• Havoc
  • Caius
  • redboot
  • Rules
  • Chain of Command
  • Members
  • Supported Ladders & Games
  • Downloads


Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
I hate PzIVs
02-25-2015, 02:00 AM,
#41
RE: I hate PzIVs
(02-25-2015, 12:10 AM)Toblakai Wrote: No, I don’t play usually QBs against the AI Helmet Smile 99% of my battles are against human opponents. Against the AI I start only sometimes a short battle to test something.

My example with the QB seems to have serious consequences to my reputation LOL

Big Laugh Big Grin2
02-25-2015, 12:24 PM, (This post was last modified: 02-25-2015, 01:50 PM by Weasel.)
#42
RE: I hate PzIVs
(02-23-2015, 10:44 AM)Steiner14 Wrote: Weasel,
you state things (spotting must be reciprocal) and when the game does not follow your assumtions, you call it stupid.
Do you play CMx1 with such a negative mindset, too? Definately not. Especially in CMx1 the player has to imagine many things, if something strange happens, to explain it. That CMx1 is more abstracted probably makes it easier.

I'd suggest you approach CMx2 with the same positive attitude you approach CMx1 and try to imagine a circumstance, that delivers the spotting result you are seeing.
I have presented you one possible explanation. I am sure you can find several others - if you try.
But if you reject everything, but on the other hand can easily accept all the shortcomings in CMx1, then the problem is less game mechanics related, but more a question of the different attitudes you approach the different games.

Do you still not understand what I am saying? If an enemy can see the piece of ground you are on, then you damn well can see the ground he is on. I don't care if he is dug in, up a tree, floating in a balloon, you can see the ground. You may not see him but you can see the ground, why is that so hard to understand? You CANNOT look east and have something blocking your LOS, and then have someone in the east look west on the same level ground and be able to see you, it is impossible! Are they looking over the obstruction, around it, under it, through it, how? Take a walk outside and stand in one spot, go down the road and turn around, bet you can see where you were standing, or did a hill suddenly spring up?

It all boils down to science. All light travels in a straight line unless acted upon by a refracting force. Therefore, the light from his position travels in a straight line to me, allowing him to see me. The recourse is true, light travels from me to him, but in this case the line is blocked blocking my LOS. That is impossible unless he has refracting sites on his AT gun. Light cannot travel in one direction unimpeded and return on the same course impeded.
Some of us are busy doing things; some of us are busy complaining - Debasish Mridha
02-25-2015, 11:01 PM,
#43
RE: I hate PzIVs

.png   CM blocked LOS.png (Size: 18.95 KB / Downloads: 27)
02-26-2015, 09:12 AM,
#44
RE: I hate PzIVs
@Steiner14

LOL! Nicely put.
02-27-2015, 02:00 AM,
#45
RE: I hate PzIVs
(02-23-2015, 05:17 AM)Weasel Wrote: [re CMBN]..My biggest regret is that I spent $90+ bucks on this game.

I know the feeling mate, I just bought CM Black Sea for 83 GB pounds (128 US dollars) and didn't like it at first because modern tac warfare is a whole new ball game and I hadn't a clue what was happening on the field and lost 5 out of 6 ladder games (sniffle).
I was sorely tempted to hit the uninstall button but have decided to run tests, train up on the game against the AI and make a sensational comeback later on..:)

"I'm a little wounded, but I am not slain; I will lay me down to bleed a while. Then I'll rise and fight again"- John Dryden, poet, 1631-1700
02-27-2015, 05:42 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2015, 06:14 AM by Steiner14.)
#46
RE: I hate PzIVs
Enigma,
my post was not meant funny.

If we think about it from a business point of view, it's really not good, if customers must encourage other customers, who try to give the game a chance, to adopt a certain positive attitude to cope with the problems they discover.

I am wondering, if I look how small the fraction of CM realtime players is, how much customers have been lost and among new customers are being lost constantly, because of the huge limitations the idiocy to go realtime is responsible for?
Almost every day someone in their forums pops up and complains about a spotting, targeting or LOS problem. The amount of players that give up but wuld have liked to play, must be huge. The relation of the size of the community in CMx1 days to the current number of CMx2 players, despite the continuous development and updates for older games, probably gives a good estimation.

For example lets take the 7 second spotting cycle. How many problems still are reported because of it!
Or let's take the problem how spotting works when aiming at buildings. If the centre of the building is not visible, then it's not possible to area fire at a visible part of the building.
How many new players, for example experiencing how their units are mowed down by a unit in a house, have a tank available and want to shoot at the visible part of the building only to recognize, that they cannot, although they clearly can see half of a huge building? The new customers has no clue about the inner workings, that the geometric centre of the building must be visible. He just loses his unit because of a problem of the game. This really can kill games for players! How many will be frustrated - additionally to the steep learning curve! - but try a second scenario or a third and then uninstall the game and walk away in frustration?

Or let's take the 8x8 m action squares. That they cannot be reduced in size is also because of the CPU restrictions thanks to the realtime mode.

All that is because the engine must be able to handle all calculations in realtime.
And that probably also is the problem, why the software cannot use additional CPU cores. If it would be a true WEGO-software, then the LOS mechanism would be used during plotting mode without any action. No need to be ready for tiny timeslots to update the graphics and everything all the time. In the calculation phase the game engine would have all the time in the world to calculate the action phase.

It is never a good thing, if the developer of a software prefers to use the software in a mode that 100% of the customers did not even request for (before CMSF had been released there was no demand from the wargaming community to have a realtime mode). And still almost 10 years after introduction, probably 80% of the customers do not use this revolutionary brilliant mode, that brought us genius like things like relative hotkeys - but these 80% of customers are constantly reminded in every game and sometimes every turn about certain shortcomings because of the CPU limits, which are purely a result to make it realtime capable.

I can understand the frustration of players who see strange things happening and I believe it can only be overcome by adopting a strictly positive attitude. Otherwise the CM community would shrink even more. Therefore my post was really not meant scarcastically.


I don't think there are any realistic chances, with a developer on such a high realtime horse and with no idea what WEGO wargamers would need (i.e. hotkeys can be assigned to units, but the assignments are not saved with the turn Crazy ), that the WEGO mode would ever receive the calculations that are necessary to deliver the best results and in fact a round based simulation deserves, instead of the quick workaround calculations that are necessary to make RT possible.
But if they could accomplish that - or maybe even admit, that the whole realtime concept did result in a dramatically decimated CM-community and that RT was not able to compensate at least a fraction of the customers that were lost, I think CM could attract a much wider audience again.

Not only because the calculations could be made as exact and detailed as it pleases them without paying attention to CPU overhead, which probably would make 90% of all of the severe complaints go away, but by getting rid of the realtime calcs the won CPU power could even be used to improve the look, which could attract even more people.

Therefore I can understand Weasel or old CMx1 players, because they IMO correctly see, what would have been possible without the awful design decisions - and these decisions are hunting EVERY player all the time. If one thinks about it and where the game could be in the meanwhile, it's really not so easy to keep a positive attitude.

But sadly there is no alternative and the only thing to cope with the severe limitations thanks to the "greatness" of realtime mode, is by developing a positive attitude. The glass must be seen as half full.
02-27-2015, 06:25 AM,
#47
RE: I hate PzIVs
Why are you upset you over the Pz.IV?Most players do not use the.Best all-round tank in CMx2 is the Panther.
Pz.IV,Stugs and Hetzer are effective only in CMx1.
02-27-2015, 06:41 AM,
#48
RE: I hate PzIVs
(02-27-2015, 06:25 AM)Westland Wrote: Why are you upset you over the Pz.IV?
Because units can only be bought in QBs?
02-27-2015, 07:40 AM,
#49
RE: I hate PzIVs
(02-27-2015, 06:41 AM)Steiner14 Wrote: Because units can only be bought in QBs?

I see.The Pz.IV in the scenarios.This is annoying.That's why I only play QB.
02-27-2015, 08:07 AM, (This post was last modified: 02-27-2015, 08:12 AM by Steiner14.)
#50
RE: I hate PzIVs
(02-27-2015, 07:40 AM)Westland Wrote:
(02-27-2015, 06:41 AM)Steiner14 Wrote: Because units can only be bought in QBs?

I see.The Pz.IV in the scenarios.This is annoying.That's why I only play QB.
I have a different approach:
I assume each scenario was made with an intention and the scenario designer with a high degree of probability knew why he was chosing certain units. So if I only have StuG or PzIV or no tanks at all, then there is a reason for it and I must make the best from it.
So far I have not found a scenario which could not be won with adequate adaptation. The points usually are always determined the way, that there is a chance to win (even if it is a tough scenarion and the chance is small).
I personally like difficult scenarios more. To be very restricted with adequate weapons and the need to find a way way to achieve the given task, is something I prefer over the ability to have everything I need at my disposal. I grew tired of this kind of battles already at CMx1 times, which was the reason why I stopped playing ladder. I prefer to play an impossible mission over a balanced QB.
But to each his own.


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)