Matrix Games Forums

These include two features requested on this forum. Can you spot which ones? [8D]

T-34s arriving along the road...

Infantry and ZIS-3s, not a fun area of woods to visit if you're German...

T-34s use a terrain feature to sneak up on the German flank...

Is that T34 firing while unbuttoned? Is the commander pulling the trigger with his toe?

Have you made squads showing five soldiers instead of three?

Also in one of the pics the track marks go over the tanks

ORIGINAL: wodin

Have you made squads showing five soldiers instead of three?

Also in one of the pics the track marks go over the tanks

If it's the picture I think you're talking about, Wodin, that looks like the telegraph wires, not the track marks[;)]

Thanks for the screenshots Erik. Nice to be able to see elevations. Looks good.

Now go and do a Mac version. [:'(]

All the best

Andreas

whoops;)

Yoozername,

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
Is that T34 firing while unbuttoned? Is the commander pulling the trigger with his toe?

While I appreciate your input and much of it is fascinating, I think you should re-read the first part of the game FAQ we posted when this forum went up:

1. What other games is this like?

Well, it's a 3D tactical game, so comparisons to Combat Mission will be inevitable, but it's not designed to be the same. This is designed to appeal to grognard wargamers, but also to less hard-core gamers who want to dip their feet in some wargaming. In other words, this does not intend to be the War in the Pacific of tactical games or the next CM, but it's way more historical than non-wargames and very enjoyable. If I had to compare it to existing games, I would say more of a cross between Close Combat and Panzer General (because it has campaigns).

We've spent a lot of time on realism, yes, but realism to that level of detail is beyond the scope of this game. There comes a point of diminishing returns in terms of development time vs. incremental historical accuracy. Keep in mind also that this is a first release in a series. As the series continues, I have no doubt we will continue to tweak and improve, always with historical accuracy in mind but also with the overall goal and scope of the game in mind as well.

Regards,

- Erik

ORIGINAL: wodin
Have you made squads showing five soldiers instead of three?

Yep, you got one of em! Actually, the game now supports _any_ number of soldiers per squad. We've set two defaults - five soldiers and three soldiers. For lower end systems, three is advised. Modding it up to 10 or 12 soldiers, however, is easily possible for anyone to do (though you'd probably need a heck of a rig to run it). I'll post a test shot of a ten man squad later on.

Also in one of the pics the track marks go over the tanks

As someone else pointed out, those are actually the wires from pole to pole along the road. I probably should have picked a different view angle.

Regards,

- Erik

ORIGINAL: Andreas1968
Thanks for the screenshots Erik. Nice to be able to see elevations. Looks good.

And that's #2 - That map shows the end of a gully, like a balka, that the T-34s were able to use for concealment and movement. It also shows some of the terrain shadowing. We do have support for lighting and shadowing on the terrain, but it comes across more clearly in some maps than in others as it depends on the angle of the "artificial sun" and so on.

Regards,

- Erik

Much appreciated Erik, and the screenshots alleviate my concern about becoming snow-blind. [;)]

Question about the infantry and the AT gun. They look like they are not dug in - is that because they are not dug in, or because there is no graphical representation of being dug in?

All the best

Andreas

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Yoozername,

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
Is that T34 firing while unbuttoned? Is the commander pulling the trigger with his toe?

While I appreciate your input and much of it is fascinating, I think you should re-read the first part of the game FAQ we posted when this forum went up:

1. What other games is this like?

Well, it's a 3D tactical game, so comparisons to Combat Mission will be inevitable, but it's not designed to be the same. This is designed to appeal to grognard wargamers, but also to less hard-core gamers who want to dip their feet in some wargaming. In other words, this does not intend to be the War in the Pacific of tactical games or the next CM, but it's way more historical than non-wargames and very enjoyable. If I had to compare it to existing games, I would say more of a cross between Close Combat and Panzer General (because it has campaigns).

We've spent a lot of time on realism, yes, but realism to that level of detail is beyond the scope of this game. There comes a point of diminishing returns in terms of development time vs. incremental historical accuracy. Keep in mind also that this is a first release in a series. As the series continues, I have no doubt we will continue to tweak and improve, always with historical accuracy in mind but also with the overall goal and scope of the game in mind as well.

Regards,

- Erik

Thanks for the answer but I must disagree. I do appreciate that its your game and it will be made the way you see fit, but it isn't about historical accuracy but levels of technical details being modeled.

If you are going to model relative sighting, and have said sighting depend on conditions like being buttoned or not, then having a T34 tank being unbuttoned while firing is not only technically incorrect, its a gamey thing also. You are giving it a technical advantage it would not have had.

The game is not including that many vehicles. I would want the game to therefore model the nuances and technical differences of the German and Soviet vehicles. To me, thats the charm of having a game that focuses on such material (a battle).

The code is as simple as...

IF T34 firing is TRUE, THEN T34 is buttoned.

Yoozername,

ORIGINAL: Yoozername
Thanks for the answer but I must disagree. I do appreciate that its your game and it will be made the way you see fit, but it isn't about historical accuracy but levels of technical details being modeled.

It actually amounts to the same thing. Suffice to say it's something that would be painless enough to add and when we do have time to get to that level of detail, we will.

If you are going to model relative sighting, and have said sighting depend on conditions like being buttoned or not, then having a T34 tank being unbuttoned while firing is not only technically incorrect, its a gamey thing also. You are giving it a technical advantage it would not have had.

That's true, but it's a minor advantage in comparison. All the significant realism elements are in the game and the results are historical, though we're not looking to set a new benchmark for realism here (though we may in some respects). The results should nevertheless be more realistic than most and hopefully more fun as well!

The game is not including that many vehicles. I would want the game to therefore model the nuances and technical differences of the German and Soviet vehicles. To me, thats the charm of having a game that focuses on such material (a battle). The code is as simple as... IF T34 firing is TRUE, THEN T34 is buttoned.

The thing is, everyone probably has one feature (or a dozen) that would make the game perfect for them. Since this is really beyond our normal level of detail it will likely be something we do when we have time to make another detail/realism pass, which may happen after release. There's a lot of great detail like that which we can eventually build in, but we have to keep ourselves focused for the initial release.

Regards,

- Erik

Looks dam sexy.When's it gonna be on my hardrive?

ORIGINAL: Andreas1968

Much appreciated Erik, and the screenshots alleviate my concern about becoming snow-blind. [;)]

Question about the infantry and the AT gun. They look like they are not dug in - is that because they are not dug in, or because there is no graphical representation of being dug in?

All the best

Andreas

Also, if an infantry unit is defending, should its posture not be prone or kneeling?

And can you hit the specs to find out how many soldiers are in the unit (if not viewing 1:1)? Or is in the screenshots also?

The thing is, everyone probably has one feature (or a dozen) that would make the game perfect for them. Since this is really beyond our normal level of detail it will likely be something we do when we have time to make another detail/realism pass, which may happen after release. There's a lot of great detail like that which we can eventually build in, but we have to keep ourselves focused for the initial release.

Regards,

- Erik

By detail/realism pass, are we speaking of patch or another game in the series?

Many people would want a Demo I am sure. Especially for a first in a series of games. The demo would probably be the best debugging/detailing/realism pass you could do. CMBO had an extensive demo-feedback period and it was still fundamntally flawed. Fun but wrong.

Since this game focuses on mobile armored warfare (historically the battle was pretty much that), then I would like to see that area modeled correctly. It can still be plenty fun and technically correct. They are not exclusive.

Yoozername --

Build your own computer war game or stop whining like a baby about his one.

Thanks

Ive only got 512MB memory and a 64MB card, will it REALLY handle this game or will the screens be jumpy or grainy????