Graviteam
March 28, 2024, 03:08:46 PM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 16
  Print  
Author Topic: Steel Armor returns :)  (Read 176479 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Tanker
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1134

BRING BACK MARKERS


« Reply #180 on: March 08, 2015, 01:57:14 AM »

Do we have re-download the entire game from Gamersgate, .. every time there is an update?
No, previous update have a critical bug with updater utility and our installer script. This is sad, but I hope fixed.
And next updates will be small and installed by standard way.


So we must download the whole game to get latest version from GGate, is that correct?
Logged

Bring back 3D markers!
Thomasew
Major
****
Posts: 97



« Reply #181 on: March 08, 2015, 03:27:56 AM »

Hi Tanker,


Apparently there was some issue with the installer, .. so, that's why you need the complete install vs. .. just an update patch/file.

I downloaded the 1st time on the 2nd of March, .. vers. 2398

I downloaded again last night .. now I have vers 2410.

However, .. I didn't notice anything different with the new installer vs. the older one ..  Huh?

.. then again, .. I never install to the default path e.g. C:\Program Files (x86) ..., .. rather to one of my RAID partitions, .. and I always leave out the 'Program Files' part of it.


I was bitching yesterday about having to re-download the entire game again, .. as I had, .. earlier in the day, .. been bitching at another developer, .. who screwed up an update on Steam,  which made the game unplayable. Apparently, .. the only way to solve the problem, .. was to delete all the local content, .. and download the entire thing again.  Angry

.. my solution?, ... I deleted the game from my account ..  Undecided


So, my apologies to Andrey & Co. for being a bitch yesterday  Embarrassed , ... it happens, .. fortunately, .. it's only once a month ..  Wink


Cheers
Tom
Logged

He Who Will Not Risk Cannot Win
Tanker
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1134

BRING BACK MARKERS


« Reply #182 on: March 08, 2015, 03:40:18 AM »

Tom,

Giving the version number is very helpful.  It would be even more helpful if Gamers' gate could list the version number offered on their site or it could be reliably posted somewhere when the versions change and what the latest one is  (looking at you here Krabb) Wink.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2015, 03:42:42 AM by Tanker » Logged

Bring back 3D markers!
Thomasew
Major
****
Posts: 97



« Reply #183 on: March 08, 2015, 03:56:39 AM »

Hi Tanker,


I definitely agree with that, .. I never know what I'm downloading from Gamergate ..  Huh?


Why don't Graviteam just have Gamersgate issue Steam keys for the game (for new buyers), .. like they do for other games. I've purchased a few games from GG, that just issued me a Steam key.

For those of us that already have the game, .. Graviteam should just issue us with Steam keys, .. and we can install from there.

That way, .. we wouldn't have this version mismatch, .. that seems to be prevalent at the moment. Steam apparently has a version after 2410.

Graviteam would then only have to update in one place, .. i.e. Steam, .. and we'd all be happy.  Grin


Cheers
Tom
Logged

He Who Will Not Risk Cannot Win
johncage
Oberst
******
Posts: 209


« Reply #184 on: March 08, 2015, 05:20:04 AM »

a lot of people don't want to have this game associated with steam. i believe they went steam because it gives them a wider consumer base. there's no inherent benefit to steam other than as a delivery platform.
Logged
Tanker
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1134

BRING BACK MARKERS


« Reply #185 on: March 08, 2015, 06:09:40 AM »

a lot of people don't want to have this game associated with steam. i believe they went steam because it gives them a wider consumer base. there's no inherent benefit to steam other than as a delivery platform.

One great benefit of Steam is automatic updates.  There is no need to mooch around trying to discover what the latest patch is.  Auto updates can be disabled if desired.
Logged

Bring back 3D markers!
chaudard
Generalmajor
*
Posts: 311


« Reply #186 on: March 08, 2015, 07:02:07 AM »

No thanks for Steam Tongue

I agree with Tanker about markers, adding an option for newbies is better. External view and crew transferring are not realistic, but they help the gameplay. Like 3D markers.

I realy think that you should merge GTOS and SABOW in one big game... And progressively add the control of anothers tanks like PzIV, Tiger, KV1S, T34, T-55, BMP, BTR, M113 and new maps through DLC.

And adding a warning to know the latest build number is a nice idea. Personally, my build number is 1983 and it works fine.
Logged
lavish
Oberst
******
Posts: 208


« Reply #187 on: March 08, 2015, 11:35:04 AM »

If you disable target markers, you cannot see squad markers on the map. At least this needs fixing. Dot icons on the map are not good for commanding and feel unrealistic.

IMO, target markers are annoying, clutter the screen, and makes playing the game too easy/arcadey. I always disable them.

Jumping from tank to tank is gamey, but it allows player to jump into action and continue playing if one tank gets destroyed. Good thing is it doesn't really break the battlefield realism or give player any advantage - keeping in mind that the player has an acces to full situation map anyway.

As for external view, I think it should be allowed only when unbuttoned. Otherwise it is very unrealistic. The only acceptable situation for external camera are screenshots or the moments when the tank gets stuck - the player as a crewmember is unable to dismount to see what happened, and thus the external camera can substitute for this behaviour. But yes, although unrealistic, it's sometimes nice to look the battle through the external camera.

BTW, I downloaded the newest version from Gamersgate, but I still don't have 3D deployment. That is in the next patch??
Logged
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 6642


Jerk developer


« Reply #188 on: March 08, 2015, 11:43:03 AM »

External view and crew transferring are not realistic, but they help the gameplay. Like 3D markers.
External view is worst, but suitable due to does not change the gameplay. Relocation between crew members is the same thing. But markers really pain, see post from Tanker http://graviteam.com/forum/index.php?topic=11818.0
it looks like 100% bug.  Grin

I realy think that you should merge GTOS and SABOW in one big game...
No, they will diverge as possible.

Now the main goal is to make the tank, tank crew+cockpit and tank platoon as a first class citizens, and then the tactical elements.
Practice shows that spend a lot of time on the map, it is not good.


And adding a warning to know the latest build number is a nice idea. Personally, my build number is 1983 and it works fine.
Grin
Logged

Пользовательский интерфейс будет неуместен на сегодняшних широкоэкранных экранах, а оригинальные карты неопределенного метра и моделирование чисел с низкими лицами заставляют людей действительно не хотеть играть.
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 6642


Jerk developer


« Reply #189 on: March 08, 2015, 11:50:38 AM »

If you disable target markers, you cannot see squad markers on the map. At least this needs fixing.
We don't disable markers on the map.

IMO, target markers are annoying, clutter the screen, and makes playing the game too easy/arcadey. I always disable them.
Yes but now, we disable it at all. No need to disable it manually. Use direction indicator instead, it performs the same role but not the cheat and not in center of the screen.

As for external view, I think it should be allowed only when unbuttoned. Otherwise it is very unrealistic.
It can be disabled or you can simply dont touch F3 button  Grin

BTW, I downloaded the newest version from Gamersgate, but I still don't have 3D deployment. That is in the next patch??
Will be in the first patch for GG, until it available on STEAM in the form of beta, as it will be finished, we will make a patch.
Logged

Пользовательский интерфейс будет неуместен на сегодняшних широкоэкранных экранах, а оригинальные карты неопределенного метра и моделирование чисел с низкими лицами заставляют людей действительно не хотеть играть.
33lima
Oberst
******
Posts: 273



« Reply #190 on: March 08, 2015, 12:48:35 PM »


Jumping from tank to tank is gamey, but it allows player to jump into action and continue playing if one tank gets destroyed. Good thing is it doesn't really break the battlefield realism or give player any advantage - keeping in mind that the player has an acces to full situation map anyway.

As for external view, I think it should be allowed only when unbuttoned. Otherwise it is very unrealistic.

 Jumping from tank to tank isn't unrealistic, tho the speed at which it is done probably is. If you're a troop/platoon leader and your tank is disabled, you take over another tank in your troop/platoon so you can continue to lead. Assuming you survive!

As for an external view, unrealistic yes but so is not having any peripheral vision, especially when playing TC unbuttoned. So I think it's an acceptable siutational awareness compromise.

I suppose you could say the same for onscreen markers and 'HUD' displays being compesnsation for the limits of 'MonitorVision' but I hate them with a passion and always turn them off. We might as well have gunsight markers in the external view and play WoT style. I have no difficulty with them being an option for those who think differently but they look truly awful in the 3d world and are not for me.
Logged

For it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "Chuck him out, the brute!"
But it's "Saviour of his country!" when the guns begin to shoot!
'Tommy', Rudyard Kipling, 1892
topnik
Oberstleutnant
*****
Posts: 133


« Reply #191 on: March 08, 2015, 01:28:39 PM »

In all the sims I used to play before (mostly aircraft and subs), the first thing I would do was turn the markers off. For some reason, I left them on in SABOW. Probably because I got used to them playing GTOS and APK43. Now that they are gone, I won't miss them much.  Grin

As for the external view, I love it - for taking screenshots and just watching my tanks move  Grin. I don't see any use for it during the actual combat, except maybe if I play as driver. Which I almost never do.

Changing seats and tanks is unrealistic, but I see nothing wrong about it. If you don't want to, don't. I once had a great fun when all the tanks of my platoon where destroyed, and all the crew of my tank was dead except me. I then turned on the "change seats" option (or whatever it is called - the one that adds a few seconds delay when changing position, as if you're moving inside a tank), and operated the tank by myself - driving, stopping to reload and shoot back, driving again. Basicaly I tried to bring my tank back home in relatively one piece. Didn't make it in the end but it was intense.  Grin
Logged
Tanker
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1134

BRING BACK MARKERS


« Reply #192 on: March 08, 2015, 04:20:54 PM »




As for external view, I think it should be allowed only when unbuttoned. Otherwise it is very unrealistic.
It can be disabled or you can simply dont touch F3 button  Grin


LOL Andrey, you are using the same logic I used to argue for keeping 3D markers.  If you don't like them, you can simply not enable them.  I guess it seems more logical when you say it.
Logged

Bring back 3D markers!
Tanker
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1134

BRING BACK MARKERS


« Reply #193 on: March 08, 2015, 04:28:03 PM »

What I'm reading here is that people have differing opinions about using or not using 3D markers and their effect on the "purity" of the game, but most seem to think having the choice available is fine.  That's what I'm advocating, choice.  GT seems against it on esthetic grounds.  Why should my personal enjoyment and play style be dictated by the esthetic views of others?  To paraphrase Andrey, simply don't use it if it bothers you.
Logged

Bring back 3D markers!
Tanker
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1134

BRING BACK MARKERS


« Reply #194 on: March 08, 2015, 04:35:55 PM »

Personally, my build number is 1983 and it works fine.

Gasp!  You've admitted to having the banned 3D markers available.  Men In Black will be dispatched momentarily. Cheesy
Logged

Bring back 3D markers!
chaudard
Generalmajor
*
Posts: 311


« Reply #195 on: March 08, 2015, 04:52:09 PM »

Personally, my build number is 1983 and it works fine.

Gasp!  You've admitted to having the banned 3D markers available.  Men In Black will be dispatched momentarily. Cheesy
Grin

I'm still waiting for a compatible patch. But I have to confess that I don't update my game (or softwares or materials in general) before a realy usefull patch or DLC come out.
I realy think that you should merge GTOS and SABOW in one big game...
No, they will diverge as possible.

Now the main goal is to make the tank, tank crew+cockpit and tank platoon as a first class citizens, and then the tactical elements.
Practice shows that spend a lot of time on the map, it is not good.
Or at least, create a WWII DLC to add these vehicles in SABOW  Wink I would like to play in SABOW in a WWII tanks (or take the control of existing tanks in GTOS).
There is a "cold war" DLC for GTOS but not a WWII DLC for SABOW Sad
Logged
andrey12345
Graviteam
Generalfeldmarschall
******
Posts: 6642


Jerk developer


« Reply #196 on: March 08, 2015, 05:15:16 PM »

LOL Andrey, you are using the same logic I used to argue for keeping 3D markers.  If you don't like them, you can simply not enable them.  I guess it seems more logical when you say it.
No, you're wrong.
You could not turn on the markers on the map (and without them there is obviously hard to play) and simultaneously turned off in 3D.

So my logic works, but your logic is not entirely a logic, but unreasonable assumptions.
Logged

Пользовательский интерфейс будет неуместен на сегодняшних широкоэкранных экранах, а оригинальные карты неопределенного метра и моделирование чисел с низкими лицами заставляют людей действительно не хотеть играть.
Tanker
Generalfeldmarschall
*****
Posts: 1134

BRING BACK MARKERS


« Reply #197 on: March 08, 2015, 06:09:30 PM »

LOL Andrey, you are using the same logic I used to argue for keeping 3D markers.  If you don't like them, you can simply not enable them.  I guess it seems more logical when you say it.
No, you're wrong.
You could not turn on the markers on the map (and without them there is obviously hard to play) and simultaneously turned off in 3D.

So my logic works, but your logic is not entirely a logic, but unreasonable assumptions.

What?  In version 1962 I can have squad and unit markers visible on the map and simultaneously turn them off in 3D via the flag icon at the bottom of the screen.  I can thus switch to the map and have markers and I can switch back to 3D and have no markers.  I can provide screen shots.  

What's wrong with that?  Doesn't that accomplish your objectives?  

So I'm not wrong.  My logic is the same as yours.  If you don't care for markers or the external view you don't have to use either one.  Explain how that is unreasonable please.
Logged

Bring back 3D markers!
lavish
Oberst
******
Posts: 208


« Reply #198 on: March 08, 2015, 06:30:31 PM »

Practice shows that spend a lot of time on the map, it is not good.

Especially with multiple artillery observers the situation is difficult to micromanage. Some kind of automatic off-map indirect fire system would be nice.

Also, I think indirect control of units (except for player's platoon) might be useful: player assigns objectives (attack/defend/recon cell) for AI battle groups and AI carries out the mission. Another option is that AI creates the objectives and player is assigned to carry out the mission, i.e. getting orders from the higher AI commander and managing his platoon accordingly.

Just some quick thoughts...
Logged
chaudard
Generalmajor
*
Posts: 311


« Reply #199 on: March 08, 2015, 06:40:40 PM »

Especially with multiple artillery observers the situation is difficult to micromanage. Some kind of automatic off-map indirect fire system would be nice.

Also, I think indirect control of units (except for player's platoon) might be useful: player assigns objectives (attack/defend/recon cell) for AI battle groups and AI carries out the mission. Another option is that AI creates the objectives and player is assigned to carry out the mission, i.e. getting orders from the higher AI commander and managing his platoon accordingly.

Just some quick thoughts...
We already have these commands. Attack/March/Take defense. The units open fire when an ennemy appears.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 8 9 [10] 11 12 ... 16
  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!