sburke Posted July 12, 2011 Share Posted July 12, 2011 So a game you can't even play against another human-being is somehow gonna challenge CM? Yeah, right. Code me some MP Graviteam, I might pick it up. From the Interview with Armchair General Q What is your favorite new feature in Operation Star? A Smoke screens Really? Smoke is the great new feature? Nothing against the game, I am sure it has it's merits and afficionados, but dang considering the b**hing here about foxholes and Orchard Huertgen like density (no offense guys, just a comparison of issue discussions) I don't expect the forum over there to somehow be Elysium. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 In CMx1 you had the option of a "short halt" with the Hunt command. In CMx2 you do not have the option at all. The Hunt command in CMx2 isn't a "short halt", it's "stop and don't move again until you receive new orders". Please, please, PLEASE stop claiming that CMx1 has a "short halt" behavior in it. As many people have already tried to explain to you, IT DOES NOT. Sometimes, if you're lucky, HUNT could yield that behavior under limited circumstances. What were they? 1. The enemy was destroyed or moved out of LOS 2. There was no other enemy to engage while stopped This is absolutely, unequivocally, NOT firing from "short halts". In fact, there was a couple of lengthy threads from the CMBO days pointing this fact out and demanding that we add "short halt" behavior. So please... for the love of all that is good and cuddly in this world... please stop confusing the behavior CMx1 had with the behavior we're talking about when we speak of "short halts". It would be very much appreciated What we would eventually like to get is something akin to this: 1. HUNT Command - move at a medium speed until a target is available. Engage until destroyed or out of LOF, then continue to move 2. MOVE TO CONTACT Command - move at a medium speed until a target is available. Engage but do not move again until new orders are issued. 3. Short Halt Behavior - Slow, Move, and Quick Commands allow a vehicle to stop, fire a couple of rounds/bursts, then continue to move after a target is found. After moving for a specified distance/time the vehicle will attempt to stop and engage again with a couple of rounds/bursts. So on and so forth. The chances of stopping will depend on the speed, with slower being more likely to stop than faster. A vehicle can be moved via Fast will never stop under any circumstances. #1 and #2 are pretty much the same as they were in CMx1. #3 is the truly new behavior. Some might wonder why we don't have Hunt and Move to Contact as they were in CMx1. Well, in the Modern setting nearly all vehicles can effectively fire on the move (the others tend to get smoked pretty quickly) and infantry can, as we've discussed, approximate firing on the move due to Soldiers being explicitly simulated. It was realized too late in CM:BN development that we really should go back to the CMx1 behaviors of HUNT and MOVE TO CONTACT. So we're going to correct this in the near future. Hacks are not an option. Anything other than a quick hack (which we tried) isn't worth doing. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mattias Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 What we would eventually like to get is something akin to this: 1. HUNT Command - move at a medium speed until a target is available. Engage until destroyed or out of LOF, then continue to move Huzzah! Another key WEGO feature gets back on line! Thank you Steve for the How & Why post. After some 12 years of constant and reliable evolution, plus now having been stabilised on my ADHD medicine, I´m quite content with not knowing the When factor M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
poesel Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 It would be nice, but I personally think it's unnecessary. We don't really need extra-fine control of speeds of AFVs, since you're basically only going three speeds (slow to stay with infantry, "normal" speed to get where you're going, and "get there NOW!"). If you're moving quickly, you probably aren't expecting there to be enemies in the vicinity or there are enemies in the vicinity and you want to get away from them. So, you probably only need to stop and engage when you're already moving fairly slowly. ... The button could be context sensitive and change depending on having selected infantry or vehicles. But with what Steve said above I think they have a nice solution which doesn't add buttons. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LemuelG Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 From the Interview with Armchair General Q What is your favorite new feature in Operation Star? A Smoke screens Really? Smoke is the great new feature? Nothing against the game, I am sure it has it's merits and afficionados, but dang considering the b**hing here about foxholes and Orchard Huertgen like density (no offense guys, just a comparison of issue discussions) I don't expect the forum over there to somehow be Elysium. The engine is terrific, it even has a few things CM does not - illumination flares; unit-formations; headlights; using your tanks to shunt wrecks outta the way etc. It's problem is that there is no MP, and the AI is absolutely God-awful; it takes a battle or two, then you realize there is unlikely to be any reasonably accurate tactical developments and un-install. Perhaps that's why their forum is a ghost-town, if no-one is playing, there isn't anyone to complain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siffo998 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 The engine is terrific, it even has a few things CM does not - illumination flares; unit-formations; headlights; using your tanks to shunt wrecks outta the way etc. It's problem is that there is no MP, and the AI is absolutely God-awful; it takes a battle or two, then you realize there is unlikely to be any reasonably accurate tactical developments and un-install. Perhaps that's why their forum is a ghost-town, if no-one is playing, there isn't anyone to complain Iam still waiting for the english translation of operation star. but i have played a lot achtung panzer kharkow 1943 and i can truly say that their ai is one of the best if not the best i have ever seen in any strategy game. dont know which game you played lemuel but the cause that their forums are empty comes from ****ty marketing (especially for the outer russian context) and not from an unplayable game. (the real flaw might be the non existent mp thats true, but with a ai like that and this absolutely historical correct and painstaking recreation this game was real gem). please dont get me wrong cmbn is a blast and iam not at all on the "dissapointed by cmbn" side but achtung panzer and their tank simulation steel fury really was a blast too. and it deserved a lot more attention then it finally got...but thats nothing new in the gaming industry... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen Von Television Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I vote for the Hunt and Move To Contact reintroduction and I profit of Steve's presence here to advocate for another minor movement re-establishment: Scoot & Shoot I found very handy and useful many a times. It's not so essential to my knowledge since you can easily accomplish it by using a combination of movements (Quick/Fast + Pause + Reverse), but there may be some defined and unique behavior to this CMX1 Command I'm not aware of that would make it more essentail than just comfortable... Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
womble Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 My mind is reeling a little bit at the possibilities for virtuoso maneuvering which would be made available by having those 3 movement modes available along with pause and fire commands at waypoints. [dribbles slightly] Of course, it'll probably just mean I'll set up vast strings of movement orders that will be stymied by a turn being too sharp, meaning I'll be scooting when I should be shooting and stopped to shoot when I should be scooting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LemuelG Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Iam still waiting for the english translation of operation star. but i have played a lot achtung panzer kharkow 1943 and i can truly say that their ai is one of the best if not the best i have ever seen in any strategy game. dont know which game you played lemuel but the cause that their forums are empty comes from ****ty marketing (especially for the outer russian context) and not from an unplayable game. (the real flaw might be the non existent mp thats true, but with a ai like that and this absolutely historical correct and painstaking recreation this game was real gem). please dont get me wrong cmbn is a blast and iam not at all on the "dissapointed by cmbn" side but achtung panzer and their tank simulation steel fury really was a blast too. and it deserved a lot more attention then it finally got...but thats nothing new in the gaming industry... My bad; the truth is that it's no worse at all than any other tactical-scale game out there, except for CMBN - and that's mainly because the most consequential AI decisions are ceded to the human designer. Developers have to get with the program - without a coherent human-designed plan for the AI to follow their game will be crap (for the solo). If I'm ever proven wrong in that statement I'll whistle a happy tune and jump into the air clicking my heels like I was walkin' the yellow F'n brick road. This game is light-years ahead of the rest in single-player fun-ness (what?) - and I say that as someone who thinks the system could and should be radically improved with no delay, not even for bugs. Triggers are needed right away. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gen Von Television Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 [dribbles slightly] Of course, it'll probably just mean I'll set up vast strings of movement orders that will be stymied by a turn being too sharp, meaning I'll be scooting when I should be shooting and stopped to shoot when I should be scooting... Wait a minute! Do you mean to say I will have to re plot from the start all those complex movements since I do not have draggable waypoints?... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steiner14 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 We wish all other war genre games well, and financial success too. Alas, I also have heard over the years a lot about punted products purporting to be iPhone & iPad killers. And I have a BlackBerry phone. We? Are you a BFC employee and paid by them? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 We? Are you a BFC employee and paid by them? I think we in this context is gamers. Wine Cape has an exciting proper job, though some might believe it to be fun!. He is also a beta-tester and has provided some of the threads here with good information*. I wouldn't want him to be upset! : ) *I am thinking particularly on gyro-stabilisers which Hunnycutts huge work on Shermans is woefully inadequate about.! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Williams Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Some might wonder why we don't have Hunt and Move to Contact as they were in CMx1. Well, in the Modern setting nearly all vehicles can effectively fire on the move (the others tend to get smoked pretty quickly) and infantry can, as we've discussed, approximate firing on the move due to Soldiers being explicitly simulated. It was realized too late in CM:BN development that we really should go back to the CMx1 behaviors of HUNT and MOVE TO CONTACT. So we're going to correct this in the near future. Excellent! I just hope that these commands and behaviors are retroactively applied to CMBN via a patch if by "near future" you are talking about a new expansion/module. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vark Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Not to carp, given Battlefronts excellent reputation at listening to its customers, but surely realistic WWII tank behaviour should have been high up the priority list. Firing from the short halt was standard practice, as it allowed aimed fire and stopped the enemy ranging in, especially as most Allied tanks had no range finders and used guestimation and observation of the fall of shot (hence the tracer in the round). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedy Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 It was realized too late in CM:BN development that we really should go back to the CMx1 behaviors of HUNT and MOVE TO CONTACT. So we're going to correct this in the near future. Steve This is welcome news Steve, is it intended to implement this via patch, module or the next family(bulge?). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
A Canadian Cat Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 <snip> 1. HUNT Command - move at a medium speed until a target is available. Engage until destroyed or out of LOF, then continue to move 2. MOVE TO CONTACT Command - move at a medium speed until a target is available. Engage but do not move again until new orders are issued. 3. Short Halt Behavior - Slow, Move, and Quick Commands allow a vehicle to stop, fire a couple of rounds/bursts, then continue to move after a target is found. After moving for a specified distance/time the vehicle will attempt to stop and engage again with a couple of rounds/bursts. So on and so forth. The chances of stopping will depend on the speed, with slower being more likely to stop than faster. A vehicle can be moved via Fast will never stop under any circumstances. <snip> Brilliant - thanks for sharing your plan. I think that sounds perfect. I would love to see this deployed in a module or patch but I am not sure if your game is setup for that so I'll just be happy with what we have for now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Not to carp, given Battlefronts excellent reputation at listening to its customers, but surely realistic WWII tank behaviour should have been high up the priority list. The same argument could have been made in 1997 when we started making CMBO. Somehow people have survived up to now without it The problem most gamers don't see is that there are hundreds of mundane "top priorities" that are even more important than something like firing from short halts. For example, trees. Couldn't have much of a Normandy based game without trees, right? Hedgerows? Pretty necessary too. What about units organized hierarchically? The possibility to play via email? Maybe having a game saveable to your harddrive would be a good feature to have? Etc., etc. The sum of all "top priorities" is massive. It's why we're probably 3 years behind in CMx2 than we intended on being at this point, yet we still have many significant game features in need of implementation. And depending on someone's own personal definition of "priority", that list of features is going to be sensible or not. I'm sure someone here would rather have flamethrowers before firing from short halts, for example. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Battlefront.com Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 This is welcome news Steve, is it intended to implement this via patch, module or the next family(bulge?). Patches will not contain new features as a rule, though some fixes might border on being called new features. Anything major like new Commands, however, definitely to big for a patch. Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boo Radley Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 The same argument could have been made in 1997 when we started making CMBO. Somehow people have survived up to now without it The problem most gamers don't see is that there are far more mundane "top priorities" that are even more important than something like firing from short halts. For example, trees. Couldn't have much of a Normandy based game without trees, right? Hedgerows? Pretty necessary too. What about units organized hierarchically? The possibility to play via email? Maybe having a game saveable to your harddrive would be a good feature to have? Etc., etc. The sum of all "top priorities" is massive. It's why we're probably 3 years behind in CMx2 than we intended on being at this point, yet we still have many significant game features in need of implementation. And depending on someone's own personal definition of "priority", that list of features is going to be sensible or not. I'm sure someone here would rather have flamethrowers before firing from short halts, for example. Steve I want to be able to shoot flamethrowers from short halts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonRocko Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Patches will not contain new features as a rule, though some fixes might border on being called new features. Anything major like new Commands, however, definitely to big for a patch. Steve In other words "You must pay us!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Speedy Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I want to be able to shoot flamethrowers from short halts. Well let's hope we can hunt in our Churchill Crocodile come the Commonwealth module. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frankster65 Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 In other words "You must pay us!" And if that is the case...so what? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Agua Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 In other words "You must pay us!" And I take it you advocate they do this for "the greater good"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aewert Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 I can shoot flamethrowers in short halts, but only after eating chili... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vonRocko Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 And if that is the case...so what? The so what is that it is a feature that never should have been left out in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts