RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Panzer Command: Ostfront



Message

pad152 -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/8/2011 4:10:21 PM)

One has to wonder, which will ship first, this or Combat Mission Normandy?



Prince of Eckmühl -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/8/2011 6:19:11 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

One has to wonder, which will ship first, this or Combat Mission Normandy?


Track records being what they are, I don't think one has to wonder which one will have more bugs.[;)]



Enigma6584 -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/8/2011 9:30:17 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

quote:

ORIGINAL: pad152

One has to wonder, which will ship first, this or Combat Mission Normandy?


Track records being what they are, I don't think one has to wonder which one will have more bugs.[;)]



Hhmm...from my perspective, most of you all paid for the first two games in this series which did not turn out so well. Panzer Command Ostfront is the third patch-upgrade finally giving you guys something which looks like it is worth the money. Track records being what they are...I'd say at most, BF is ahead, at minimum it is even. Personally, I'm getting both and will enjoy both for the different reasons.





Prince of Eckmühl -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/8/2011 10:39:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: RedCharlie65

Track records being what they are...I'd say at most, BF is ahead, at minimum it is even.


Both of the Panzer Command games that were developed by Koiosworks shipped relatively bug-free. The patches for the games fixed a few problems, but most of the changes were game enhancements. Where the game fell down, relative to the CM1 games, was in content, particularly 3D vehicles. The models simply weren't there, and it's taken years for modders to fill in the void.

Oh, but we were talking about bugs, weren't we?

It's my understanding that the Normandy game belongs to the second generation of games from BF.

And yes, of course, we all know that CM2 was found in no way wanting in terms of bugs and other issues when it shipped to the public.[sm=innocent0009.gif]



HintJ -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 3:42:51 AM)

Many things I find quirky about Panzer Command may actually be bugs.

For example, an enemy unit that is most definitely spotted and targeted sometimes magically disappears during playback, even though the spotting unit is selected, tracking, and firing at it. I understand what relative spotting is, but I don't understand that.

Let's not forget tank commanders remaining in destroyed tanks (I've been told this has been fixed, fortunately) and also that strange sight of tank tracks and crews visible through occupied buildings. Its very hard to believe that nobody spotted these things in the beta testing.

Regarding CMx2, the initial release of CMSF was a disaster, sure, but the engine has improved remarkably (as Battlefront promised), and the new CM is built upon that. Perhaps it is better for WWII gaming fans that Battlefront did a modern game first to break in the CMx2 engine and improve it.

Of course, some of the most entertaining drama in computer wargaming history has been the reaction of Battlefront's harshest critics of CMx2 and Battlefront's reaction to the critic's reaction. I wonder if PCO would even be happening today without so many people upset w/CMSF? Either way, it has been great for me.



rickier65 -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 5:01:31 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HintJ

Many things I find quirky about Panzer Command may actually be bugs.

For example, an enemy unit that is most definitely spotted and targeted sometimes magically disappears during playback, even though the spotting unit is selected, tracking, and firing at it. I understand what relative spotting is, but I don't understand that.

Let's not forget tank commanders remaining in destroyed tanks (I've been told this has been fixed, fortunately) and also that strange sight of tank tracks and crews visible through occupied buildings. Its very hard to believe that nobody spotted these things in the beta testing.

Regarding CMx2, the initial release of CMSF was a disaster, sure, but the engine has improved remarkably (as Battlefront promised), and the new CM is built upon that. Perhaps it is better for WWII gaming fans that Battlefront did a modern game first to break in the CMx2 engine and improve it.

Of course, some of the most entertaining drama in computer wargaming history has been the reaction of Battlefront's harshest critics of CMx2 and Battlefront's reaction to the critic's reaction. I wonder if PCO would even be happening today without so many people upset w/CMSF? Either way, it has been great for me.



The issue of units magically disappearing during playback could be the dynamic sighting, it's hard to say. But the way sighting works it's certainly possible for a unit to be in sight then out of sight, then back in sight. Thats not to say that is the case you're referring to.

The dead commanders returning to the tanks and looking very healthy has been fixed.

There had been bugs associated with building transparency that were fixed, but also some aspects of building transparency are by design. Building you occupy with your forces will be transparent. Buildings with enemy units you've spotted will be transparent. I have to admit, I don't recall looking for tracks through them though, so I cant speak to that.

thanks
Rick



Prince of Eckmühl -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 5:29:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HintJ

Many things I find quirky about Panzer Command may actually be bugs.

For example, an enemy unit that is most definitely spotted and targeted sometimes magically disappears during playback, even though the spotting unit is selected, tracking, and firing at it. I understand what relative spotting is, but I don't understand that.

Been here from the beginning, and I have to say that I haven't witnessed what you describe, what is, otherwise, so seemingly inexplicable.

quote:

Let's not forget tank commanders remaining in destroyed tanks (I've been told this has been fixed, fortunately) and also that strange sight of tank tracks and crews visible through occupied buildings. Its very hard to believe that nobody spotted these things in the beta testing.

Yup, and it's my understanding that it was resolved a while ago.[:)]

quote:

Regarding CMx2, the initial release of CMSF was a disaster, sure, but the engine has improved remarkably (as Battlefront promised), and the new CM is built upon that. Perhaps it is better for WWII gaming fans that Battlefront did a modern game first to break in the CMx2 engine and improve it.

I agree completely.

quote:

Of course, some of the most entertaining drama in computer wargaming history has been the reaction of Battlefront's harshest critics of CMx2 and Battlefront's reaction to the critic's reaction. I wonder if PCO would even be happening today without so many people upset w/CMSF? Either way, it has been great for me.

Yeah, and the biggest bitching to be heard came from the folks who simply couldn't stand to see BF move on from the old game-engine.

Two points before I end my contribution, here:

#1 - I'll purchase the Normandy game when it's released. It'll be cool in it's own way, and that will do it for me.

#2 - BF/S is really a pretty darn good guy. He put up with my ragging on his games for years and never held a grudge. After all that, he contacted me one day via email in regard to a problem with with my account at BF that I didn't even know existed. He had sorted it out for me, and wanted to let me know.

A prince?

Perhaps.

I wish that he could resolve things with Dorosh. They both have so much invested in CM. It's almost as if you really can't have one without the other. Who knows, perhaps there will be a reunion tour when a "Canadian module" for CMN come out![;)]



HintJ -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 1:30:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rick

I have to admit, I don't recall looking for tracks through them though, so I cant speak to that.

thanks
Rick




[image]local://upfiles/36350/73FA38A964E2472C847D550832E35735.jpg[/image]



HintJ -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 1:33:51 PM)

weird...

[image]local://upfiles/36350/BCAEFD2D56A8459FBB2189654B990DAE.jpg[/image]



HintJ -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 1:37:03 PM)

Am I the only person having this issue?




Erik Rutins -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 1:51:43 PM)

Hi HintJ,

The previous releases were quite stable and I think it's fair to say they had relatively few severe bugs, but they certainly had a lot more bugs than we realized when we released them. The good news is that Ostfront _fixes_ a huge number of bugs as well as making a huge number of improvements, including both of those you reported above. Thanks to fantastic work by the team, it's basically a complete overhaul of the game and the underlying engine.

Regards,

- Erik



Yoozername -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 2:25:59 PM)

I am pre-ordering CM:Norm because of the box.  It has a GI with a water-cooled MG on it, y'know.  Supposedly, SG had claimed the USArmy in WWII did not use the 1917A1 machineguns.  This is his way of showing the world that he is sorry for his mistake and that he is honoring me and my contribution to CM.  I had set him strait on the matter.  I am sure when I open the sacred 'box' there will be a golden invitation for me to once again walk the threads of golden-rapture and pontificate about minutia from WWII....

All kidding aside (that was a parody of a paranoid/delusional wargamer that thinks much of his 'contribution' to games), I am so glad there are computer wargames instead of board games.  The thought of having to be around people like Dorosh or PRINCE boggles my mind. 






Yoozername -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 2:46:11 PM)

While I am loathe to tell a wargame company how to conduct it's business, I will at least throw out the following for consideration. 

The PCO 'patch' should be minimalized so that owners of the previous games can see what the game looks/feels like.  That is, the existing scenarios can be played with the updates.

A full-on patch with MM, grassy-scenarios and other doodads should be sold as a product later on.  Something like 17.99 USD.  This would allow the wargaming crowd to get a taste for the major updates first and allow a revenue stream later once the 'grass' issues are dealt with. 

I think most people would support the full-on patch at that price.



vonRocko -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 3:20:37 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

While I am loathe to tell a wargame company how to conduct it's business, I will at least throw out the following for consideration. 

The PCO 'patch' should be minimalized so that owners of the previous games can see what the game looks/feels like.  That is, the existing scenarios can be played with the updates.

A full-on patch with MM, grassy-scenarios and other doodads should be sold as a product later on.  Something like 17.99 USD.  This would allow the wargaming crowd to get a taste for the major updates first and allow a revenue stream later once the 'grass' issues are dealt with. 

I think most people would support the full-on patch at that price.

Brilliant idea! Make me pay for something I was going to get free. Next time you get a marketing idea remember how much you loathe telling a company how to do business.



Mad Russian -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 3:24:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

While I am loathe to tell a wargame company how to conduct it's business, I will at least throw out the following for consideration. 

The PCO 'patch' should be minimalized so that owners of the previous games can see what the game looks/feels like.  That is, the existing scenarios can be played with the updates.

A full-on patch with MM, grassy-scenarios and other doodads should be sold as a product later on.  Something like 17.99 USD.  This would allow the wargaming crowd to get a taste for the major updates first and allow a revenue stream later once the 'grass' issues are dealt with. 

I think most people would support the full-on patch at that price.


All manner of formulas were discussed about the patch and resulting new materials for it. This is what Matrix chose to do with the new materials.

I think it will pay off in the long run, showing that they support their products, and give the gamer a good value for their money. It should also build a solid customer base for PC4.

And once you decide to give a product away, you aren't going to come back and later decide to charge for it. This was not a decision that was taken lightly.

I personally think the direction Matrix has chosen to take is the right one. But I only have one vote. The rest of you get to vote on their decision as well by playing the update or not.

Good Hunting.

MR



Yoozername -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 3:31:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: vonRocko


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

While I am loathe to tell a wargame company how to conduct it's business, I will at least throw out the following for consideration. 

The PCO 'patch' should be minimalized so that owners of the previous games can see what the game looks/feels like.  That is, the existing scenarios can be played with the updates.

A full-on patch with MM, grassy-scenarios and other doodads should be sold as a product later on.  Something like 17.99 USD.  This would allow the wargaming crowd to get a taste for the major updates first and allow a revenue stream later once the 'grass' issues are dealt with. 

I think most people would support the full-on patch at that price.

Brilliant idea! Make me pay for something I was going to get free. Next time you get a marketing idea remember how much you loathe telling a company how to do business.


You would still get your 'freebee'. But you wouldn't get the whole enchilada. I suppose it does come down to supporting a wargame. I spend so little money or time on wargames that 18 bucks is nothing. But I suppose it might break some people's budget.

edit: At this point, I am most interested in how the game looks and plays compared to the previous releases. I don't need 87 scenarios and a mapmaker, etc. to see what's-what.



Mobius -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 3:39:54 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Yoozername

While I am loathe to tell a wargame company how to conduct it's business, I will at least throw out the following for consideration. 

The PCO 'patch' should be minimalized so that owners of the previous games can see what the game looks/feels like.  That is, the existing scenarios can be played with the updates.

A full-on patch with MM, grassy-scenarios and other doodads should be sold as a product later on.  Something like 17.99 USD.  This would allow the wargaming crowd to get a taste for the major updates first and allow a revenue stream later once the 'grass' issues are dealt with. 

I think most people would support the full-on patch at that price.


Long ago that was an idea. But, since this update was mostly done by volunteers who did it because they wanted a game that played their way and aren't concerned about maximizng revenue. In the future their might be supplements if there is interest. I hope there is.



Mad Russian -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 3:42:45 PM)

Yoozername....you are far more correct than you realize.

It will only take the first turn in the game to see that PCO doesn't play like the first games in the series. So much has been added.

There were a few things taken away as well, like TC's who never die, which was the entire reason for the update to begin with.

There came a time though, when the shear volume of the content going into the update, that made this far more than a simple fix for a few noticeable bugs.

There was a discussion, to Matrix' credit, the design team had at least an opinion in that direction and now "it is what it is."

I can't wait for you guys to have it so we can all PLAY!

Good Hunting.

MR



Prince of Eckmühl -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 4:06:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

I can't wait for you guys to have it so we can all PLAY!


It'll be great fun knocking-out Stug with 45mm when the NAZEE has to rotate his entire vehicle to use its main gun. That's not to say, however, that the vehicle couldn't fight from hull-defilade:




[image]local://upfiles/21246/BC823539C8A14A53859C14539B903D1D.jpg[/image]



JMass -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/9/2011 7:37:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HintJ
Am I the only person having this issue?


The fM X exporter was changed so the last working version is the 1.1.0, I wrote this problem in the fM forum so it should be fixed, I hope.



HintJ -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/11/2011 9:29:41 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Prince of Eckmühl

quote:

ORIGINAL: HintJ

Many things I find quirky about Panzer Command may actually be bugs.

For example, an enemy unit that is most definitely spotted and targeted sometimes magically disappears during playback, even though the spotting unit is selected, tracking, and firing at it. I understand what relative spotting is, but I don't understand that.

Been here from the beginning, and I have to say that I haven't witnessed what you describe, what is, otherwise, so seemingly inexplicable.



In PCK, I have tested and retested and I state, w/100% certainty, this bug exists. It cannot possibly be a feature of relative spotting.

For example, if during the playback I rewind to the beginning, without selecting any friendly units, a certain enemy tank is present; however, if I click through every single friendly unit to figure out who spotted it, the spotted tank never shows up.

My opponent's tank is indeed spotted, but it isn't displayed when the spotting unit is selected. Sometimes it is even being tracked and fired upon by the spotting unit, but all I can see is a red rubber band shooting at empty space!

If you enjoy watching the playback from above the action w/no units selected, this isn't much of an issue, but if you prefer watching from each unit's bino view for increased immersion, this is very disconcerting.

Let's hope this has been fixed. I'm going to be all over it if it isn't.[8D]




rickier65 -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/12/2011 12:27:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HintJ
Many things I find quirky about Panzer Command may actually be bugs.

For example, an enemy unit that is most definitely spotted and targeted sometimes magically disappears during playback, even though the spotting unit is selected, tracking, and firing at it. ......

........... Sometimes it is even being tracked and fired upon by the spotting unit, but all I can see is a red rubber band shooting at empty space!

Let's hope this has been fixed. I'm going to be all over it if it isn't.[8D]



Quite a lot of work was done on the sighting routines in PCO. Including a significant effort to eliminate some of the side effects of unbuttoning or buttoning during the Orders phase giving immediate sighting and therefore targetting benefits. Those benefits have now been pushed to the Orders resolution phase and the TacAI gets the benefits for both the Human and the AI player.

LOS calculations were also found to be a signficant contributor to performance issues. However the LOS routines will certainly allow for the situation where an enemy unit will appear and disappear during a turn resolution as either of the units move, or as other sighting factors that affect LOS occur during the resolution. So you will still see units appear and disappear during a turn resolution.

Having said that, I think you might also occasionally see what you describe where a unit gets targetted, and then disappears from view, and the targeting data doesn't get immediately refereshed. Hopefully this will not happen frequently, although part of this is the result of "target fixation" in which a gunner has a tendancy to fixate on a target that it's acquired rather than immediately switch to a different target. The frequency of sighting checks and retargetting by the Tactival AI has also been tweaked to achieive a balance for both performance and gameplay. Hopefully the result will acheive both goals.

Thanks
rick




HintJ -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/12/2011 1:50:30 AM)

Well, I don't think most players would ever even notice this bug. It would take about 20+ screenshots from the same angle to prove it in my current PCK game, but I can prove it. Considering all the other improvements in PC, I'd imagine this has been fixed, but believe me, I'll let you know if it isn't!

edit* I'm not talking about when the game is playing and units appearing/disappearing. I'm talking about when the game is paused, and after about ten or so replays spotted units disappearing from the entire playback.



Mad Russian -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/12/2011 1:55:47 AM)

I've seen it and my normal PBM opponent and I have commented on it before. I'm not sure why at times I can see something very clearly and then when the turn ends I can't see it.

With some thought though that makes at least reasonable sense.

Combat situations are all about motion and what you can see and what you can't see.

The situation described where you start playing what amounts to Peek-A-Boo with an enemy unit can get extremely frustrating fast! However, in a real life situation this would occur often. Where there are times that you just don't see them for more than a split second at a time.

Those of you that have ever hunted know how this can work as well.

So, while it still does happen every so often, I'm good with it and just try to get a better LOS to the unit and then the Peek-a-Boo is on You!

Good Hunting.

MR



Mobius -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/12/2011 1:59:45 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HintJ
In PCK, I have tested and retested and I state, w/100% certainty, this bug exists. It cannot possibly be a feature of relative spotting.

For example, if during the playback I rewind to the beginning, without selecting any friendly units, a certain enemy tank is present; however, if I click through every single friendly unit to figure out who spotted it, the spotted tank never shows up.
In PCK the sighting probably took place at some time during turn. The unit is 'remembered' at the end of the turn. But at the end as well as the beginning there is no LOS. The circumstances at the end of the turn and the beginning of the next are different that the instant it was sighted.

I wanted a feature that found my units that sighted a particular enemy unit - a reverse sighting feature. But this remembering would make that feature not as effective as I had thought.
PCO changes this a bit. Things aren't remembered as much but pop in and out of sight more often during the turn. In PCO you may not see the unit at the end or the beginning of the turn but if you do a replay it will pop into sight sometime in the middle of the turn.



HintJ -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/12/2011 2:04:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

I've seen it and my normal PBM opponent and I have commented on it before. I'm not sure why at times I can see something very clearly and then when the turn ends I can't see it.

With some thought though that makes at least reasonable sense.

Combat situations are all about motion and what you can see and what you can't see.

The situation described where you start playing what amounts to Peek-A-Boo with an enemy unit can get extremely frustrating fast! However, in a real life situation this would occur often. Where there are times that you just don't see them for more than a split second at a time.

Those of you that have ever hunted know how this can work as well.

So, while it still does happen every so often, I'm good with it and just try to get a better LOS to the unit and then the Peek-a-Boo is on You!

Good Hunting.

MR



Thanks MR! This has not been fixed. I've gone hunting before and expect a 20+ screenshot thread of a major bug!



Mad Russian -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/12/2011 2:14:02 AM)

That's because this isn't a major bug. It's an annoyance that real soldiers, on real battlefields, also deal with.

It's also hard to come up with screen shots of a Peek-A-Boo situation.

Good Hunting.

MR



HintJ -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/12/2011 2:15:56 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobius
In PCK the sighting probably took place at some time during turn. The unit is 'remembered' at the end of the turn.


That's the problem! In the replay, we don't want what it "remembered" or what they saw at the beginning or end of the turn, we need current info of what it spotted at that exact moment.



HintJ -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/12/2011 2:18:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian


It's also hard to come up with screen shots of a Peek-A-Boo situation.

Good Hunting.

MR



*nevermind. We'll see and I'll complain loudly if we still have the PZK replay.



rickier65 -> RE: If this game is going to be a Q1 2011 release... (4/12/2011 3:36:05 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HintJ

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian


It's also hard to come up with screen shots of a Peek-A-Boo situation.

Good Hunting.

MR



*nevermind. We'll see and I'll complain loudly if we still have the PZK replay.


I think I wasn't clear enough in my earlier reply, if you're referring to the situation you described above where a unit gets a target rubberband, but the unit doesn't show, then yes. It's likely a case where the unit was in sight, then sight was lost, and the target was not changed or refreshed. I think it's possible you will see it happen, though hopefully not as frequently.

Thanks
rick



Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.796875