poesel Posted July 31, 2011 Share Posted July 31, 2011 I woud like to have a fourth tree option: Only tree stumps around my units. Similar to 'only stumps around viewpoint' but around all friendly units, too. Reason: I mainly use the treestump option but more often than not the unit I want to look at is in the woods and I'm just too far away. So I have to move there to get rid of the trees. IMHO that could as well be the standard behaviour for tree stump view. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 There is apparently no way to preview QB maps in full screen 3D and the thumbnails don't really show that much. It would be great if you could click on the thumbnail and get taken directly to the map, scrollable in 3D, before you had to accept it. That way, you could reject it if you didn't fancy it and select another without having to go through the entire forces selection process, which is tedious in any case. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJFHutch Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 An "advance to hull down" command would be nice, so tanks would advance until they could see beyond a hill and stop, you might have to select the command and then click the point you want to be able to view and the tank/infantry would advance until they had that in sight. You could quickly move 10 or more units into fairly reasonable positions without having to eyeball each and every one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 An "advance to hull down" command would be nice, so tanks would advance until they could see beyond a hill and stop, you might have to select the command and then click the point you want to be able to view and the tank/infantry would advance until they had that in sight. You could quickly move 10 or more units into fairly reasonable positions without having to eyeball each and every one. Might not be all that simple. Take a tank for starters. Should it halt when the TC can see the point with his head out the turret? Or should it drive farther until the gunner can see it? And with men on foot, are they to stop when they can see the point while standing? Or kneeling? Or prone? And what if the ground is uneven so that some members of the squad/team can see it while others cannot? There may be solutions to all these problems, but finding them might not be such a snap. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LJFHutch Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 Hmm, good points, though for tanks you could use the same method as the target command, infantry ... yeah, not sure. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan8325 Posted August 1, 2011 Share Posted August 1, 2011 Might not be all that simple. Take a tank for starters. Should it halt when the TC can see the point with his head out the turret? Or should it drive farther until the gunner can see it? And with men on foot, are they to stop when they can see the point while standing? Or kneeling? Or prone? And what if the ground is uneven so that some members of the squad/team can see it while others cannot? There may be solutions to all these problems, but finding them might not be such a snap. Michael I believe vehicles in CM still have just one point of LOS generation in the center, regardless of number of crew and where sights are located. This is why vehicles in CMSF did not have working mast sensors, making many scout and ATGM vehicles virtually worthless. Not a big problem in CMBN IMO, but needs to be fixed for CMSF2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I believe vehicles in CM still have just one point of LOS generation in the center, regardless of number of crew and where sights are located. I have reason to doubt that that is still the case in BN; I regard the question as open until someone at BFC addresses the matter. But regardless of what the present situation is, the theoretical problem will remain. Either it has to be resolved or shrugged off, but shrugging off seems to be to fall back on the kind of abstraction that BFC is trying to avoid. Interesting to see how this all falls out. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lt Belenko Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I woud like to have a fourth tree option: Only tree stumps around my units. Similar to 'only stumps around viewpoint' but around all friendly units, too. Reason: I mainly use the treestump option but more often than not the unit I want to look at is in the woods and I'm just too far away. So I have to move there to get rid of the trees. IMHO that could as well be the standard behavior for tree stump view. I'm thinking only tree stumps every where. This setting just like No Trees in CMx1 would not increase spotting ability just open up the map and let you know where the trees really are. In CMx1 with no trees selected the ground type still indicated the trees were there. In CMBN with no trees you really don't know where they really are - not good. Stumps local is good but everywhere or all a round all of your own troops would be better. Maybe making this feature available on the lower settings but not on Elite and Iron 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wonderjeep Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 I have to chime in. I have read many threads that proclaim how horrible the [?] markers are. I love them. I know exactly what information each unit has. In addition, the markers themselves give information. Seeing a trail of markers getting dimmer and dimmer shows me the movement of the enemy. I know where and when enemy units were sited in different places. Or if the markers keep appearing in the same area then I have a good idea the enemy is holed up at that spot. The C2 system is wonderful. I have never seen another game achieve this in a meaningful way. Don't change a thing. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen Von Television Posted August 2, 2011 Author Share Posted August 2, 2011 Again I underscore that IMO the C2 as it is depicted in the GUI is a bit clumsy and not efficient: I believe to use the floating icons instead of the connecting rods may be a good choice to depict if a unit is in contact with his commanding unit, or if it's out of range; if I double click on an HQ unit (or single click on its floating icon) all its dependent units highlight as well, so it's just a case of color coding their floating icons to depict their C2 state. The [?] markers have been always present in CM games, but now they are a bit overwhelming and confusing since sometime you may run to fight one of them, only to discover that this marker is present only for the unit selected, since all other units have already cleared that spot (so user wise it's again a matter of clicking away all the nearby units to check if that spot is actually still a [?] marker or if it is cleared already): I understand it is a more realistic way to represent the mechanics of spotting and identifying enemy units on the battlefield, but I believe it as a bit overworked; I've seen a tank surrounded by his own infantry units still hunting plenty of those markers even if all the grunts few meters away knew already those spots to be clear. It's just a case of either implementing the communications between units, and no matter if they belong to different units, or to reevaluate the point of view of the player economizing on mouse clicks. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ClarkWGriswold Posted August 2, 2011 Share Posted August 2, 2011 There is apparently no way to preview QB maps in full screen 3D and the thumbnails don't really show that much. It would be great if you could click on the thumbnail and get taken directly to the map, scrollable in 3D, before you had to accept it. That way, you could reject it if you didn't fancy it and select another without having to go through the entire forces selection process, which is tedious in any case. MichaelEven if there's no 3D map preview option, I think an overhead view of the map would be much more helpful. Showing me 100 yards of road and some trees doesn't really do much to let me know what the map actually looks like, how much tree coverage there is, how many buildings there are, how many victory locations, etc. I'd much, much rather have an overhead view that shows a good overview of the ENTIRE map than a pretty picture of one small section. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan8325 Posted August 3, 2011 Share Posted August 3, 2011 I have reason to doubt that that is still the case in BN; I regard the question as open until someone at BFC addresses the matter. But regardless of what the present situation is, the theoretical problem will remain. Either it has to be resolved or shrugged off, but shrugging off seems to be to fall back on the kind of abstraction that BFC is trying to avoid. Interesting to see how this all falls out. Michael Fortunately this is easy to test with a little moving of vehicles around bumps in the terrain, in different states of buttoned/unbuttoned, to see if there are differences in LOS to various points on the map. I don't have the time to do this now. But maybe on the weekend. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketman Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 In order to make viewing the action easier I would like a keyboard keys similar to view lock on unit (tab - behind unit), but also to the front of the unit (snap close, not like "V") as well as 90 degrees to the right and left of the unit. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erwin Posted August 9, 2011 Share Posted August 9, 2011 "...color coding their floating icons to depict their C2 state." +1 to that. An elegant solution to speed up the C2 calculations one has to make. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 "...color coding their floating icons to depict their C2 state." +1 to that. An elegant solution to speed up the C2 calculations one has to make. I'd rather it showed their ammo state... I can at least roughly guess who's in C2 from looking at a platoon's bright icons. For ammo I have to click on every one. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 Close Combat had a system where you could choose the meaning associated with the colour of the unit icon: C2, ammo, morale, cover. Any chance of something along these lines? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 ...color coding their floating icons to depict their C2 state... No way. I like the fact that the icon colour coding are kept simple. The only highlighting I want is the way it is now: showing who on our side can see an enemy unit and showing the rest of the teams in the platoon. More clutter will not help. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen Von Television Posted August 10, 2011 Author Share Posted August 10, 2011 The highlight of units to show those who can spot the enemy is OK, and wouldn't clutter anything at all if at the same time you can see i.e. a black floating icon for the squads out of C2. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 The highlight of units to show those who can spot the enemy is OK, and wouldn't clutter anything at all if at the same time you can see i.e. a black floating icon for the squads out of C2. So which floater gets priority for the unit that is out of C2 but still in the platoon? I'd rather it was a toggle: Default as it is now > low ammo > out of C2. Any time you click on an enemy unit it shows bright for those who can see it. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted August 10, 2011 Share Posted August 10, 2011 I think messing around with the floating icons is a subject that should be approached cautiously. There may be things that can be done to improve them and make them more functional, but not everyone has the same pet idea about that, and there is a real risk of information overload in an already complicated game. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LukeFF Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Separate weapon sounds for bolt-action and semi-auto rifles. I own both a Garand and a K98 (plus other WWII-era rifles), so I say with absolute certainty the two weapons sound distinctly different. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt Schultz Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Static Operations and persistant damage to all Operation/Campaign maps for the duration. Reinforcements option every minute instead of every five.(para drops) Tank riders.(the russians are coming) Adjustable artillery ammo loadout in editor.(more smoke without more HE) Editor clues as to base structural integrity of structures. Multi-level water.(I want my dam and reservoir back) Click-n-drag path points for path adjustment, rather than re-do the whole thing. "Dig-in" command at setup for perma-hulldown. Normandy without glider and 'chute flavor objects is just ... wrong. Assault Boats. Bailey bridges. More groups. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSB Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 The ceiling of the last store of a building should be transparent like the roof. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rocketman Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 The ceiling of the last store of a building should be transparent like the roof. +1 to this:) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nachinus Posted August 11, 2011 Share Posted August 11, 2011 Separate weapon sounds for bolt-action and semi-auto rifles. Ditto. I'd really enjoy some improvement in small weapon sounds variety and quality. It's a very immersive factor for me. Click-n-drag path points for path adjustment, rather than re-do the whole thing. Oh yes!!! Normandy without glider and 'chute flavor objects is just ... wrong. Very true! 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.