Graviteam
December 11, 2019, 12:09:05 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 38
  Print  
Author Topic: Any update on Mius front?  (Read 297294 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Dane49
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1479


« Reply #60 on: October 23, 2013, 09:34:23 PM »

Quote
This changes does not apply on tactical combat. This is a management system of the troops for _operational phase_, not for tactical. In tactical combat, you can still control by the squad basis, and even can manage individual teams.

I had this discussion with Andrey a few months ago also.I thought He may have changed his mind after reading the Facebook description.

Glad to see it is operational only and does not apply to the tactical phase of the game.
Logged
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 5845


Jerk developer


« Reply #61 on: October 23, 2013, 10:51:20 PM »

Glad to see it is operational only and does not apply to the tactical phase of the game.

Tactical phase we have not yet engaged. So I would in your place did not rejoice too soon  Grin.

It may be an option as shown in the fifth page
http://failteamtactics.blogspot.fi/

is not too far from the truth Smiley
Logged

Реклама для игры показывала отличную графику и обещала стратегию и тактику Второй мировой войны. На самом деле не было ни графики, ни стратегии, ни тактики. Игра представляла собой серию грубых иконок, которые при нажатии ничего не делали, кроме отображения текста.
Dane49
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1479


« Reply #62 on: October 23, 2013, 11:02:27 PM »

If it is just an option I can live with that.
I would be interested in both actually.

I mostly just play QBs with company size units,so I like controlling the individual squads.
But with larger size forces it may be better to have the other option.
Logged
lavish
Oberst
******
Posts: 208


« Reply #63 on: October 26, 2013, 07:39:19 AM »

Management of operational phase sounds promising. But OMG, several regiments *KABOOOM*!?  Now I'm beginning to wonder what really happens when they start "messing up" with tactical phase. I'll make sure to keep one of my eyes watcing the news, while the another is playing the game and the another generating more failteam tactics.  Smiley
Logged
Schuck
Oberstleutnant
*****
Posts: 166


« Reply #64 on: October 26, 2013, 12:21:42 PM »

Hey Dane,
I see your point about the map, having a sudden edge to it wouldnt be great.
Its just i love the maps, but i have always found them to be to small.
I cant begin to imagine the time and effort that goes into producing them, so this isnt a critism.
I just dont think they give the oppotunity for movment, ie flanking and turning the enemy.
And smaller maps seem to funnel and concentrate men and armour into small areas, its possibley this that slows PC's to a snails pace.
Now a nice big 100km x 100km map of the Russian front, that would be GREAT! Grin

I also like to control individual squads. Especially as already mentioned, setting up AT guns in defence.
The Auto-positioning does put them in some very odd places!
I think the game play at the moment is spot on, and shouldnt be altered, after all "if it aint broken, dont try to fix it!"
Logged
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 5845


Jerk developer


« Reply #65 on: October 26, 2013, 01:08:22 PM »

Management of operational phase sounds promising. But OMG, several regiments *KABOOOM*!? 

In Shilovo DLC (latest version) you can see approx two infantry regiments and half of tank regiment from German side.
In Mius will be even more.

Is too much if you manage troops per squad basis (in operational phase). But in GTOS you can manage only on squad basis (in platoon area).


In GTMF you can manage on company basis (in battalion area) - setup reinforced coy and on platoon basis - setup priority and logistic strategy. Its more realistic for battalion commander rather GTOS method.

You cant move individual guns/vehicles or squads in platoons manually (as in GTOS). But you can "move" guns/vehicles or squads from one company to another (in battalion area) or personnel and supplies from one squad to another (in platoon area).

P.S. "move" is asking from AI of course  Smiley
Logged

Реклама для игры показывала отличную графику и обещала стратегию и тактику Второй мировой войны. На самом деле не было ни графики, ни стратегии, ни тактики. Игра представляла собой серию грубых иконок, которые при нажатии ничего не делали, кроме отображения текста.
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 5845


Jerk developer


« Reply #66 on: October 26, 2013, 01:14:48 PM »

Now a nice big 100km x 100km map of the Russian front, that would be GREAT! Grin
I also like to control individual squads.

Give the control of the troops in one turn during 8 actual hours, not less!

Reposition of 1000+ squads in 200 platoons manually it's so beautiful.
Logged

Реклама для игры показывала отличную графику и обещала стратегию и тактику Второй мировой войны. На самом деле не было ни графики, ни стратегии, ни тактики. Игра представляла собой серию грубых иконок, которые при нажатии ничего не делали, кроме отображения текста.
chashka17
Oberstleutnant
*****
Posts: 133



« Reply #67 on: October 26, 2013, 04:01:05 PM »

Seems as if GT are 'incorporating' the idea behind Histwars' mechanics - where nothing smaller than a regt is interacted with http://www.histwar.com/  (Another small dev who has given up a huge chunk his life to a monumental project.)
This concept works very well for a Napoleonic setting & its' style of balletic tactical maneuvers.

In WW2 some micro-management seems desirable if the AI placement algorithms aren't tweaked more.  But I fully expect more tweaking - GT has a track record of improvements. 
It will be interesting to see if the sweet-spot is hit with platoon/company level AI management.

Recently I played some ToW2 & it was interesting to see the already huge difference between micro-managing every unit & then going back to GTOS to compare AI behavior.
I think Andrey is correct in his assertion that the level of micromanagement would cripple the player if individual units needed management, given scale. The fluidity of the game is one of the things that really hits home after playing ToW again.  Bigger maps, more units & thus bigger battles with regular 'toy soldiers' certainly take forever to organize  Smiley

I recall a trend in older games where 1 unit sprite became a group of sprites - giving the illusion of many units but effectively coded as a single entity.  I think this approach may be present in some ways within HWLGs unit/regt handling.  Assigning individual unit sprites & characteristics to an AI en bloc promises to create plenty of new head-aches & not just for the players.   Grin
Logged
Dane49
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1479


« Reply #68 on: October 26, 2013, 04:07:57 PM »

I enjoy the larger maps also.
Not for larger battles but for having more battle areas to choose from
when setting up a Quick Battle.

The game plays best for me when I assume the role of the company or
platoon commander.

Otherwise if I have too many forces on the map to control I have to move
the camera further up into the sky to manage those forces.

I love the detail of the maps and the units and prefer to keep the camera
at ground level as much as possible.This is where the game shines the most
for me,which is why I mainly play Quick Battles and usually with no more
than a company per side.

I've yet to find a game that does this better at this level.
My greatest wish is that more people become interested in this game and
Graviteam is able to generate enough profit to be able to expand this
series into other theatres of WW2.

I think they would do a wonderful job with the Battle of the Bulge in the Ardennes.
« Last Edit: October 26, 2013, 04:23:27 PM by Dane49 » Logged
Schuck
Oberstleutnant
*****
Posts: 166


« Reply #69 on: October 26, 2013, 05:19:01 PM »

Obviously the movement of such large amount of men and equipment, 1000+ squads would only take place in the map phase (operational phase).
And maybe they could be moved in Company size (or maybe even Battalion) only on the map. As it is now.
The number of squads would still be limited by the number and size of the fighting area, ie 3x3 km (9 squares). And wether you limit the forces available in the game settings.

So what i mean is, leave everything as it is (ive grown to love the new orders system!) just with bigger maps to allow better movement over a wider area.
On the small maps we have now, flanking manouvers are all but impossible.

It would appear Dane i play the game exactly as you do, at ground level for maximum emersion.
After i have positioned my men and the game starts i never look at the map. Instead i use one i have printed off with the key points marked on it.
So much more realistic.

The Ardennes, that would be nice.
Logged
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 5845


Jerk developer


« Reply #70 on: October 26, 2013, 08:53:54 PM »

News about troop management system
https://www.facebook.com/Graviteam/posts/610427445683200
Logged

Реклама для игры показывала отличную графику и обещала стратегию и тактику Второй мировой войны. На самом деле не было ни графики, ни стратегии, ни тактики. Игра представляла собой серию грубых иконок, которые при нажатии ничего не делали, кроме отображения текста.
chashka17
Oberstleutnant
*****
Posts: 133



« Reply #71 on: October 27, 2013, 10:16:09 AM »


This looks good.  I am curious about player structure-control relative to scale.
When allocating units to battle groups can the player select which entities go where?  Or is it always automatically done by the AI?
e.g. I want Pilyushin as my lead scout in a specific squad, am I given that level of interaction if I want it?
& on a similar note - The RPG element of individual characters, their stats, awards etc is always more immersive for me, will this aspect be diminished in the new engine?  (more units = more stats = more pages - a lot of scrolling or sub-levels might be req'd.)

My understanding of late war tactics esp. for Germany implies that almost 'random' unit composition occurs - Grab whatever is about & make it work. 
Is the new structure flexible enough to handle this via AI or by allowing player assignments?  (Could be year specific for historical accuracy).
Logged
chashka17
Oberstleutnant
*****
Posts: 133



« Reply #72 on: October 27, 2013, 10:47:34 AM »

I enjoy the larger maps also.
Not for larger battles but for having more battle areas to choose from
when setting up a Quick Battle.

The game plays best for me when I assume the role of the company or
platoon commander.

Otherwise if I have too many forces on the map to control I have to move
the camera further up into the sky to manage those forces.

I love the detail of the maps and the units and prefer to keep the camera
at ground level as much as possible.This is where the game shines the most
for me,which is why I mainly play Quick Battles and usually with no more
than a company per side.

I've yet to find a game that does this better at this level.
My greatest wish is that more people become interested in this game and
Graviteam is able to generate enough profit to be able to expand this
series into other theatres of WW2.

I think they would do a wonderful job with the Battle of the Bulge in the Ardennes.

I find I need to have a birds eye view to get a sense of the ebb & flow.  Too easy to get drawn into one particular exchange & forget the rest of the field  Grin 
[hence my (impossible) wish for a game recording VCR so I can get my up-close fix for every little event.]
I guess it comes down to balancing squad leader with general perspective.  I've seen sims/games fail when they have tried to be all things at all levels.  A great concept versus the restrictions of code.  Andrey seems like he has a handle on this as far as MF goes though.

It would be great to see more from the game in terms of theatres.  But I am happy to see one area done well - this is better than a slew of half-baked theatres. 

Driftng a bit OT
I've played a lot of ToW & that game more than any other at the time changed my taste for RTS type products.  Given 1C dropped the series after ToW3 Korea I have to ask what their numbers were like.  Big studio not short of resources (relatively) switches to (for me the huge disappointment of) Men of War.  (This series is, by far, not the worst WW2 game however!)

Can't help thinking that the band-wagon being swamped with some terrible games with a WW2 theme is largely responsible for the niche nature of this game. 
After seeing soooo much cr#p how many 'average' gamers are willing to even try another WW2 game?
Hollywood & co has done the same with movies - spin-offs & remakes & 'Z' list copies with similar names.  Not always easy to find a good product before boredom & low attention spans kick in & it's back to the game consoles for the masses  Tongue

All I can do is try to force as many buddies to play this game as possible & hope to break the WoT mentality pixel by agonizing pixel  Cheesy Cheesy
Logged
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 5845


Jerk developer


« Reply #73 on: October 27, 2013, 11:23:14 AM »

This looks good.  I am curious about player structure-control relative to scale.
When allocating units to battle groups can the player select which entities go where?  Or is it always automatically done by the AI?
All done automatically, in other case this feature dont have a sense.

The RPG element of individual characters, their stats, awards etc is always more immersive for me, will this aspect be diminished in the new engine?  (more units = more stats = more pages - a lot of scrolling or sub-levels might be req'd.)
All computed as in GTOS, even more precise in some aspects like a rearrange personnel in platoon (one exception is awards). But you dont have a direct control how to do this, only recommendations.
more units = more stats but few pages  Grin

My understanding of late war tactics esp. for Germany implies that almost 'random' unit composition occurs - Grab whatever is about & make it work. 
Is the new structure flexible enough to handle this via AI or by allowing player assignments?  (Could be year specific for historical accuracy).

In this case even better than before, since the choice of the AI ​​makes a certain element of the _controlled_ randomness.
You ask for something and you know that if it is possible you get it in general terms, but you never know what will be absolutely precise as in GTOS  Cheesy.
« Last Edit: October 27, 2013, 11:26:14 AM by andrey12345 » Logged

Реклама для игры показывала отличную графику и обещала стратегию и тактику Второй мировой войны. На самом деле не было ни графики, ни стратегии, ни тактики. Игра представляла собой серию грубых иконок, которые при нажатии ничего не делали, кроме отображения текста.
chashka17
Oberstleutnant
*****
Posts: 133



« Reply #74 on: October 27, 2013, 12:57:25 PM »

Thanks Andrey.
Sounds as if you are hitting a good balance between speed & fluidity of set-up / play & the unpredictable nature of battlefield changes.
A good approach to the emulation of command / logistics / conditions.  Makes me want to play it!  Wink
Logged
Dane49
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1479


« Reply #75 on: October 27, 2013, 01:22:56 PM »

Quote
It would be great to see more from the game in terms of theatres.  But I am happy to see one area done well - this is better than a slew of half-baked theatres.

I agree.
I wouldn't want to see a bunch of 1/2 assed products at the expense of 1 really good product.
If the funding isn't there to do the same type of job on a Bulge game with the same quality we've come to expect with the Russian front then I definitely would be against Graviteam moving in that direction.

Graviteam is the only company that makes tactical games at this level that I enjoy.
I certainly would hate to see them go out of business by making a bunch of garbage that just sounds interesting but looks and plays bad and no one buys.
I think they've come to the same conclusion.

I know Combat Mission is going to go to the Ardennes eventually and is the closest game in terms of how they depict tactical combat at this level,but I doubt they'll be able to do the kind of job that would satisfy my expectations the same way that Graviteam does.
Lately I haven't been impressed with anything BF has put out and I'm not even going to comment beyond this about their pricing or other restrictive features.
Since CM Normandy I haven't been able to play that game and the Italy and Market Garden games don't look interesting whatsoever or graphically appealing.

The people who play the CM games seem to be happy with and accept what BF is doing,so I doubt if anything will change much once they get into the Ardennes with that series.
They've even convinced themselves that graphics aren't even important,and micromanagement and being able to play a human opponent above all else is what makes CM  'Superior' to other games. Huh?
So I've basically given up all hope of any miracles ever coming from that direction.

I search the internet frequently looking to see if some other company other than BF or Graviteam are making these types of games,but haven't really seen any that would even remotely qualify as a candidate for my consideration.
So it looks like my only options are do without a Bulge game for now or hope Graviteam can one day find a way to do it.

Maybe(Hopefully)one day a publisher with some deep pockets will want to see a western theatre type version of this game and approach Graviteam to oversee that project and allow them enough freedom to do the job properly.
I'm hoping for that.
Logged
cuca_
Hauptmann
***
Posts: 35


« Reply #76 on: October 27, 2013, 04:43:12 PM »

AI is just dumb. I'm not sure if I understand all this but I know one thing, it's always bad to rely on AI.
Logged
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 5845


Jerk developer


« Reply #77 on: October 27, 2013, 05:59:33 PM »

AI is just dumb. I'm not sure if I understand all this but I know one thing, it's always bad to rely on AI.
AI not dumb and not smart. At the current level of technology use such "concept" to the AI ​​does not make sense at all.

AI operates on the basis of strong and logical algorithms, but human not. Therefore, the AI ​​almost always comes logically and deliberately, but it is not always clear to humans who does not think (yes most of humans dont think logically during a substantial part of the time  Grin) and work on emotions and feelings not on logics. From human's point of view - AI is dumb, but this dont right at all - AI is another Smiley
Logged

Реклама для игры показывала отличную графику и обещала стратегию и тактику Второй мировой войны. На самом деле не было ни графики, ни стратегии, ни тактики. Игра представляла собой серию грубых иконок, которые при нажатии ничего не делали, кроме отображения текста.
lavish
Oberst
******
Posts: 208


« Reply #78 on: October 27, 2013, 06:26:15 PM »

Graviteam seems to posses a certain ambitious approach to computer based wargame/simulation. It's not just face-lifting to increase marketing and sales - I believe they want to improve the game also for themselves. As long as that continues to be true (at least to some extent), we'll see interesting new things added the game. One at a time.

I'm happy with the operational changes and troop management system so far. I didn't find anything wrong or unlogical in it at first sight. You know, it's not about what is positive, but what is negative. You don't comment/critize positive things! Grin Funny that no matter how much the game is improved, it will never be complete because of it's nature. There's always someting to bitch about (theoretically speaking).  Cheesy
 
AI is just dumb. I'm not sure if I understand all this but I know one thing, it's always bad to rely on AI.

I think you are correct, if we look at things from the point of view of your comment. But if we think it another way, AI cannot be dumb. It's just a collection of scripts and algorithms (I don't believe it can learn and adapt - otherwise we would have a skynet problem already  Grin). Even with scripts and algorithms, if we can quantize all the necessary variables and understand their relationship mathematically, it's possible to do some magic. Smiley "AI" don't have to be perfect in all the cases. If it can produce results within satisfactory limits, it may be used to do the extra work for you that you simply cannot do by yourself alone.
Logged
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 5845


Jerk developer


« Reply #79 on: October 27, 2013, 07:11:19 PM »

I'm happy with the operational changes and troop management system so far. I didn't find anything wrong or unlogical in it at first sight.
Its not "direct acting" system. This aspect for many causes dissatisfaction. How is it? I ordered to do so, and stupid AI is not performed! Or did not do as I conceived Smiley

I think this new features are wide field for Failteam  Grin


 
Logged

Реклама для игры показывала отличную графику и обещала стратегию и тактику Второй мировой войны. На самом деле не было ни графики, ни стратегии, ни тактики. Игра представляла собой серию грубых иконок, которые при нажатии ничего не делали, кроме отображения текста.
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 ... 38
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder
Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!