the ground tiles. I can, however, very easily see the gap itself.

[Michael Emrys]

Maybe it's because I'm somewhat red-green colour blind...

Yeah, that's it. While the grass is green, the dirt has a reddish tinge to it. The luminosity for both kinds of ground look the same to me, so it would be hard to impossible for a color blind person to pick it up. BFC might think about altering the luminosity of some terrains that lack other visual clues to make it more readable for the color blind. This is even realistic. I did some tests years ago and discovered that bare dirt was several times more reflective than growing grass. But dried grass is even more reflective.

Michael

[Childress]

Makes a lot of sense when the gap is one that's there 'to be used' in day-to-day operation of the landscape, but I can certainly see that it's plausible that a given gap is more marginal/accidental/serendipitous and so shouldn't be that easy to detect.

It's there chiefly as a player aid.

Has anyone considered placing Light Forest tiles under bocage? That way, when the hedge is blown by engineers or a Rhino equipped tank it leaves a realistic residue. The negative is that this may render existing bocage more formidable than it already is. Not sure about that.

[Sergei]

Yeah, that's it. While the grass is green, the dirt has a reddish tinge to it. The luminosity for both kinds of ground look the same to me, so it would be hard to impossible for a color blind person to pick it up.

I can differentiate between dirt and grass tiles in my own copy of the game, though, with ease. Presumably he's using a texture mod.

[Childress]

Nope, Sergio.

[Sergei]

Aha, then it must be because there is just one lone tile of dirt - which then blends with tiles all around it. A path of dirt tiles stands out very clearly, a separate tile not so much...

[Battlefront.com]

Correct, CM is not for everybody. My advice for someone who's gone through the manual and the Tutorial, but still can't figure out how to do much with the game, probably needs to move onto something else. I could stare at differential equations all day long, with some sort of Math for Dummies book in hand, and I'd still not get it. And why would I want to when there's so many other things to do with my time that I would enjoy for sure. Math just isn't my strong suit. Fortunately, this is not true for Charles and Phil

Being unable to play CM says nothing about intelligence. I'm sure there's rocket scientists, nuclear physicist, and nobel prize winning biologists that couldn't do squat with CM no matter how hard they ry. There are plenty of extremely stupid people that play CM quite well. Of course I speak of the Peng Challenge thread as prime evidence (I kid because I care!). Therefore, there's no shame in finding CM to be too difficult to play, nor pride in finding it to be easily mastered. It's all about finding what is enjoyable to one's own sense of self and tell the rest of the world to feck off if they don't agree. That's what we wargamers have been doing for decades

Steve

[Battlefront.com]

I put a dirt tile under small Bocage gaps. On my computer, at least, they're pretty easy to see from high up. Or at least easier than if it is the same terrain as everything else around it.

Steve

[ClarkWGriswold]

I think BFC would ultimately benefit from a serious and well made built-in tutorial. Everyone I know outside of these forums that knows about the game or its predecessor laments about the interface being hell.

I agree 100% I specifically asked about this before the game came out and was assured there was a tutorial. Well, that's not really true. There's a "beginners scenario", but the only tutorial is in the manual, and that tutorial doesn't work with the demo anyway. My best friend is a very avid gamer and WWII buff and he gave up on CMBN after the first 10 minutes. Only after I went to his house, changed to the alternate key layout, and walked him through how to play and interpret the UI did he bother to give it a second try.

This game is hugely complex and the UI makes a lot of things difficult to understand. On top of that, the way you interact with the game (mouse and camera controls) are not really intuitive and don't follow conventions of any game that's come before. Even guys that played CMx1 for 10 years can't figure out half of the stuff in this game. New users really need a *walkthrough tutorial*. Something that shows them "click here and this is what happens", while walking them through winning a scenario. Unfortunately, I highly doubt we'll ever see such a thing, given the manpower constraints of BFC.

I think this game would be more people's cup of tea if they could get past the incredibly confusing and frustrating interface.

[Oddball_E8]

Correct, CM is not for everybody. My advice for someone who's gone through the manual and the Tutorial, but still can't figure out how to do much with the game, probably needs to move onto something else. I could stare at differential equations all day long, with some sort of Math for Dummies book in hand, and I'd still not get it. And why would I want to when there's so many other things to do with my time that I would enjoy for sure. Math just isn't my strong suit. Fortunately, this is not true for Charles and Phil

Being unable to play CM says nothing about intelligence. I'm sure there's rocket scientists, nuclear physicist, and nobel prize winning biologists that couldn't do squat with CM no matter how hard they ry. There are plenty of extremely stupid people that play CM quite well. Of course I speak of the Peng Challenge thread as prime evidence (I kid because I care!). Therefore, there's no shame in finding CM to be too difficult to play, nor pride in finding it to be easily mastered. It's all about finding what is enjoyable to one's own sense of self and tell the rest of the world to feck off if they don't agree. That's what we wargamers have been doing for decades

Steve

truer words have not been spoken.

[Blackcat]

Well, the interface is a lot less confusing if one forgets about hot-keys. The mouse can do 99% of what is needed and using it makes life so much simpler.

The game is very complex. It is supposed to be and it has to be in order to do what it sets out to achieve. Comparisons with other user interfaces are not worth a light because whatever game that other interface comes from that game doesn't even attempt to do what CMBN does.

Would it be useful for new gamers to have a hold-your-hand-walk-through all on screen? Probably. However, if a person is not capable of reading the manual and applying what he has just read with what he sees in front of him is he really going to cope with the game?

My son started playing CMBO when he was about seven or eight, he didn't struggle with the interface then and, despite playing all sorts of God-awful games (which, no doubt, comply with the "conventions") in the interim, he hasn't had a problem with CMBN now.

CMBN is a "serious" wargame played on a computer. It isn't a computer game that can be enjoyed by the casual player. I strongly suspect BF know where their market is and know where to devote their efforts to satisfy that market.

Sorry, off on one there.

[Agua]

I've recommended the following several times before. Spend a few minutes reading through the portions of the manual dealing with the info panels and the orders, then play around with them in the game without worrying about the scenario outcome.

The camera controls are really simply with the mouse. Top of screen = forward; bottom of screen = back; left of screen = left; and right of screen = right. Right side top = pivot camera right; left side top = pivot camera left. Mouse scroll wheel affects elevation as do the numerals 1 - 9. [edit] Right click mouse pans camera around in any direction from whatever elevation your view is at. [edit] doesn't appear left click mouse does anything other than shorten the necessary sweep of the mouse to move forward, back, left right as per above. [edit]. I only use WASD, Q, E, for fine tuning camera movement.

I picked up CMSF and modules a couple weeks before the CMBN demo came out in order to become familiarized with the UI. I was put off at first by it, but simply spending about 15-20 minutes reading through the manual sections on the info panels and orders, then another 15-20 minutes in game fiddling around with the orders, without regard for the scenario outcome, was about all it took to feel, if not comfortable, at least not overwhelmed (pretty neat learning those ugly Striker things actually have all kinds of game turning goodies inside and their differing nomenclatura identify remarkably differing capabilities rather than just "another ride to the fight". Probably another half of a day playing the scenarios and I felt pretty good with the UI (the weapons capabilities were another matter).

The offer is out there. If you want to give me a call up, we'll fire up whatever scenario you want and I'll tell you what I'm looking at, what info I'm gaining from it, the orders I'm issuing, where and why.

This stuff isn't hard, its just getting used to thinking about creating "uneven" matchups using terrain.

[lookeylou]

I'm not buying new players don't have tools to make them successful. Some of you are very well aware I'm new around here and to the game. That includes the learning pains of the interface as well. I remember after demo came out, i came across a AAVR by a beta tester and saying damn when I can move the screen around like that, i'm going to really enjoy the game. Guess what. I'm really enjoying the game! Like it was mentioned you don't have to be smart to play this game. Anyone that knows about wargaming, knows bfc guys know their sht. And if it's in the war it's going to be in the game unless it breaks the game/simulation. what you do need to have to play this game is a Ol' fashion set! And some intestinal fortitude. So dumbing the game down for people that wont put forth the effort to learn the game is not the course of action BFC will take. And it boils down to IMHO to the following

The need for instant gratification.

[JonS]

How hard is it for a scenario maker to simply put a patch of dirt under a bocage break? Prob realistic, as well, as it no doubt gets a lot of transit.

Not very, but be honest ... you need the little patch of red to notice that big freaking hole in the otherwise solid wall of green vegetation? :confused:

Yes, at higher elevations the gaps can be harder to see because of the plume of the bocage, but if you look at the cast shadows it is again pretty easy to see where the gaps are.

And, you know, these gaps are supposed to be hard to spot. At least a little. They aren't the kind of things marked on any map, and they don't show up in aerial photos. The only way to find them is to go out and look for them. I imagine commanders in Normandy would have given their left bollock to have the 'problem' of zooming around anywhere in there AO at any elevation looking for routes of advance

[lookeylou]

And rather than wasting time with a in game tutorial, when read along tutorials are common fare in the genre, an in GUI screen to bind commands to letters would go further in lowering the curve. It brings what is familiar back to the user by their own hands. I played games in the past where binding commands in notepad for a lot of different things was the difference between death and survival.

[MarkEzra]

I put a dirt tile under small Bocage gaps. On my computer, at least, they're pretty easy to see from high up. Or at least easier than if it is the same terrain as everything else around it.

Steve

Most QB Maps use this method

[Michael Emrys]

Well, the interface is a lot less confusing if one forgets about hot-keys. The mouse can do 99% of what is needed and using it makes life so much simpler.

I used the mouse the first time I ran through Basic Training. The original hotkeys setup just looked bizarre to me, so I didn't make any serious effort to master it. I quickly adopted the Alternate Hotkeys arrangement and have been using it ever since with no problem. There are only a few commands I need the mouse for (in addition to some of the camera control).

Michael

[gunnergoz]

I used the mouse the first time I ran through Basic Training. The original hotkeys setup just looked bizarre to me, so I didn't make any serious effort to master it. I quickly adopted the Alternate Hotkeys arrangement and have been using it ever since with no problem. There are only a few commands I need the mouse for (in addition to some of the camera control).

Michael

Ditto here. Didn't have many habits from other games to unlearn, fortunately.

[Michael Emrys]

doesn't appear left click mouse does anything other than shorten the necessary sweep of the mouse to move forward, back, left right as per above.

You are overlooking a couple of things. If you place the cursor on the map (center is best) and hold down the left click, you can control the speed of camera movement by how far you move it from the first position. With a little practice, you can get very precise movement control that you don't get just by banging the cursor against the top, sides, or what have you. What's more, you can move the camera on any diagonal or combination of diagonals that you like.

Michael

[stikkypixie]

You are overlooking a couple of things. If you place the cursor on the map (center is best) and hold down the left click, you can control the speed of camera movement by how far you move it from the first position. With a little practice, you can get very precise movement control that you don't get just by banging the cursor against the top, sides, or what have you. What's more, you can move the camera on any diagonal or combination of diagonals that you like.

Michael

Yes but you need to keep hold of the mouse button which can be uncomfortable. I prefer only to use it to fine tune. For medium distances the screen edges are the best, and for further out ctrl+click.

[Michael Emrys]

Yes but you need to keep hold of the mouse button which can be uncomfortable.

Really? For two or three seconds? Well, different strokes...

Michael

[Lt Belenko]

Correct, CM is not for everybody. My advice for someone who's gone through the manual and the Tutorial, but still can't figure out how to do much with the game, probably needs to move onto something else. I could stare at differential equations all day long, with some sort of Math for Dummies book in hand, and I'd still not get it. And why would I want to when there's so many other things to do with my time that I would enjoy for sure. Math just isn't my strong suit. Fortunately, this is not true for Charles and Phil

Being unable to play CM says nothing about intelligence. I'm sure there's rocket scientists, nuclear physicist, and nobel prize winning biologists that couldn't do squat with CM no matter how hard they ry. There are plenty of extremely stupid people that play CM quite well. Of course I speak of the Peng Challenge thread as prime evidence (I kid because I care!). Therefore, there's no shame in finding CM to be too difficult to play, nor pride in finding it to be easily mastered. It's all about finding what is enjoyable to one's own sense of self and tell the rest of the world to feck off if they don't agree. That's what we wargamers have been doing for decades

Steve

Does any one remember the little post cards that came in the Avalon Hill Games. They started off something like: "If you have the necessary gray matter to play our games, mail in this card and we'll send you a catalog..."

Just saying

[StellarRat]

His point about the lack of artificial aids to compensate for the lack of terrain detail that would be apparent, or more apparent, in the real world is a good one. It's the worst feature of this game and quite surprising given the history of the CM series.

In fact the appearance of the terrain can be worse than being merely uninformative, it is misleading on occasions, particularly where certain angles of features such as roads may, for example, indicate a rise when there is not.

It's strange given the really excellent quality of the game otherwise, anyone done a grid mod or something yet?

I agree with this poster. It difficult to judge terrain, gaps, where cover ends. If you are playing WEGO and have time to scroll all over the place at head level its probably not so much of an issue however playing real time it gets very annoying. You waste a lot of time and get people killed because it difficult figure the later if the land and EXACTLY where your units are in relation to cover. BFC needs to give something like contour lines etc.... finding hull down positions is a nightmare in real time.