RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (Full Version)

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



Message


Mobius -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 3:58:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: HintJ

As you can see, a mortar can fire to a place it obviously has no line of sight:


[image]local://upfiles/36350/13FD0A7828804FBD85830D38C0E6428F.jpg[/image]

Please bring this back!

I think there's a hole in that building that your mortar has LOS through. Try firing at the back side of that woods.




HintJ -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 4:18:40 AM)

There's no hole in the building--the game even confirms no LOS

[image]local://upfiles/36350/F9E90FB236FF42C0AEC4F9B9F8F518D7.jpg[/image]




HintJ -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 4:20:31 AM)

Here's seeing through two buildings:

[image]local://upfiles/36350/D45DB3DCA08D484EA6BB8452EA9DB11F.jpg[/image]




Mobius -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 4:23:52 AM)

Then that was a bug. It has been fixed.




Mad Russian -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 4:45:12 AM)

I always thought that was what mortars were for. Shooting over obstacles and lobbing mortar shells there.

I'll add that to the list and we'll discuss the feature again. No guarantees other than we'll discuss it.

Good Hunting.

MR




Mobius -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 4:49:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

I always thought that was what mortars were for. Shooting over obstacles and lobbing mortar shells there.
Yeah, and they come with their own crystal ball.




Mad Russian -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 4:50:56 AM)

Some of them apparently did. I've seen AAR's where mortar fire that was indirect did tremendous damage.

We might have to have both sets. Those with crystal balls and those without....[8D]

Good Hunting.

MR




Prince of Eckmühl -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 5:42:37 AM)

I have but two suggestions for the wishlist:

I'd like to see the developer tackle North Africa.

I realize that there's a noisy element that will always demand more Eastern Front, but there's not a hint of evidence that it would sell better than a game devoted to desert warfare. Comments would suggest that there's an element of nationalism associated with sales of these games, and there's nothing on the planet that mixes more nationalities than NA. Combine that with a thoroughly unhealthy preponderance of "crap tanks" that were employed by all sides in the campaign, and you'll find yourselves on the cusp of an adventure that could challenge the fancy of even a Bob Crisp.

Second, and this is but an echo of someone else' lamentation....

Create a routine in the game such that AT guns can be towed. I'm in agreement with some other posters as to their concern that the maps not be made in such a way as to unintentionally evolve the game from the tactical to the operational. However, there's great mayhem to be culled from a situation in which ones assets can "drag" an enemy into a friendly screen of AT guns. That vignette strikes me as thoroughly tactical, and would serve as a point of demarcation between the competition and yourselves.

My two cents.




Pillar -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 6:50:10 AM)

1)  UI tweaks.  I prefer the old CM style interface, maybe it's what I'm used to... but I do not mind the new camera controls
2)  Orders not linked to platoon hq's.  Having to give orders to my platoon and then cancel most of them just to move a single squad really really sucks.
3)  Cover from vegetation needs to be dialed down against small arms.  Vegetation, including trees, provide concealment but not much by way of cover.
4)  30 second turns would be nice
5)  Units in the open should not pin as easily as units in cover.  Instead they should be more likely to break for cover. 





Pillar -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 6:51:44 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobius


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

I always thought that was what mortars were for. Shooting over obstacles and lobbing mortar shells there.
Yeah, and they come with their own crystal ball.



If you can target behind the building, that's fine, as long as you can't spot units back there.




HintJ -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 11:30:31 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobius


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

I always thought that was what mortars were for. Shooting over obstacles and lobbing mortar shells there.
Yeah, and they come with their own crystal ball.


Yeah, or maybe something crazy like a radio. Please bring this "bug" back.

In fact, a player can make the on-map mortars closer to 80mm if he wants, and can't the ammo loads also be increased through .xml editing?




Mad Russian -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 1:02:11 PM)

The current list:

1. HQ gets a HQ ONLY command button  that branches off just like the  others so it can be given orders  without effecting its subordinates as  it does now.  

2.  Lower supression levels a little bit for infantry. It feels as if they  goto ground a bit too easily in the face of danger.  

3.  Add a no rout, hold at all costs feature like a last stand, what if   those units at Bastonge had the rout factors of the units in this game?   Besides realistically Hitler said no retreating.   Aggressive SOP Elite units are very resistant to routing Others are not so resistant and would benefit from a Hold At All Costs order.

4. Create a step feature for grass animations like trees. 3 steps would be fine instead of just on/off  

5. Of course I want a female partisan and a female sharpshooter.   

6. If possible perhaps a 30:0 per turn feature. I like 40:0 but more variety is always better.  

7. Recheck that FPS meter we get by pressing F1 somehow now I just   don't think it's working correctly. I got some 10-fps last night and had   LOWERED the settings from Ultra to High, my card is better than that   and I have a quad core cpu i7 3.2ghz Strange thing is the video is still   pretty smooth and it should be choppy at 10fps the only difference I   see is the objective flags flapping is different.  

The F1 FPS measurement is accurate.


8. When   setting up random battles give us an ability to choose "random" map at   the "template" choice point. I was surprised this wasn't already   implemented and I had to pick a map to play on. 

Already done and in the Ostfront release.

9. When   choosing what type of army group also put a "random" pick in that box  as  well instead of having to pick infantry, tank battallion, etc. etc.  I'd  like the computer to randomly pick what i get to play with  sometimes as  well. Even a custom choice and then put a ? on each type  of unit in the  mixed of combatants like infantry, trucks, armor,  artillery etc. etc.  to get a more random group of units to play with. I  like NOT KNOWING  what I'm going to get to command in a battle the  most.

Already done and in the Ostfront release.


10. To add damage effects to the 3d models?  Like  scratches from  non-penetrating hits, holes from shots that do  penetrate, track damage,  etc?  I would love to see that.

11. A unit pause command.

12. Text feedback when a unit starts firing at something, specifically:  what  it's firing at and with what. Sort of the same information that's   displayed in the lower left corner of the UI when you select a unit.

13. Unlimited Ammo feature.

14.  Unlimited waypoints

15.  Moveable waypoints

16.  Clicking on an enemy unit will hilight the human players units that are in its LOS.

17. The ability to transport  AT/Infantry guns.

18. The ability to have some influence on airstrikes.

19. A command system that is bit more straight forward when one wants give individual orders.

20. Destructible buildings.

21. A map editor that is much more intuitive. Realistically this probably will not happen but it would be nice.

Make 3 maps then we'll talk.


22. In my view the tac ai needs some improvement. Units sometimes make really bad choices.

23. Better display of maps to be chosen for Random battles and campaigns.

24. Larger Maps.

25. Larger unit limit when creating scenarios.

26. Unit order ques.

27.  A different color for the message when reinforcements arrive.

28. AA guns.

29. Reverse field of view so you could click on an enemy and see lines  indicating which of your units could see him.  That would be much better  than cycling through your units.

30. More verbose messaging.

33. Add 'codenames' or other designations to units so that during battle if I  see "*west flank group* Panzer III destroyed" I would know exactly  where to look.

34. Leave questionmarks longer, or the ability to put a marker on the map  so that if I see something I can put "Suspected KV-1" or the like.  It  wouldn't be good enough for area fire with a tank but it would keep my  small brain from forgetting what I saw.

35. Optional air recon.  If we could designate an area and have a Storch  fly over and give us some idea, it would be great.  An exposed tank  could be identified, and question marks for everything else.  You could  make it a chance based flyover so you could simulate the recon plane  having been shot down.  And futher you could make the information only  visible to units within radio contact.

36. Additional Russian campaigns.  And...maybe North Africa as a expansion pack?  :)

37. More sound

38. Towable guns.

39. Mud terrain doesn't create dust when rounds impact.

40. FOW for entrenchments and trenches.

41.Infantry graphics display for in game showing squads with correct number of men.

42. LOS indicator for what a unit can actually see. A shaded area or something.

43. More diverse experience levels for units beyond the current 3.

44. Infantry taking fire should get off of tanks but would stay in APCs.

45. Cavalry units. Both for infantry and artillery.

46. Motorcycle troops.

47. Kubel Wagons, Jeeps, Gaz...etc. The smaller vehicles.

48. End game on a specific turn.

49. End of game carry over of data.

50. Import/export to xml save game file.

51. Exit Objectives.

52. Company formations.

53. Battalion formations.

53. Rejoin formation orders.

54. Sound contacts.  

55. Quicker expansion/game release cycle for future additions to the series.

56. Mine clearance.

57. More editing controls for Random Campaigns.

58. Random campaign balance adjusted. Specifically gamer controlled points for both sides forces and Victory Levels.

59. Options for long campaigns such as renaming units and commanders, and keeping crews separated from vehicles.

60. Show suppression status of your units on / with the floating icons that show up in the main window view.

61. Ability to toggle off Russian Science of War in Random Campaign.

62. Ability to purchase or adjust random campaign units (even in somewhat ahistorical ways)

63. Ressuply out of ammo units.

64. Continue option for lost random campaign battles -- e.g. not to "Skip" it.

65.  End of battle tally of KIA, WIA etc...

66. Running campaign total of KIA, WIA for both sides.

67. Running campaign total of battles lost vs. battles won.

68. Different icons for different types of infantry and vehicles.

69. Add a "Next Target" hotkey.

70. Make complex orders possible. Example: Move + Advance + Defend

71. Being able to add a delay to an order.

72. Firing arcs.

73. Better gun crew positioning.

74. Paratroops landing.

75. Unlock the unit view (tab) using the arrows or moving the cursor on the side of the screen

76.
73. Operational level for PC. Which would show units, supply level, etc...

74. Long Campaign (12 - 90 battles) for GD or 5th SS Wiking for expansion/patch.

75. An icon at the left of the HUD that shows vehicles buttoned up.

76. Some way to tell you how long the platoon will be delayed.

77. A face>Engage command. Face the target while engaging. Not just turning the turret towards the enemy.

78. Lock on vehicle view from the outside of the vehicle.

79. Mortars being able to fire at targets out of LOS.

80. North Africa.

81. Cover from vegetation needs to be reduced.

82. 30 second turns.

83. Units in the open should not pin as easily as units in cover. They should break for cover more quickly.




Mad Russian -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 1:04:09 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: HintJ

Yeah, or maybe something crazy like a radio. Please bring this "bug" back.

In fact, a player can make the on-map mortars closer to 80mm if he wants, and can't the ammo loads also be increased through .xml editing?


You can give a unit up to 400% of it's basic ammo load in the scenario editor currently. That should cover most situations.

Good Hunting.

MR




Mobius -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 1:05:14 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pillar
If you can target behind the building, that's fine, as long as you can't spot units back there.
What's to stop the player from using the general sighting feature to borg spot things back there? Nothing. It is a gamey bug.




Mad Russian -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 1:13:52 PM)

What was to stop a Lieutenant from telling his mortars to fire into trees that he couldn't see into but was suspecting enemy troops? Nothing.

What's to keep the mortars from firing into a smoke screen? Or firing behind a building? Or at night firing 50 meters out in front of your line? To area fire that patch of woods where we think the Russian anti-tank gun is? This was all done in real life.

I agree there should be some control over how it's done but a 50mm mortar belongs to the company. The company should be able to control and direct it. That would mean firing over buildings etc.

The concept isn't hard to grasp. The application to a wargame could be a bit interesting.

Good Hunting.

MR




Mobius -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 2:34:08 PM)

The 50mm mortar teams were more often dispersed to the platoons in '40-'41. In 42-43 they were consolidated at the company level. In '44-'45, apparently lacking any more ESP operators, they were removed from the TO&E and a mortar company was added consisting only of 80mm and 120mm mortars.




sztartur2 -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 7:06:58 PM)


OK as I said I do understand you have technical difficulties. I am not an @ss[:o]. Very bad news but we cannot do much about it.

I'm telling you my point of view just to undestand my side.

First of all the problem with 2km maps is that a Panther a Tiger a T34/85 or a IS-II is capable of shooting through the whole map. If you make a scenario you want to provide some "edge" to the map a deploy zone preferably unseen by the other side. If you want to do a maneuvering battle you need room to outflank the opponent or keep him guessing where you come. Of course you can do dense maps with so one tank cannot cover the whole map with the main gun but that is a hotfix and not a real solution.

What I had in mind:
-Kursk era. Those who have played may Kursk scenario in the SPWAW Das Reich campaign and my standalone Prokhorovka scenario know what I mean [:D]
-The massive mobile/tank warfare in October 44 in Hungary
-OP Fruhlingserwachen in March 45 in Hungary Those who have played the last 3 scenarios in the SPWAW Das Reich campaign know what I mean [:D]
-A campaign based on a heavy Panzer Battalion.

I have very good sources for it.

Unfortunately PCO is not capable of supporting me with it. (Hopefully not yet...)

BTW when do you estimate PC4? Just roughly...

I I can give you one hint if it takes to sacrifice abit the pixel density for bigger maps you should do it.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian


quote:

ORIGINAL: sztartur

I am still in the learnin phase BUT I have used the 3X3 km maps for CMBB.


So have I. I've even made scenarios for CMBB using 3km maps.

I wouldn't get hung up on size. PCO plays very different from CMBB. So comparing the simple size of the maps in terms of game play is a serious under estimation of what PCO is capable of.

quote:


I have in mind some ideas which I wanted to do in PCO. Now it seems it will not be possible. I see that if it has serious performance issue then that's it.


It depends on your project. Since you don't say what it is there's no way of knowing if PCO is currently capable of doing it or not.

At the moment your computer doesn't have the ability to play a 3km PCO map. I can already make 2km maps that push PCO beyond it's limits.

PCO maps are restricted by a few things but lets take a look at a single texture and the ability of PCO to render it.

The textures are a result of how the scenario designer chose to display the terrain. There are two settings with a range from 1 to 999 and two other settings that have a range of 20 more. That's a texture display range of 399,200,400. Then there is a directional display for the terrain texture that covers the 360 degrees of the compass. If you consider that to be 360 more options for display you come up with a total of 12,201,553,224,000 different display options for a single texture in PCO. I'm pretty sure that's not a poly issue. I can display the terrain textures showing from completely smooth to completely rough and everything in between. No other games terrain display features come anywhere near PCO's ability for the designer to show a texture as they wish. Ours are not a single tile that displays only one way in the game but it's a single pixel shown any way the designer wants to show it.

PCO doesn't have tile based terrain for it's maps. Each pixel is displayed. When you do that it takes a lot of computing.

Erik has already said that we are looking at larger maps in the future. I would think that future is PC4 at best and not sooner. Making bigger maps available in PC looks to be a HUGE issue not something that just needs 2 lines of coding. But as Erik said he'll get with the programmer and see. Then he'll let us all know.

Good Hunting.

MR

Good Hunting.

MR






Mad Russian -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 7:20:51 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: sztartur


OK as I said I do understand you have technical difficulties. I am not an @ss[:o]. Very bad news but we cannot do much about it.

I'm telling you my point of view just to undestand my side.


I understand you are giving your opinion and not being an @ss.

quote:


First of all the problem with 2km maps is that a Panther a Tiger a T34/85 or a IS-II is capable of shooting through the whole map. If you make a scenario you want to provide some "edge" to the map a deploy zone preferably unseen by the other side. If you want to do a maneuvering battle you need room to outflank the opponent or keep him guessing where you come. Of course you can do dense maps with so one tank cannot cover the whole map with the main gun but that is a hotfix and not a real solution.


A 2km map can already produce shots of longer than 2km. I've taken them before. I rarely do now. What starts to enter play is hitting something that far away.

Also, it's hard to find spots that have 2km of clear terrain to fire that far. There are some but the vast majority of the worlds surface offers cover within a 2km area. As the Russians you're not going to sit in an open field and let a Tiger fire at you 2km's away.

quote:


What I had in mind:
-Kursk era. Those who have played may Kursk scenario in the SPWAW Das Reich campaign and my standalone Prokhorovka scenario know what I mean [:D]


One of our expansions may be on Kursk and if not specifically there are scenarios set in Kursk that will make one of the expansions. Again, Kursk is not flat. There are hills there. The Soviets won't just sit out there in the open and let you shoot them. Unless you are looking for a shooting gallery type of scenario. Those can be made if that's what you're looking for.

quote:


-The massive mobile/tank warfare in October 44 in Hungary
-OP Fruhlingserwachen in March 45 in Hungary Those who have played the last 3 scenarios in the SPWAW Das Reich campaign know what I mean [:D]
-A campaign based on a heavy Panzer Battalion.

I have very good sources for it.

Unfortunately PCO is not capable of supporting me with it. (Hopefully not yet...)
quote:



That area is also possibly to included in an upcoming expansion.

quote:


BTW when do you estimate PC4? Just roughly...


Hard to say since we are still taking requests in this wishlist thread.

quote:


I I can give you one hint if it takes to sacrifice abit the pixel density for bigger maps you should do it.



Thanks.

Good Hunting.

MR




Jacko -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 7:29:23 PM)

Is fog included in the game? There are two things I LOVE (no really!): fog and Panthers. Preferably Panthers in the fog. [:D]




sztartur2 -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 8:09:48 PM)

@Mad Russian. Well, the Hungarian plains is not hilly. :) But I guess you know whay I want bigger maps. Also the 3X3km is quite small. A 4X5km would be fine as it is in CMAK. That would cover the area of a whole day operation of a Battalion+ sized Kampfgruppe with some room to maneuver.




Jacko -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 8:33:30 PM)

I second that. Please make it possible. [&o]




Ratzki -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 11:23:32 PM)

Larger maps. I that would be good as well. Not just to be able to play on larger maps but to find some way of making the maps a little easier on our systems.
A question,... with all the possible items that we can place on a map, how much of a load do these place on our computers as compared to the physical size of the maps? I like the idea of the huge variety of trees and other things but in the end would be willing to give a little here for some other things like showing more men in the squads and larger maps, ect. When it comes down to eye candy, I tend to look more at my units then I do some trees and shrubs. Again, not that I do not appreciate all the work to bring these into the game, but if something has to go in order to ease up on our poor cpu's, then I will make doe with a few less varieties of trees.




Mad Russian -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/25/2011 11:49:42 PM)

When Erik gets a chance to talk with the new coder I'm sure he'll let us know just what can be done with map size.

He's still on vacation. Until he gets back I can't answer more than what I've already given you.

Good Hunting.

MR




Pillar -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/26/2011 12:17:01 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Mobius

quote:

ORIGINAL: Pillar
If you can target behind the building, that's fine, as long as you can't spot units back there.
What's to stop the player from using the general sighting feature to borg spot things back there? Nothing. It is a gamey bug.



Well, he can do this pretty much any time any place and under any circumstance. It is unavoidable. The question is, can mortars lob shells over buildings - yes they can. It's up to the player to play as his preferences permit.

Are you trying to make a competition sport or a wargame?




sztartur2 -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/26/2011 12:22:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ratzki

... Again, not that I do not appreciate all the work to bring these into the game, but if something has to go in order to ease up on our poor cpu's, then I will make doe with a few less varieties of trees.



Agreed with this as well.





Pillar -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/26/2011 12:37:35 AM)

Be able to place all entrenchments in setup




Mad Russian -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/26/2011 1:03:48 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ratzki

Larger maps. I that would be good as well. Not just to be able to play on larger maps but to find some way of making the maps a little easier on our systems.
A question,... with all the possible items that we can place on a map, how much of a load do these place on our computers as compared to the physical size of the maps? I like the idea of the huge variety of trees and other things but in the end would be willing to give a little here for some other things like showing more men in the squads and larger maps, ect. When it comes down to eye candy, I tend to look more at my units then I do some trees and shrubs. Again, not that I do not appreciate all the work to bring these into the game, but if something has to go in order to ease up on our poor cpu's, then I will make doe with a few less varieties of trees.




It's not the variety of structures or texture you can choose from in Map Maker. It's the number on the map. The bigger the map the more textures and structures you have on the map.

Think of painting a picture.

Let's use a 1 foot square canvas. (1km map) and think of the amount of paint that goes on that canvas and what it will take to be able to create a picture.

Now we move up to a 2 foot square canvas,(2km map) which is 4 times as large.

To get the same amount of detail you have to put a whole lot more paint on the canvas that you did for the 1 foot canvas.

If we move up to a 3 foot canvas you get the same issue.

From a 1km map to a 2km you increase the size by 4 times.

From a 1km map to a 3km you increase the size by 9 times.

1x1=1
2x2=4
3x3=9

It's not a matter of reducing the number of tree choices in the game to go to add just another 1km of map size. It's all about displaying 9 times more surface area and the associated textures and structures that goes with it.

Good Hunting.

MR




Mad Russian -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/26/2011 1:15:09 AM)

Has anybody played on a 2km map yet?

Good Hunting.

MR




junk2drive -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/26/2011 1:49:26 AM)

Has anybody played CMBN on a large map yet?

Edit to add: Does any 3D game besides CMBN have larger than 2kx2k maps that are playable? IF so, what spec computer does it take to run it and is it realistic? RT or WEGO or IGOUGO?




Ratzki -> RE: Ok WISHLIST TIME after seeing & playing game (5/26/2011 2:52:53 AM)

Could a generic tree "tile" be added that contained multiple trees on it. Then this could be rotated somewhat for some variety. As well some indivdual trees could be placed to further spice things up a bit. These multiple tree tiles would be now seen as an individual object and not several as is when we have to place individual trees.
Could this then not be used for other terrain type as well.




Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.7189941