jwilly

Registered Users
  • Content count

    23,988
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    60

Everything posted by jwilly

  1. The DD model is (1) unimportant to CRS's revenue, and (2) possibly a worst case, because the texture set is entirely technical and "meaningful", from the perspective of finding tool settings that will generate useful improvements without accentuating shortcomings of the old/existing textures. The ground and building textures are where to test. They're seen close-up by lots more players, and they're "natural" therefore potentially more visually tolerant of a small level of odd side effects.
  2. There's no reason for topo visual prominence to be an issue, because topo always should be a switchable layer.
  3. Watch the shockwave arrive across the terrain. That's also the arrival of the sound.
  4. I think maybe the OP's point was that when observing an event from a distance, the sound should arrive later than the visual image. Sound travels at (roughly) a thousand feet a second, or five seconds a mile. Sound arrival delay is a useful way to determine how far away a sound source is. Kids learn that you can tell how far away lightning was by counting the seconds until you hear the thunder. Just about anyone can recognize two hundred feet of sound arrival delay. Sound arrival delay would be a perfect item for coding, if resources were available, because it behaves 100% consistently with the physics, and it'd be game-useful. As to items that exceed the speed of sound: many of the game's gun projectiles do. But, exceeding the speed of sound isn't relevant to sound propagation speed. For a year or so a long time ago, the game did model the propagation speed of high-level mechanical compression waves in air...in the form of visual shockwaves from explosions. That was a very cool and highly realistic effect. Mechanical compression waves like that are just the "speed of sound" in a localized, high-level form. It'd be visually neat to bring that effect back, now that everyone's computer has plenty of power to support it. I wonder if the code for it still exists in the client, commented out but restorable.
  5. Ummmm...consistent much? FWIW, I'm with item 1. If timers are so long and the risk of counterattack is so low that cappers are bored, and similarly for other game activities, other solutions are needed than adding a solitare sub-game. CRS says a lot that they're trying their darnedest to get the game to greater commercial viability. A commercially viable game shouldn't be boring.
  6. I think that's been considered a zillion times over the past going-on-20 years. That's what game management is about. Most games don't last nearly this long, so CRS's decisions have been good enough to result in that longer-than-most life. But CRS, I'm pretty sure, is always evaluating whether where gameplay is headed is optimum in regard to its present state and the other possible places that they could go given the available resources. Much of the commercially insufficient performance of the game over the years, I think, has been related to attempting to do things for which resources were insufficient. Advice from the player community is great for some things, but not necessarily for what's achievable given resource limits. I think CRS is focusing more these days on making sure that they stay within their means.
  7. I once dated a woman who had experienced an odd closed head injury in an auto accident that damaged the sensory nerve bundle from the face to the brain. She was slowly recovering her impaired sense of taste, but more slowly for the tongue based sensing ability than for aroma sensing based in the nose. So, she tended to add extra salt, sugar and pepper to prepared foods to strengthen those aromatic flavor experiences. She also liked hot food because it has stronger aromas. I gather than your tongue is impaired by your treatment. How about your nose?
  8. I don't have much experience with marijuana, but it's discussed a lot in relation to chemo and appetite. Maybe that's other cancer types and treatments, though...?
  9. Someday, maybe: dynamic spawn locations so that camping is no longer a thing, and capture/control applies to points of economic value.
  10. Doc can further inform us if he wants, and chemo can be hard on food tolerance, but I'll bet his doctors are eager to get a protein/fat/carbs/fiber balanced diet and lots of calories into him if they can. Gotta eat well to get better--it takes a lot of nutrition to maintain and rebuild during chemo--plus you want to keep your GI system functioning for multiple reasons.
  11. If you're on a Windows 7 computer, when this happens Alt-Tab out to Windows and do a Cntl-Alt-Del, then bring up Task Manager. That'll tell you what's running, and your recent CPU and memory load factors.
  12. Is an automated background process like a backup, download, patch/update installation, etc. taking control of the processor and causing it to miss foreground events? When this happens, what's running?
  13. Where are you, metro DFW? Hmmm, long way away from me at the moment. Obviously your doctors and whoever else is managing your nutrition could overrule, but fundamentally "astronaut food" is made by finely grinding a food item into a puree...a soft paste or thick liquid. Yuri Gagarin, all those years ago at the very beginning of the Russki cosmonaut program, ate pureed meat from a tube. Of course, astronaut food has to be stable across a wide range of temperatures, and completely preserved. You however are on Earth, and stuff doesn't have to come to you by rocket or last for weeks or months before you eat it. So it sure does seem possible to make a burger to your preferences...grill cooked, medium rare, ketchup and hot peppers, toasted sesame bun, whatever your specs would be...then puree the whole thing using a food processor, adding a few tablespoons of hot beef stock, and voila...food suitable for someone with dysphagia (difficulty swallowing) or other throat disabilities.
  14. From the 2019 Roadmap: Since the game's inception, various weapons have been assigned ammo from earlier or later parts of that weapon's timeline. CRS explained that the game's mechanics did not provide effective means for providing chronologically correct ammo for each tier. It's often been noted over the years that some weapons (such as FlaK 36 88mm) have been nerfed by being provided with very early AP ammo, even though much more effective ammo was available soon after T0 at the latest. Other weapons (such as StuG IIIB and PzKpfW IVD) have been buffed by being provided with late war versions of HEAT ammo starting in T0, even though the historical T0 versions of that ammo were much less effective. Will Loadouts allow each weapon to be provided with the historically appropriate version of each ammo type for each tier?
  15. I'm pretty sure Hatch wasn't saying that. My guess was that he was just referring to it being historically absurd for a high ranking officer to be running around as a lone infantryman on the battlefield.
  16. Old CRS's surveys of departed customers / ex noobs (and I presume those of new CRS as well) indicate that a large percentage did not have Discord or another relevant voice comms program. Old CRS's surveys of noobs and ex noobs (and I presume those of new CRS as well) indicate that being on voice comms immediately on beginning to experience the game...not at some later time...substantially increases noob game engagement and retention rate. It also increases game satisfaction of those vets who try to help noobs, by making that process substantially more effective.
  17. Defending boredom could not be eliminated without also eliminating attacking surprise. In a game with announced tactical plans, defenders could be allowed to be set up and ready. Attackers could be held away until that readiness. But, defenders could be limited to say 1/2 or 1/3 the pop of the attackers...i.e. the classic even-odds or slight-attacker-advantage force ratios. That would be a very different game.
  18. The death cam is a game mechanic to teach you a lesson of actual warfare: single-location defensive fighting tends to make you dead, because attackers learn where you are and figure out how to put fire on your location. In-game as in real war, moving around is dangerous but not as dangerous as not moving around. Any game like WWIIOL has no gameplay if too many players are stationary in "great hiding spots" and waiting for other players to come by. So, the game is designed to make that tactic problematic.
  19. Old CRS recognized that in WWIIOL, and generally any game with a steep learning curve, the high K/Ds of many vets were achieved by slaughtering noobs, and therefore that a key reason for low noob retention was vets. The game isn't completely zero sum, but it's close. There were Design Forum discussions about a game system in which players would see, and could interact with, only those other players that were similar to them in K/D and noob-status. So, noobs and vets wouldn't see each other. Obviously that'd result in complications. Other discussions were about running two or three simultaneous instances, with players automatically allocated according to some combat effectivness metric unless they choose a "harder" instance. None of that ever went anywhere. The concern was that too many vets would leave if they couldn't get easy kills and were killed more often themselves.
  20. Or maybe a one gram fragment to the left wingtip. That however would be someone else, not you. ...3000 rounds per kill, on average. At a round every four seconds, that'd be one kill every 3.3 hours. But, if you manually set the fuze-range according to what you're shooting at and where it will be when the shell arrives, and it's more like 6 seconds per round, that's one kill every 5 hours.
  21. 1. Consider how many large caliber (75mm/88mm/90mm) AA shells were fired per downed plane. Various accounts say, on average, 3000 or more. I don't think any game player is going to accept getting one kill per 3000 shots. 2. The minimum time setting for a time fuze shell of this kind was about half a second. Thus the minimum distance of the target to the gun would be about 500 meters. 3. The effective damage radius for such shells was, I think, about a hundred meters. That's for a plausible chance to cause one fragment worth of damage, not for certainty of bringing down the target. 4. If ten gunners set up to fire on parallel aim-paths so that their shells burst 200 meters apart, they're creating a "wall" about 2km wide. If each gun fires one shell every four seconds, and each shell is lethal for only an instant, and the targets move at say 120 meters a second, and you could determine the exact altitude of the targets and set the slant range to that altitude with sufficiently close tolerance, the "wall" only has about a 40% chance of causing one fragment of damage to each target flying through it.
  22. The French Brandt 60mm and 81mm mortars were license-copied with minor changes by USA. Basically, they were the same weapons. The French ones would have T0 availability. No reason for the French to get the US ones via Lend-Lease, as long as the French haven't been defeated. The French (Brandt again) developed the original 120mm mortar. The USSR bought a license and made their own, and the Germans captured some, liked them, and began building their own. I'm pretty sure the caliber of the Brit 3 inch mortar was 76mm, not 81mm. The US never actually had any of, or used, the French 50mm mortar. That's just a CRS game artifact that hopefully will go away once the 60mm is modeled. The kurz and schwer 81mm mortars were the same caliber, I think. USA also used a copy of the British 4.2 inch mortar. French Brandt 120mm:
  23. Old CRS said in a design-capabilities discussion that flamethrowers and other incendiary weapons were not developable yet because a bunch of corollary mechanics...Burning states for all the world elements, Destroyed states for the vegetation elements, zoned damage states for large buildings, fire spread within a building or between proximal buildings, more difficult ignition and fire extinguishing in rain, illumination at night, and injury/damage for infantry and other soft targets entering into a fire zone or indirectly exposed to a fire weapon...don't exist, and resources to develop them all don't exist yet either. It also was discussed that world damage models would need to become more complex. A burned tree is Destroyed but still stands; a tree knocked down by a tank or a bomb is Destroyed and laying on the ground. And, a large building might have two rooms on the first floor on fire, but the rest of the building in undamaged condition...until the fire spreads horizontally or vertically...and the fire would cause those rooms to be lightly damaged, then heavily damaged, before the building's structural integrity was affected. AFAIK, all of that information remains valid.
  24. How old would that tool be? Presagis stopped using the Multigen name for that product line, what, five or more years ago?