Ratzki
Posts: 581
Joined: 8/18/2008
From: Chilliwack, British Columbia
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: RedCharlie65
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ratzki
I am sure that you can. The point is that the more that a player has to worry about on screen, the more labourious each turn becomes as you will now have to be so much more careful as to where you plot your moves to take into account the terrain and position(s) of each and every soldier, all X a battalion or more worth of squads. I know that CMSF and CMN are squad based, but what will happen if I plot a move that leaves some of my men in cover and some outside this same cover?
The tactical AI in CMSF handles that position of individual soldiers. When one plots moves in CMSF, you get a highlighted zone at the end of your cursor showing the area the squad will occupy. If the position you are seeking is up against a fence or wall, the highlighted area will show where they will set their formation. Thus, as a player, you can check to see if anyone is out of postion or in the open. You can move the cursor and thus the highlighted area around to see what might be the best position in that tile of terrain.
Yes, but there is an extra step. You get that highlght at the end of your proposed move, then you have to see if that is ok and readjust if it is not. Multiply this over several companies and I can see this getting to be a bit of a pain.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ratzki
I can see a player being forced to get right down to plot his moves, and this does not translate well to larger formations. Plus the CPU hit has to be up there as well to handle 1:1. If your machine can take (x) number of squads in a battle before it locks up, then it will potentially only be able to handle (x/10 assuming a linear reduction and a 10 man squad) soldiers before the same cpu stumbles.
quote:
I thought most wargamers loved the concept of getting down and dirty with plotting moves to their hearts content. I have always been of the understanding this is the kind of stuff wargamers have craved...the more detail, the better. Maybe I'm not understanding your statement here. There is always going to be a line drawn to where ones' CPU can handle large calculations.
Getting down and dirty is one thing, but being forced into the dirt to play the game is another. With CMx2 two not just choosing to model the full squad but to have each individual member able to sight, pick targets, ect., this has to limit the size of battles that are able to be played.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ratzki
Have you tried playing a full regiment worth of infantry with added tanks ect. with CMSF?
quote:
Good gracious no. My CPU could never handle that kind of data. Considering the size of the maps in CMSF, the map would be rather crowded as well. I have played battalion vs. battalion battles in CMSF and my machine can handle it quite well. The management associated with those size forces is quite enough for me. Anything larger and you are talking (IMHO) tedium just to get one turn going. Are you telling me that in Panzer Command Ostfront, we are going to be able to play regiment vs. regiment battles on large maps?
If I want to play with those kind of numbers and up, I usually load up one of my John Tiller Panzer Campaign games and we both know they have absolutely no eye candy. But there I'm looking for a much different gaming experience.
I do not see why PC could not handle larger forces on a map then can CMx2. There's that limiting factor again, CMx2 will force us into smaller battles.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ratzki
There are some CMx1 battles out there at this size, and I never found anyone that could not play them due to cpu issues.
quote:
No disrespect to you but I've never heard of battles that size in CMx1. Well, in thinking more about it I can remember maybe two that size and those two battles were way too large for my machine to handle at the time. Maybe with today's new machines, maybe but I figure those size battles must be limited in number. Battalion vs. Battalion were what I remember as the sizes to shoot for and limit due to peoples' CPU restrictions.
There are several out there, the AI never was able to handle them well, but a human made the games well worth playing.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ratzki
I do not own CMSF, but I would dare to stick my neck out and say that CMx1 will handle larger battles then will CMSF. All so that I can look at what amounts to eye candy with 1:1 on screen.
quote:
I would consider that a safe bet. I think it is pretty obvious CMSF and CMBN would be much more CPU intensive than the older CMx1 series. I can remember constant questions from players back then asking BF to give them the opportunity to see a full squad in action in future versions. I like the eye candy. It leads to more immersion in the game IMHO. There is always a trade-off. We shall see the trade-offs in PCO once we start to see game reviews and more video of actual gameplay.
There is that force into smaller scale battles again. Great if you like that size, no so much if you don't.
quote:
ORIGINAL: Ratzki
CMSF is still a squad based system so why do I need to know what each soldier is doing, all I want to know is what is happening to the squad. In effect, all that the 1:1 thing is doing is kicking the crap outa my cpu for what gain as far as gameplay and how I will use my squads?
quote:
Because of the fun factor? Why do you need to see what your individual armored vehicles are doing? Take all 3D representations out then. If calculations is all that matters, why not just play those John Tiller Games then or WITE? John Tiller Games have squad based games available in Panzer Campaigns format. My point being that IMHO most people want to see those representations and as computers get more powerful, we will see more of this type of representation in computer gaming.
Ahh, because I like playing a squad based system and not a platoon based one. I play many table top wargames and the Tiller series, all for different reasons, the thing is that when I want to play a squad level game, I do not want to do it at the individual soldier level. It kinda misses the point then. I too will buy CMN when it comes out, and I hope that I like it, but as it looks at the moment, for me it might miss the mark.
|
Printable Version
RE: Proof why 1to1 representation is not a good idea. - 
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread