Close Combat Series :: View topic

through

[^/[Print]\]
Goto page : Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next :| |:
Close Combat Series -> CC5 Stalingrad

#41: Re: Angriff Author: Manoi, Location: Brussels

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 2:14 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

Then they are creeps!

OK, it has been awile for me. But here goes the map size thing again. I have spoke on this many times in the past. For WW2 ...

In deployment tiles (which I believe equate to 24m square) even in the pevious scale.

18x18 - 20x20 = large map
15x15 - 17x17 = medium map
12x12 - 14x14 = small map

For CCMT I initially used 25x25 = large map = 600 meters square. An original CCMT map being 4800x4800 pixels / 40 deployment tiles per side = 120 pixels square per deployment tile. An element being 40 pixels square?

600 meters square would be a goodly size for any infantry only conflict, and considered very large for any map containing plenty of obstructions found in a city like Stalingrad.

The main conflict is large maps could be needed to satisfy the needs of the campaign game, which could be in direct conflict with using the same map for a single battle, and of course, single battles are used many times for multiplayer.

The fact that you cannot have 2 sets of VL (one for campaign games) and (one for single battle and multi player) presents the most formidable challenge.

Thanks

I agree with you on the VLs problem. It would even be interesting to have different sets of VLs for each side in single campaign

#42: Re: Angriff Author: Manoi, Location: Brussels

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 2:25 pm
—

Stwa wrote (View Post):

600 meters square would be a goodly size for any infantry only conflict, and considered very large for any map containing plenty of obstructions found in a city like Stalingrad.

The main conflict is large maps could be needed to satisfy the needs of the campaign game, which could be in direct conflict with using the same map for a single battle, and of course, single battles are used many times for multiplayer.

.

I'm busy to consider this problem in the cutting of the stratmap. Compared to the old Stalingrad mod, I was forced to gather important key points on the same map (as sample grain elevator and South railwaystation or Stalingradskii (airfield) and Pilots school) but all the maps will have a good cover of the city. (600 meters should be enough to respect the geographical accuracy)

#43: Re: Angriff Author: Stwa,

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 3:02 pm
—
If true, then the shapes of the maps can be made to loosely conform to the shapes of the strat map sectors. Its an old adage, and I am sure you are already aware, to use mainly square of near square maps for the main areas of confrontation and long side rectangles for the bottlenecks or transistions on the strat map.

But all that is just a generalization, the strat map will become mostly the authority regarding the shapes of the maps.

And at 600 meters X 8 pixels per meter you are back to 4800 pixels (the size of an original CCMT map). My system, a vintage Athelon 2000, with an antique Radeon 9600 processes a CCMT map with no problems, even vehicles move smoothely with 2 GB of ram.

I would just caution that 600 meters might be a very large map using the sizes I gave above. The main problem, being that the number of VLs (which are 16) has not been scaled up like the ground scale. Just assuming a factor of 8/5 or 1.6 you might need 16 x 1.6 = ~26 VLs. The assumption being that the software measures distance between VLs simply using pixels while possibly not accounting for the distance in meters, and in so doing compelling units controlled by the AI to do nothing. (ask Steve) Please note the area or size of the VLs has been scaled properly.

A similar situation may exist when it relates to movement and its speed. Some people were reporting slower movement speeds, perhaps because of the sizes of infantry and vehicles, or perhaps the longer distances now required as measured in pixels, (again ask Steve), becuase if true, there are more scales in effect besides the ground scale.

#44: Re: Angriff Author: Drizzt,

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 5:34 pm
—
to Manoi: I had misunderstood about Vls (I thought you speak about also the normal Vls). Now it's clear. In this case.. Yes, east: maybe not all toghether so much at east (not too much near one each other), but anyway yes, all in the "second part" of the rectangle.
About square shape and IA: I agree with you. The maps of my examples are rectangles "more high", but yes, also them can be less competitive than a "classic" rectangle map. I think that the important thing it's don't carry to the extreme this concept (map rectangles really too low), for don't lose the possibility to flank the enemy or sneak behind him. Anyway, I have trust in your judgement.

Drizzt

#45: Re: Angriff Author: Nomada_Firefox,

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 6:20 pm
—

Manoi wrote (View Post):

Nomada_Firefox wrote (View Post):

You can mod all you want, at least you can be how nobody go to pay you as you tried at a first moment......

I.

every work deserves salary but I have understood now that my best reward will be the satisfaction of the (eventual) players... Smile

If you are not happy, you can make mods for any game from steam workshop. But request money by a mod, it kills the idea from a mod.

At the end, you should not try sell us BF as worse than GTC. From BF we do not know too much and from GTC we know everything.

#46: Re: Angriff Author: Manoi, Location: Brussels

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 8:15 pm
—

Nomada_Firefox wrote (View Post):

At the end, you should not try sell us BF as worse than GTC. From BF we do not know too much and from GTC we know everything.

??? I work on TBF!

#47: Re: Angriff Author: Manoi, Location: Brussels

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 8:20 pm
—

Drizzt wrote (View Post):

to Manoi: I had misunderstood about Vls (I thought you speak about also the normal Vls). Now it's clear. In this case.. Yes, east: maybe not all toghether so much at east (not too much near one each other), but anyway yes, all in the "second part" of the rectangle.
About square shape and IA: I agree with you. The maps of my examples are rectangles "more high", but yes, also them can be less competitive than a "classic" rectangle map. I think that the important thing it's don't carry to the extreme this concept (map rectangles really too low), for don't lose the possibility to flank the enemy or sneak behind him. Anyway, I have trust in your judgement.

Drizzt

thanks. the goal is to make previews and ask the opinion of the community throughout its development.

#48: Re: Angriff Author: Nomada_Firefox,

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:00 pm
—
[quote="Manoi";p="79298"]

Nomada_Firefox wrote (View Post):

??? I work on TBF!

If you work at BF, why are you speaking bad about it?

#49: Re: Angriff Author: Manoi, Location: Brussels

Posted: Tue Feb 03, 2015 9:50 pm
—
[quote="Nomada_Firefox";p="79300"]

Manoi wrote (View Post):

Nomada_Firefox wrote (View Post):

??? I work on TBF!

If you work at BF, why are you speaking bad about it?

???? where? Shocked

#50: Re: Angriff Author: Pzt_Crackwise, Location: Switzerland

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2015 12:14 am
—
Firefox, I think Manoi opened this thread to get input for his mod. No need to start an unnecessary flame war here. Send him a private message or something instead, if you really want to ask him other stuff.

#51: Re: Angriff Author: Stwa,

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2015 2:01 am
—

Pzt_Crackwise wrote (View Post):

Firefox, I think Manoi opened this thread to get input for his mod. No need to start an unnecessary flame war here. Send him a private message or something instead, if you really want to ask him other stuff.

++ Pzt_Crackwise

It would seem to moi that 2D CC titles, at least from Matrix, may finally be behind us. If true, what is done is done, and it is all history now. It went down the way it went down.

The good news and the bad news: A modder has several platforms to choose from. Each with different capabilities and even scales. Eeek!

So, if you can't find a way to have fun with CC, you are just a sicko. Laughing

#52: Re: Angriff Author: Tejszd, Location: Canada

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2015 3:25 am
—
Medium/Large maps or medium maps with cover at the entry VL's are required.

You do not want maps like some of those in CC4 which were small and lacked cover which resulted in immediate fire fights between soldiers/tanks and then artillery/mortar support dropping into the small entry area. There was no tactics on maps like that....

#53: Re: Angriff Author: dj,

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2015 4:59 am
—
Wow, best thread ever. AI Sucks. No Multiplayer Sucks. We all know AI and Multiplayer sucks on almost every CC game released with the exception of CC2 for AI. The current owners of CC game simply do not have the financial resources or realistic budget to truly fix the game the way we know it needs to be. In the meantime, just be grateful Manoi wants to make a new mod and stop being such cynics.

#54: Re: Angriff Author: Nomada_Firefox,

Posted: Wed Feb 04, 2015 3:35 pm
—

Manoi wrote (View Post):

Nomada_Firefox wrote (View Post):

Manoi wrote (View Post):

Nomada_Firefox wrote (View Post):

??? I work on TBF!

If you work at BF, why are you speaking bad about it?

???? where? Shocked

People sayed how it would not be a success and you did not defend the game. Just you were selling the good points from GTC. One thing which I can understand. But not about BF.;)

Pzt_Crackwise, are you a moderator? you are nobody for say to the people what they must speak.

[quote]You do not want maps like some of those in CC4 which were small and lacked cover which resulted in immediate fire fights between soldiers/tanks and then artillery/mortar support dropping into the small entry area. There was no tactics on maps like that....

At multiplayer can be but at singleplayer, with GTC, at a big map, you must wait to the IA for hours and it will launch a kamikaze attack where you would not see any tactic.

In the other point, you will not be able play a multiplayer game without lag and crashes at GTC most of the times. If you do not trust it, check the matrix games forums, last Close Combat games are the unique games with thousands of reclamations from players about how it runs bad at multiplayer and lately people have started to request a better IA for BF, mostly because they are tired from multiplayer games.

Now your choice but it is the true.

#55: Re: Angriff Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:20 am
—
Hi Firefox,

I know you are trying to present what you believe to be the truth concerning these titles.

But even at this stage in the game, most of us are simply observers. Just do the research before you buy. It probably holds true for many games now days, and for a lot of good reasons.

But I was talking with someone in a CCMT forum that reminded me that he had wasted $30 bucks on lots of stuff during his lifetime, so purchasing a game that didn't turn out so well is no big deal.

Maybe find a title you do like, and rock and roll.

#56: Re: Angriff Author: dj,

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 4:59 am
—
@Manoi - is there any way you can make the maps smaller? It is OLD problem with the AI issues with larger maps. PJ I remember also had a way to address this for his Stalingrad mods besides the smaller maps, don't recall exactly what he did.

#57: Re: Angriff Author: Nomada_Firefox,

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 5:45 am
—

Quote:

I know you are trying to present what you believe to be the truth concerning these titles.

I´m not speaking about what I believe. I speak about believe the players.

I do not speak about lose or not $30, but most of the GTC titles are more expensive than $30. However, I have bought most of them.

But I was speaking about three problems from the game.

-Bad IA.

-Bad multiplayer.

-Very few players.

If Manoi wants ignore all these three points very good. But at least as DJ says, he can try improve some of them with smaller maps. With smaller maps, he would fix the two first points.

#58: Re: Angriff Author: johnsilver, Location: Florida

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 7:04 am
—

Quote:

PJ I remember also had a way to address this for his Stalingrad mods besides the smaller maps, don't recall exactly what he did.

Hi DJ,

Yeah, PJ and Selhexe were talking about that on one of the OLD Stalingrad post/topics long ago and PJ posted how he did it, it was when PJ went ballistic over Selhexe making that vetmod for DK. Digging up that topic should find the answer.

Werf

#59: Re: Angriff Author: Stwa,

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:03 am
—

Quote:

I´m not speaking about what I believe. I speak about believe the players.

OIC, I doubt that. Do you REALLY speak for all these .... what ... PLAYERS?

Quote:

I do not speak about lose or not $30, but most of the GTC titles are more expensive than $30. However, I have bought most of them.

I have never paid more than $30 for any modern CC title. Perhpas you need self discipline or therapy or both.

Quote:

But I was speaking about three problems from the game.

There you go again.

Quote:

-Bad IA.

Just your opinion. I have always thought the AI not so bad, when you consider what it does.

Quote:

-Bad multiplayer.

Just your opinion. Multiplayer requires an environment apart from the code-line of the game.

Quote:

-Very few players.

A total non-issue. In all the games I have played over the last 5-6 years. I have needed only one player. Myself!

Quote:

If Manoi wants ignore all these three points very good. But at least as DJ says, he can try improve some of them with smaller maps. With smaller maps, he would fix the two first points.

So I didn't see that Map Size made the top three. Are you high?

#60: Re: Angriff Author: DAK_Legion,

Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:18 am
—
PJ said.....you are an american fat......

Close Combat Series -> CC5 Stalingrad

output generated using printer-friendly topic mod. All times are GMT

Goto page : Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 Next :| |: Page 3 of 6