Matrix Games Forums

Hi

I'm long time lurker and fan of old wargames: Steel Panthers, CMBO, CMBB.
I'm looking forward to new Panzer Command, hope its gonna be good and will replace my outdated Steel Panthers?

I like the fact that you resigned from having 1to1 representation in your game. Sometimes the less is more .


Meanwhile lets look at "amazing" soldiers AI in Combat Mission :Battlefront Normandy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUlEFUYz2TU#t=38m43s
German soldiers struggling with the monster obstacle: THE WOODEN FENCE. Reminds me GI Combat [8|] .

Oh, the humanity! That wire fence is more effective than a minefield at channeling an enemy force.

But there is more:

Check out this Panzerschreck team:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRqTkKVSrSo#t=24m49s

The thing that I notice is that the 1:1 level where every shot by every man is represented is there is a lot of firing and not much hitting. It may be realistic but it seems chaotic. You can't tell where firing is effective and where its just burning ammo.

I always get a kick out of first time posters who have to start out their life here with "negativity" towards a perceived competitor.  Doesn't say much about their character.  In fact, I would say it is proof of absolutely no character.
 
Oh...and I'm still waiting for videos of Panzer Command Ostfront.  We'll then get a better idea of how that game plays.  Until then, it's all just pretty pictures.

That's realistic. Combat is chaotic. It's not like an organized sporting event.

Good Hunting.

MR

ORIGINAL: RedCharlie65
I always get a kick out of first time posters who have to start out their life here with "negativity" towards a perceived competitor.  Doesn't say much about their character.  In fact, I would say it is proof of absolutely no character.

I don't have much experience judging others character. The videos do show that one should have a little experience and practice with the game before they produce a video of the way it plays.

ORIGINAL: Mad Russian

That's realistic. Combat is chaotic. It's not like an organized sporting event.

Good Hunting.

MR

Sorry but I dont agree with you.

These(videos) are obvious AI and design limitations flaws. Ofcourse the battlefield can be very chatoic but in real life every soldier has his own intelligence and can communicate - share informations with others.

You can't make a good 1to1 right now because it would require to write a very advance and complex mirco AI, almost near to full artificial intelligence.

In real life soldiers look around the corners, they sprint really fast to good cover positions, they analize situation, share complex tasks(even inside a squad) and they can think abstractly.

Thats why I prefer not so detalied games, beacuse they generalize things and assume that my soldiers(squad size) behave in right way.

LETS GO DEEPER.

The Panzerschreck situation/example:

1. In real life the other squad(the one who sees tanks) would tell or show the Panzerschreck team that tank is behind house.
2. Panzerschreck analyzes situation by looking around corner or communicating with other team.
3. Panzerschreck team thinks abstractly, assesses its chances and tries to shoot tank by beeing near the house or they refuse to obey the order if they think its too dangerous.


And thats just the simple 2 men vs tank situation.


And what about more complex like assaulting the house with full men team?


THE WOODEN FENCE situation is another, but more like a design flaw when you cannot give soldiers more complex orders.
In real life a Platoon commander would command few soldiers to crawl and make a holes in such fence first.
Or the soldiers would just try to jump over the fence and hide in fields.
But thats require an abstract thinking

ORIGINAL: genMaczek

LETS GO DEEPER.......

THE WOODEN FENCE situation is another, but more like a design flaw when you cannot give soldiers more complex orders.
In real life a Platoon commander would command few soldiers to crawl and make a holes in such fence first.
Or the soldiers would just try to jump over the fence and hide in fields.
But thats require an abstract thinking

CM has already received enough criticism for lacking player input. Some feel it is too much like watching a movie. Imagine if they took even more player control away. The player in the video obviously ordered the troops to advance across the field. It would really suck if the troops decided on their own that they should stop and dig a foxhole instead of trying to follow the players orders. The player could've chosen to advance his troops in a more 'realistic' manner but he admitted in that video that he was kinda new and not the best at the game.

ORIGINAL: genMaczek
snip....
Meanwhile lets look at "amazing" soldiers AI in Combat Mission :Battlefront Normandy:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sUlEFUYz2TU#t=38m43s
German soldiers struggling with the monster obstacle: THE WOODEN FENCE. Reminds me GI Combat [8|] .

I don't think that video shows what you are claiming....i see no struggling with the fence.
Most of the troops are kneeling near the fence and firing. Some are running up to it. And then there are some that jump over it and keep running. The fence itself is not preventing any troops from advancing....incoming fire yes, but not the fence.

I clearly see struggling, Some of soldiers are even jumping back(sic!) like they cant decide which side of fence is better [:D]. Some of them are going in circles, back and forth.
I dont think pinned soldiers behave like that. This looks like GI Combat to me.

And most of them do push ups but thats more like an animation system glitch that cant decide what stance soldier should have.


EDIT:
Dont get me wrong I have nothing against Battlefront itself. I just dont like 1to1 in wargames because I know you cant make it right.

All those games: Close Combat, GI Combat, new Combat Mission have the same issues. Its like the same song but by different bands.

If Matrixgames will decide to make a 1to1 in future PC games you know what I will do

Animation glitches are significant because hits are tracked by interceptions with polygons.  The video shows that the TacAI still struggles a lot.   Perhaps more than even in the CMx1 series.  I note Shermans turning and facing in odd directions, exposing their rear ends to the enemy front, or clustering into one another.

I really like CMSF and I own the Marines and Brit module.  Map detail is my favourite thing about the series.  TacAI and (especially) the way armor is handled are the biggest weaknesses -- everything is a huge obstacle, and facing is a constant problem with the AI.  Also it's been a good fun way to get familiar with modern stuff.

The game works best once you have experience with it, and can specifically avoid all the positions and situations where you know the game will have trouble.  (Particularly, on urban maps.)  I agree with most of the stuff Undead Reindeer Cavalry says on their forum.  He has noticed for example, that keyhole firing is very difficult to manage because of the tile system.  1:1 would be more functional I think if the player could have some say on how the arrangement of troops will work within the tile.  Too many times they don't go where you want, or they don't use cover. 

1:1 could be made to work better, I wouldn't give up on the concept based on one series.  That said, I'm definitely a convert to PzC.

Question -- can tanks run over light obstacles in PzC:O? Or are we going to be driving around wood fences and bushes still?

ORIGINAL: genMaczek

I clearly see struggling, Some of soldiers are even jumping back(sic!) like they cant decide which side of fence is better [:D]. Some of them are going in circles, back and forth......snip

I think what you're seeing is due to the fact that the area to where the squads movement is plotted is very close to the fence and since the squad takes up a much larger 'space' than just one soldier, some of the individual soldiers within the squad seem to be acting a bit odd due to their space coinciding with the fence's space. Once they get to where they were ordered to go, there is a bit of jostling before they settle down.
I'm sure there is a better way to say what i'm trying to say but hopefully you get my point.
Remember too that what you're seeing is beta code.

And for the record, i'm not a shill for Battlefront and i realize that no game, including this one, is perfect. I'm not even necessarily disagreeing with you on the 1v1 issue....i just don't think the fence in the video is causing the problems that you think it is.

Every game design has its corner cases. Representing infantry at the 1:1 level has corner cases in CM and also had them in CC and EYSA. Similarly, SP and Panzer Commmand also have their corner cases. We do the best we can in design and development to minimize those, but at some point every game asks us to suspend our disbelief to some degree.

I own and have played every CM game. I think they're great, but it's true that they are going in a somewhat different direction than Panzer Command and I think for that reason there is room for both. Panzer Command: Ostfront should make you all happy and I'm sure CM will too - some players will prefer one approach over the other, others will like both just as much for different reasons. We may have different design philosophies, and obviously we feel that our game is the best, but there are many ways to build a great game. [8D]

We're focused right now on getting the demo and the full release out to you all. The demo should be much better than another movie at showing you how Panzer Command: Ostfront plays. Hopefully gamers who passed on Winterstorm and Kharkov will give Ostfront a look as I think it has come a very long way and addressed most if not all of the wish list items from the previous releases.

Panzer Command will also continue after Ostfront, with plans for future releases in the works and all gamers are welcome here. We hope you'll join us.

As a gentle reminder, constructive criticism of other games and developers is fine, though we prefer that you address it to them, but bashing (non-constructive criticism) is not. So far, this thread is constructive but I'd also encourage you to give your feedback directly to Battlefront.

Regards,

- Erik

ORIGINAL: Pillar
Question -- can tanks run over light obstacles in PzC:O? Or are we going to be driving around wood fences and bushes still?

Most light obstacles don't interfere with movement of vehicles and troops. Often a map is configured with movement delay terrain under a fence. This will slow movement of vehicles and troops.

At the end of development there was a new feature added to knock down fences and trees when a vehicle rolled over it but almost all maps were created before this feature. The feature also has the added un-FOW of showing something being knocked down when the vehicle was out of sight. I don't use it.

I have played CMSF extensively, CM1 forever, and a lot of PC.  PC is closer to CM1 than CM2 will ever be.  To me it is much more the successor to CM1 than CM2 will ever be.  1:1 does one major thing wrong for CM.  It forces BFC to spend huge amounts of time and effort on animation.  Time better spent fixing the horrwndous QB system in CMSF.
 
Other than BFC not truly finishing CMSF, I do enjoy it as a tactical simulation of modern war.  For WW2, PC has a shot at it over CM2.

ORIGINAL: genMaczek

But there is more:

Check out this Panzerschreck team:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gRqTkKVSrSo#t=24m49s

It looks bad, but:

They never had a chance, because:

The tank turret already turned in their direction.
They should have been issued a Hunt order instead of a Quick one.

Once appropriate peeking around corner behavior will be implemented (and I bet it will), these situations will be handled just fine with one-on-one modeling.

Best regards,
Thomm

1:1 does one major thing wrong for CM.  It forces BFC to spend huge amounts of time and effort on animation.  Time better spent fixing the horrwndous QB system in CMSF.

But the guy doing the animations is certainly not the guy who is making the QB corrections, is he?

Do you mean TacAI for individual soldiers?!

Best regards,
Thomm

Yeah, but I assume they both get paid.  The way businesses work is if someone is doing something you don't need. get rid of him and hire soemone to do something useful.  Steve stated several times the individual soldier animations were the biggest bottleneck next to programming and one guy had been doing that almost full time.  And the animations still aren't quite right.  Can that guy, abstract the squads, voila, hire another programmer to actually fix things.