Close Combat Series :: View topic - What the problem with CCMT weapons, a consumer debate..

What the problem with CCMT weapons, a consumer debate..

through

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

#21: Author: Therion,

Posted: Fri Apr 25, 2008 12:57 pm
—
Hmm...
Does anyone know where in the internet I can find RL penetration data for small arms ammo and some information on effects of HE weapons?

#22: Author: Therion,

Posted: Wed Apr 30, 2008 11:45 am
—
*bump?*

#23: Author: Tula,

Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 12:53 am
—
Interesting topic you bring up here.. When I first got this game I was personally annoyed with what seemed to be incredibly unrealistic kill power of some of the weapons at ranges they should not even reach. On looking at the actual data I only had a three phrase sentence to describe it... "What the F**K... Not only that I was quite annoyed with the lack of an accurate Opfor TO&E..

Great thing is this is one very easily modded game with very little effort to create a more accurate representation of a modern battlefield. I'm currently working on a Russian mod to this game covering Soviet and later Russian involvement in Afghanistan to Chechnya. In doing so I changed the data of the Weapons to reflect correctly what capabilities they should have. This simple moding has really brought the Close combat back into Close combat Modern Tactics...Differences are night and day between the stock version and the moded version.

This actually IMHO has increased the fun and usefulness of this game as you really do have to use current Infantry and armor tactics. Real close action fights are now brutal but long range sniping and skirmishes just suppress and disorient. Not obliterate you... You can keep your armor in the right place to still support but not get whacked by an RPG because you can actually get infantry close enough to support the armor and suppress the Hand AT weapons before having the whole team obliterated by some dude with an AK at 500 meters.. Something which is bizarre as the damn thing can barely reach 100 meters in reality.

I'm not sure how or why many parts of the weapons data was chosen in the way it was but I can assure you that if you change it to be more realistic this game really changes and becomes very challenging...

#24: Author: Neural_Eclipse,

Posted: Wed Jun 11, 2008 11:59 pm
—
Unbelievable... are those really the values Matrix Games used for the weapon data? ... Why??? Honestly, this has a huge WTF factor to it.

Real world data:

This is good for cartridge weights, which I am sure were input wrongly as well, but it is not in metric unfortunately, so you would have to convert from grains to grams.
Velocities of ammo types
Example of what you can find at FAS.org, the penetration of the BMP-2's 30mm AC can be found in this link.

So is somebody making a mod to correct these horrible values? I do not own the game yet, but I would love to have a more realistic version of it compared to... well... I don't have words to describe the mess the weapon data is in. I would make the mod myself, but.. without the game in my hands, I cannot do that just yet.

So I am guessing the first patch did not address the f'd up values? I guess I'll just play Red Storm Rising for CCV for now..

#25: Author: Therion,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:47 am
—

Neural_Eclipse wrote:

Matrix Games

Errr...
Atomic Games and Simtek.
Amusingly, those Sci-Fi values were used by Atomic Games, when they were making a "simulator" for USMC XD .

Neural_Eclipse wrote:

So is somebody making a mod to correct these horrible values? I do not own the game yet, but I would love to have a more realistic version of it compared to... well... I don't have words to describe the mess the weapon data is in. I would make the mod myself, but.. without the game in my hands, I cannot do that just yet.

I was working on such mod, it was almost ready about month ago, but I never finished it because I have trouble with getting the game to use AP ammo for cannons.

So, basically it works, but mainly for infantry and light vehicles.
On the other hand, it features civilians.
And recently I experimented with uhhh... addding Space Marines XDDDDDDDDD .

Neural_Eclipse wrote:

So I am guessing the first patch did not address the f'd up values?

Nah, it only added more horror Very Happy

#26: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:53 am
—
The 2A72 30-mm gun data seems fine in game.

it cannot defeat an Abrams "class" vehicle

It can defeat a Bradley "Class" vehicle in certain circumstance

It can defeat a Stryker "Class" vehicle in most circumstance

and will generally defeat any vehicle in a lesser "Class"

#27: Author: Neural_Eclipse,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 3:10 am
—

Therion wrote:

I have trouble with getting the game to use AP ammo for cannons.

Have you tried copying cannon data from other CC titles that had the ammo loading setup right? I can't think of anything else to try. How would the soldier in the game determine which ammo to use? Does it go with 'higher blast radius' for anti infantry?

Oh, and I know that Atomic Games and Simtek made the original engine/morale simulator, but I was talking about this incarnation of the game specifically~ I suppose Matrix Games is just the publisher then.

Therion wrote:

And recently I experimented with uhhh... addding Space Marines XDDDDDDDDD

Is there body armor in the game? <3 Power Armor, but never could put it into the older CC titles, as the only armor on men was helmets.

Did your Space Marines have proper Bolters? Specifically, hand held Grenade Machine Guns? ;p That's what they are supposed to be, right? :D

#28: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:07 am
—
Neural_Eclipse the game also has another major bug, NOT A SINGLE vehicle has AP round or Sabots even in the data........................
How can one realise a military game with this major defect?

The values of the HE and HEAT is even more sad then the small calibre values. Uhh...

IMO This sad product CCMT should never had been realised to the market.
It brings nothing good to the Close Combat name.

#29: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 10:41 am
—
Lucky for all the happy owners your opinion doesn't carry much weight..

But your concerns have been noted with thanks.

#30: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:45 am
—

schrecken wrote:

Lucky for all the happy owners your opinion doesn't carry much weight..

But your concerns have been noted with thanks.

I’m aware my opinion don’t carry much weight to you or to the rest of the developer team. It’s a bit frustrating for me, as I expected CCMT to be a functional product, and realism a high priorety.
But you’re also not aware the data is so massively fecked up in the game it’s all but playable.

You nor non in the development team is humble enough to listen to the consumers; instead you just badmouth and just argues with consumers or even name call consumers who dare say anything not positive about your products. Matrix / S3 professional serious business ethics?

“concerns noted” is that all?
Not even when the data errors are presented to you (as in this thread) in a side by side comparison and detailed explanation in a graphics manner that a child should understand, you can bring your self to be humble enough to say or take in that CCMT data has MAJOR flaws..
And how can a military game be realised with no armour fighting vehicle having AP or Sabot munitions?? “concerns noted” ??

Thank you mr Matrix Consumer Relation man for your time and for not listen to me.

#31: Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 12:15 pm
—
Im in no way sticking up for shrecky, but hay, at least a S3T person is here reading ALL comments, is here making things happen, is listening...

...yes yes yes...i know, he may not be responding with immediate patches,and the best public relations way,but at least we have seen one patch,try getting one from atomic,SSI,simtek....GONE....nobody from them employed,its history. S3T is here and watching, the notes for CC6 wish list must surely carry weight.

also think about those who we all know for over 10 years, are in there now doing stuff...that gives me much happiness....I wont blowhard about there stuff,or shrecky,future games...but there will be a future.

long live close combat...
...burp

#32: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 1:54 pm
—
Tack, I have not really the same feelings about this as you have.

I’m a PAYING consumer, you not Tack, you part of the S3 Matrix developers test team, right?

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

Im in no way sticking up for shrecky, but hay, at least a S3T person is here reading ALL comments, is here making things happen, is listening...

No it’s not listening, your confusing it with him try to control the talk in a fan forum and what is said here about his products, I have NEVER seen anything like this in ANY gamers forum, I don’t know but its arguable a bit shady business practice of a developer?
And by the way, what is he making happening SO FAR, I have complaind for 6-7 month now about CCMT missreble data...
Matrix and S3 have chosen not to listen to the consumers, but to try to control what the consumers are SAYING about CCMT instead, that’s an interesting approach. .

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

...yes yes yes...i know, he may not be responding with immediate patches,and the best public relations way,but at least we have seen one patch,try getting one from atomic,SSI,simtek....GONE....nobody from them employed,its history. S3T is here and watching, the notes for CC6 wish list must surely carry weight.

One crappy patch adding nothing in data except MORE errors and EVEN more unrealistic values.
And if Atomic is gone, as they are, shall I be MORE happy for S3 matrix realise CCMT with such poor data?? Im not.. How can you be??
Im not jump up and down happy applauding anything just because it bare the name Close Combat. PERIOD.
For me the Close Combat name, ISN’T A SIGN FOR QUALITY OR A SIGN TO APPLAUD JUST FOR IT OWN SAKE; I applaud the realism the Close Combat product brought with em (Atomic made so far), not the name in it self.
Anyone realise a product with Close Combat name and expect me to pay for it, and to be happy the series continues is sadly mistaken, I will applaud only QUALITY and realism. PERIOD. How do you feel about this Tack?
If S3 and Matrix can’t deliver that, then it’s not quality “Close Combat” game in my book, and I wont have it. And whats the use of a crap product anyway tack, apart from the fancy name that use to be synonym of quality and realism!!

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

also think about those who we all know for over 10 years, are in there now doing stuff...that gives me much happiness....I wont blowhard about there stuff,or shrecky,future games...but there will be a future.

Hmm, what good does that do Tack, we have the data of CCMT, thats what they have ACTUALLY manage to DELIVER so far, and when its pointed out its crap, they still don’t listen, so Im sorry but I cant see any thing to applaud or be happy about. 10 years or 12 years or whatever don’t shange the current miserable status of CCMT…. Or Does it?
Or maybe im misunderstand you, and you meant all them modders who have been doing stuff for 10 years, they are sure something to aplaud and be happy about.

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

long live close combat...
...burp

Yes , at the end we agree on something Tack Smile

but dont expect me to jump up and down if its not quality, sorry..

I WANT A REALISTIC WAR GAME PRODUCT, THAT LIVE UP TO THE CLOSE COMBAT NAME! I want a professional handling of the consumers and fans. Is that to much to ask for after 8 years of draught?

#33: WH40000 Author: Therion,

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 2:51 pm
—

schrecken wrote:

But your concerns have been noted with thanks.

So, there will be a patch?

Neural_Eclipse wrote:

Therion wrote:

I have trouble with getting the game to use AP ammo for cannons.

Well, older titles tended to use HE against infantry and AP/HT against vehicles. It seems that it's dependent on Blast Radius and Blast Rating.
If Blast Rating is much higher, then it will use HT even if AP has greater penetration.
And changing BR of AP to higher would kill the point of adding AP ammo.

Neural_Eclipse wrote:

Oh, and I know that Atomic Games and Simtek made the original engine/morale simulator, but I was talking about this incarnation of the game specifically~ I suppose Matrix Games is just the publisher then.

Atomic Games made CC1 - CCM.
Simtek worked on various versions of CCM and CCMAT and CC3:CoI and CCMT.

Neural_Eclipse wrote:

Therion wrote:

And recently I experimented with uhhh... addding Space Marines XDDDDDDDDD

Is there body armor in the game? <3 Power Armor, but never could put it into the older CC titles, as the only armor on men was helmets.

You probably had old Qclone files.
There's body armour but there are some problems.
Soldier armour works correctly only in CCIV.
In CCV it gives a total invulnerability to a protected body area and in CCMT helmets don't give any protection.
So, I gave those marines a 50mm body armour with probability of 1 for head and 128 for body.

Neural_Eclipse wrote:

Did your Space Marines have proper Bolters? Specifically, hand held Grenade Machine Guns? ;p That's what they are supposed to be, right? Very Happy

Yeah. I borrowed Bolter graphics from the CC5 WH40000 mod (as I'm not releasing the SM part anyway XD ). They are pretty deadly and accurate Very Happy

UO0149.jpg

Description:

One Marine is worth a hundred other soldiers.

Filesize:

97.26 KB

Viewed:

9427 Time(s)

UO0145.jpg

Description:

A Combqat Squad purging the impure.

Filesize:

177.86 KB

Viewed:

9427 Time(s)

UO0136.jpg

Description:

A Tactical Squad cleansing the unclean.

Filesize:

198.22 KB

Viewed:

9427 Time(s)

#34: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Thu Jun 12, 2008 11:36 pm
—
concerns noted and documented and will be addressed in due course.

Of course if you have a burning need to edit the data and supply us with same, this will undoubtedly speed the process.

Any contributions will be duly scrutinized and acknowledged as is our policy ... see credits.bmp

Get on board, don't be a nay sayer.

#35: Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 5:40 am
—
"I’m a PAYING consumer, you not Tack, you part of the S3 Matrix developers test team, right? " Yes.

I also Agree the quality of the data is questionable. when i tested i spent hundrens of hours, and i thought it needed further tweaking of data.

CCMT was a fizzer for me,as it had NO ops or GC,i said so before release,and after. yes its a fun single game, and i enjoyed it.

#36: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:19 am
—

ANZAC_Tack wrote:

"I also Agree the quality of the data is questionable. when i tested i spent hundrens of hours, and i thought it needed further tweaking of data.

.

I also Agree the quality of the data is questionable. when i tested i spent hundrens of hours, and i thought it needed further tweaking of data

Hehh..
I had no idea you can Wright so diplomatic Tack.
Razz

#37: Author: AT_Stalky,

Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 7:31 am
—

schrecken wrote:

Matrix Staff Man:

concerns noted and documented and will be addressed in due course.

Of course if you have a burning need to edit the data and supply us with same, this will undoubtedly speed the process.

Any contributions will be duly scrutinized and acknowledged as is our policy ... see credits.bmp

Get on board, don't be a nay sayer.

Do the work your self. Start prioritize what the consumer think is important, either continue to waste time by interfere in the consumer debates about your product or make a shange and use that time to research weapon data so badly needed in CCMT.. That you should have done long ago… Fix it, it’s your broken product that YOU HAVE SOLD FOR MONEY.

I wonder how you would sound as a car sales man, talking to a complaining consumer who’s car is broken down? Maybe like this:
“concerns noted and documented and will be addressed in due course.

Of course if you have a burning need, repair the car your self, and supply us with the solution how you fixed it, this will undoubtedly speed the process. Don't be a nay sayer. "

Are you Serious? Get to work man!

#38: Author: schrecken, Location: Sydney, Australia

Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 11:14 am
—

Quote:

Are you Serious? Get to work man!

Please send money, it greases the the gears of industry.

or like everyone else, volunteer your time and and much can be achieved.

#39: Author: squadleader_id, Location: Soerabaja

Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 11:37 am
—

schrecken wrote:

Quote:

Are you Serious? Get to work man!

Please send money, it greases the the gears of industry.

or like everyone else, volunteer your time and and much can be achieved.

So you guys at S3T (the artist formerly known as Simtek) are still not getting paid for your work?? Are you all volunteers workers?
Well...Matrix is making (some) money from your work, guys Smile

#40: Author: ANZAC_Tack, Location: Australia

Posted: Fri Jun 13, 2008 12:08 pm
—
I have never been paid a cent at S3T,and probably wont ever. all i get is a copy of the final product,and name in credits...

yes Crazy tack, making $$$ for ex cso boys...blah blah blah..If i willingly do this, its a choice,if i went in employment and didnt get paid, thats criminal.

I get out of it is seing new systems,new maps,new graphics,see how things are done, i have a say on the project to some degree, i would love to mention the changes already...and how god dam nice it operates...but alais i cannot.

I enjoy it foremost,its addictive...EXACTLY THE SAME REASON i spent SO much time testing and helping dima on TRSM,and helping PJ on SOC,and L4W on early projects, why im SLOWLY doing voice cues for SL,and want to help with the project and testing...is FUN and learning for me.

I know people think im the sucker, i have been outright told so( the day ross posted his resignation here and reasons, i went into a spin for weeks on how much i was 'used',but now i have no regrets,and gladly do them again).

If anybody wants my help with testing, or just comments...Im a post away!

Im Nobody's Lacky Boy...If the product stinks, i'll have no problems saying so,after release...

Close Combat Series -> Close Combat Modern Tactics

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

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