"Reality" and how it pertains to AA, also AFV's (armored fig

riesep · 07-01-2001, 11:59 PM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Recycled Spooge:
Wow, I should get Combat Mission. Sounds like a great game. I was suppose to download the demo a while ago but I forgot. Thanks for reminding me.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey I downloaded the demo for Combat Mission hoping for a lot of fun and I played it once. I hated the game. It was really slow and the idea behind it is that you command soldiers what to do while the game is stopped and then for a minute it goes again, and you place other orders. The vehicles were detailed but I didn't like the gameplay.

Cleft_Asunder · 07-02-2001, 12:04 AM

Hans, if the post means nothing to you don't reply to it. I was mearly trying to anylise what they really meant when they said they were creating a realistic squad level FPS, and that's what I have done. I added the occasional predictions throughout my post such as a hit-point based system for AFV's because this is probably what they will do at the end, I wouldn't be surprised.

BallisticWookie, I wasn't really being critical, I'm not saying TYPE 1 style gameplay should be included, reread my post and you should come to a different conclusion. As I said in the original post, implementing things like this would be more headache than payoff for the designers.

------------------
In the name of Allah.

Cleft_Asunder · 07-02-2001, 12:17 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Recycled Spooge:
Wow, I should get Combat Mission. Sounds like a great game. I was suppose to download the demo a while ago but I forgot. Thanks for reminding me.

<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Let me tell you, combat mission is hardcore. The gameplay it's self is a huge improvement over any other wargame to date, it works extremely well. The attention to detail is astonishing also. It's not a game that everyone will like but it has revitalised the wargame community single handedly. Oh and ever since the release the MOD community has played a crucial role in it's success, you should see the game with these amazingly detailed High-res MOD's, it's awesome looking.

Any way, it's a hardcore game and you might not like it, saying it's a bad game would be out of ignorance.

------------------
In the name of Allah.

Polaris · 07-02-2001, 12:48 AM

even if AA is not to your liking in terms of accuracy and realistic damage , i think it would be possible to be tweaked and modded in that respect . the developers are trying to make a realistic and fun game , with what they have .

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>The second type would be what AA is ACTUALLY doing. We have weapons with an infinite amount of magazines/clips, magazines are automatically replenished as they are put away.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Surviving the Omaha beach landing with rather little effort is a new one on me . <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

those dont sound like assumptions . that sounds like something i dont know and you DO . where did you come up with these assumptions anyway ? i would really like to know .

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Ballistic trajectories have been unrealisticly tweaked (read bullets will never be subject to the laws of gravity after being fired, no curve will take place, only a straight travel path until an object is hit).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

this has been discussed before ... in this thread ....

http://www.pcgamers.net/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000294.html

[This message has been edited by Polaris (edited July 02, 2001).]

riesep · 07-02-2001, 12:56 AM

Hey, I said that in my opinion it was a bad game. I didn't say it was a bad game, if you understand the difference. Reread my post and you should come to a different conclusion.[Cleft]

Cleft_Asunder · 07-02-2001, 01:41 AM

QUICKLY ABOUT TANKS:
I have to say since you implimented AFV's into the game that the only sound judgment I can make about this feature is that once I confront an AFV in Allied Assault I will most likely be dissapointed. Why you ask? Frankly because I've been a 'Combat Mission Beyond overlord' (CMBO, greatest wargame ever made) veteran for about a year now so I can tell you the armor thickness, slope, armament, muzzel velocity, horsepower, top speed of a Jagdpanzer or most tanks right off the top of my head. The result of so much knowleadge gained from playing this game only leads me to suspect that the tank accuracy in Allied Assault due to the actual scope of the game (which is squad based fighting) will be... hmmm, how can I put this... sub-par.

Allied Assault always seems to create an image in my head of a U.S. bazooka team firing off their first bazooka round directly into the front turret plating of a Tiger II and knocking it out. You see the irony of the situation is that a bazooka round amounts to roughly 90mm max armor penatration at 100meters which is not suitable for punching a hole through 185mm (DOUBLE!) 10 degree curved armor of a Tiger II.

Now that that's out of the way what I REALLY want to get to is analyzing what the AA team meant when they said that "realism" is being implimented into the game. There's two types of "realism" I'm thinking of right now, number one is:

TYPE 1: The type of realism where I am able to, within the game, grab a Colt .45 1911 from my ally who is handing it to me, fire off all the rounds from my magazine at the enemy and then have to manually reload my magazine one bullet at a time or any other magazine one bullet at a time. Another example would be if I push an MG42 to the point where the muzzel is about to melt and I have to change it, or the gun jams and I am forced to repair it or abandon it. I can already tell you that these are clearly out of the scope of Allied Assault for many important reasons, not particularly techonological limitations. Another example would be if I fire a Panzerschrek (~170mm penetration at 100mm) at the side lower hull of whatever type Sherman is being implamented into the game, the Sherman will be knocked out, no if's and's or but's. Realistically there are instances where Shermans absorbed high armor penetrating rounds but these are very rare so I expect a KO.

TYPE 2: The second type would be what AA is ACTUALLY doing. We have weapons with an infinite amount of magazines/clips, magazines are automatically replenished as they are put away. Ballistic trajectories have been unrealisticly tweaked (read bullets will never be subject to the laws of gravity after being fired, no curve will take place, only a straight travel path until an object is hit). Surviving the Omaha beach landing with rather little effort is a new one on me

. I'm sure a hitpoint based system is being implemented for the armored units instead of what I mentioned above, that is armor thickness ect.(sigh). Various other things I can't think of, off to the conclusion.

So Allied Assault is aiming for the later, TYPE 2, a more fun filled game were an eye wont get sand in it and turn the screen half black (har har). Saving Private Ryan went for realism but it also went for "hollywood", there were incaccuracies that were intentional, the movie was only realistic in that it created a CLOSE image of what the war was like. It's the same in games, We can create a game based on world war II and be extremely carefull on detail, however it wont make it the real deal, only the actual war itself was realistic. If the game was made using method TYPE 1 it will only frustrate most gamers, and there's more headache than payoff when implementing so much detail. Allied Assault doesn't do TYPE 1 nor does it want to.

------------------
In the name of Allah.

Hans · 07-02-2001, 01:55 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by Cleft_Asunder:
Hans, if the post means nothing to you don't reply to it. I was mearly trying to anylise what they really meant when they said they were creating a realistic squad level FPS, and that's what I have done. I added the occasional predictions throughout my post such as a hit-point based system for AFV's because this is probably what they will do at the end, I wouldn't be surprised.
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Your not anylising the game, your analyzing your own predictions. That is my point, that's why your post is meaningless. To truly analyze anything it has to be complete, this game is not, and you are only analyzing what you THINK it will be like. As I said before, wait until it is complete before you do this.

Recycled Spooge · 07-02-2001, 02:53 AM

Wow, I should get Combat Mission. Sounds like a great game. I was suppose to download the demo a while ago but I forgot. Thanks for reminding me.

------------------

-Waffenampt- · 07-02-2001, 02:58 AM

I know this at first sounds like it really shouldnt be here, but bear with me.

I too downloaded the "Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord" demo, I found the gameplay interesting, but not really all to realistic. While the game was being devolped, I watched the forum there at Battlefront.com for some time with interest. And I've found that there are many numorus historical discrepancies.

Especially in the presentation in the TOE. From what I read, they baised almost every detail of the German Wehrmacht, on a American Field manual on the German Army, Dated March 15th, 1945 ("Handbook on German Military Forces 15th March 1954 TM-E 30-451). This book was completed before the war with Germany was even concluded. It ended in Germany in May.

Visually I found the game limited in some areas, and overdone in others. I enjoyed that I could position the camera any and everywhere, but at the same time I did not feel like I was really in command of this battlefield in front of me. It is a cold and inpersonal game, like Command&Conquer.

The interface with your soldiers and other units was to good. To good to even be real. I feel that your ablitly to sit in your ultimate battlezone bullet proof hovercraft and tell every Unteroffizer and Untersturmfuhrer what exact blade of grass he wants them to lay in is a little too far fetched. To far out to be a "Reality." Over a crackling radio, sometimes without visual would be a little better off.

When I was reading the description of the game I figured you would be a Officer, sitting in your Command vehicle or laying in a field, behind some trees and issueing your orders under more realistic conditions.

So Cleft Asunder, I think it's from a entirly different perspective you are viewing this game. Look at my previous posts, I crave and desire 95% realism, but every game is limited by bugdet, time, and creative control. Nevertheless, Constructive insight of details and backround is important..

BallisticWookie · 07-02-2001, 05:53 AM

It's been said before, this isnt a realistic game, it's a highly realistic game, 2015 themselves have said they never set out too make a realistic war game. Their trying to make the game as authentic as possible, thing is some things have to be left out so the game can be playable and fun. This is supposed to be a fun game, but still serious. Alot of the things you mentioned in "Type 1" are being left out so the game can be playable. 2015 thought about implementing realistic ballistics, but that would require a substantial amount of cpu power to do, therefore making the game less playable and not run as smoothly as wished.
<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR> We can create a game based on world war II and be extremely carefull on detail, however it wont make it the real deal, only the actual war itself was realistic<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Your exactly right, so what are you exactly trying to say ?? Allied Assault doesnt "do" Type 1 because it never set out to do Type 1.
It is a game, have you ever played the first 2 MoH games on the playstation ?? I doubt it. Play them and see what the Medal of Honor universe is like. You may like it, or if your a details person like you seem to be, you may not. Just dont judge this game without having even played it yet.

-Waffenampt- · 07-02-2001, 05:57 AM

Please Note Correction!
The second date I wrote "1954" is supposed to be 1945. Sorry about that.

Recycled Spooge · 07-02-2001, 06:03 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by -Waffenampt-:
Please Note Correction!
The second date I wrote "1954" is supposed to be 1945. Sorry about that.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

------------------

Hans · 07-02-2001, 06:47 AM

Yes, you forgot the edit/delete button, again...

-Waffenampt- · 07-02-2001, 07:19 AM

Smartasses

Recycled Spooge · 07-02-2001, 08:19 AM

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:<HR>Originally posted by -Waffenampt-:
Smartasses<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Oh the irony!

------------------