Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
y0mario

FB's between dover and deal

18 posts in this topic

Is it hard to add fb's to the map? Why not remove the fb's between Gravelines and Dunk(just like some other cities don't have fb's) and put two fb's from Dover and Deal between the cities? On the other side two fb's from Dunk could be put between Dover and Deal?

The map gets so boring as the axis get towards the French factories and the channel becomes a wall you can't get past. If it isn't too hard to add fb's, why not give it a try? It would add a whole new dimension to the map.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Terrain is untouchable for now, from everything that CRS has said.  That includes things like buildings and FBs.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Capco said:

Terrain is untouchable for now, from everything that CRS has said.  That includes things like buildings and FBs.  

Well, so much for that 

8*(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Untouchable = "We cant be bothered to fish through the code and models"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Crossing the channel should not be as easy of a task as blowing an FB and have an insta-army on the other side of the channel.. Allies have the same "boring" factories to take on the german side. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, calyx6 said:

Untouchable = "We cant be bothered to fish through the code and models"

No that's not at all what it means.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/17/2017 at 3:04 PM, y0mario said:

Is it hard to add fb's to the map? Why not remove the fb's between Gravelines and Dunk(just like some other cities don't have fb's) and put two fb's from Dover and Deal between the cities? On the other side two fb's from Dunk could be put between Dover and Deal?

The map gets so boring as the axis get towards the French factories and the channel becomes a wall you can't get past. If it isn't too hard to add fb's, why not give it a try? It would add a whole new dimension to the map.

Tell you what.
You axis get that far, and i will spawn axis and run TT's across so you can try?

Personally, i would be cool with temporarily boosting the TT to DD speed or so to facilitate a little more landing type operations, only trouble is when you eventually return them to normal to put a better solution in place, people forget it was only a temporary thing and get mad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, OldZeke said:

No that's not at all what it means.

Then feel free to enlighten me.

Since first seeing this game, I have been to college to study various software aspects, worked for numerous software companies and helped to develop quite a few game worlds and the like.

What has changed here since then? Nowt. And y'all are paying for that nowt....

Have they lost all access to some important part of the engine or something? I don't see how it is possible to be "unable" to update something which was developped in your studio.

"Unwanting" perhaps

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, calyx6 said:

Then feel free to enlighten me.

Since first seeing this game, I have been to college to study various software aspects, worked for numerous software companies and helped to develop quite a few game worlds and the like.

What has changed here since then? Nowt. And y'all are paying for that nowt....

Have they lost all access to some important part of the engine or something? I don't see how it is possible to be "unable" to update something which was developped in your studio.

"Unwanting" perhaps

Think its more about time at the moment.. They don't have the man power and time to devote to this at the moment. As Capco said that you focused on a single word rather than the sentence:  "Terrain is untouchable for now"

The current team is not the same team that was working the game years ago. That team essentially folded up and shut down. Xoom essentially stepped up and worked on saving the game. From what I can tell, the old team did not have very good tools in order to make changes to the terrain engine, its very time consuming to work on terrain and can break a lot of things if its not done correctly (fall through the earth lines, trees and berms clipped into buildings and spawn points, and other weird stuff). I am sure that Xoom and the rest of the team would rather explore changing to a new modern graphics and terrain engine over the next 6 months to a year than spend months to figure out how to add an FB between Dover and Deal with an old outdated engine.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, calyx6 said:

Then feel free to enlighten me.

Since first seeing this game, I have been to college to study various software aspects, worked for numerous software companies and helped to develop quite a few game worlds and the like.

What has changed here since then? Nowt. And y'all are paying for that nowt....

Have they lost all access to some important part of the engine or something? I don't see how it is possible to be "unable" to update something which was developped in your studio.

"Unwanting" perhaps

Why don't you volunteer and help?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Scking said:

I am sure that Xoom and the rest of the team would rather explore changing to a new modern graphics and terrain engine over the next 6 months to a year than spend months to figure out how to add an FB between Dover and Deal with an old outdated engine.   

Afaik this is the plan.  Working with the terrain is so risky that it'd be better to save all that work for WWIIOL 2.0. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No no no, jamokes, this is how its done with what we got:

Transport gets to the other side (ought to turn off ews on transports) they plant a Beach Head FMS different than the current thats tougher with better supplies (its a transport so you get bofors and a few tanks and trucks). Doesn't have to be complicated, overly large, or involve new textures. Now you got a little more purchase. Maybe only engies can kill it so you have to fight your way to it and not simply strafe it out of existance. Trucks can still set regular FMS of course.

 

Edited by biggles4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/19/2017 at 3:00 PM, Capco said:

Afaik this is the plan.  Working with the terrain is so risky that it'd be better to save all that work for WWIIOL 2.0. 

I may be wrong, but i think what we are talking about is only a client side rendering engine?
And if so, the backend would remain unaffected, the coding required to make an FB exist and function would remain.

As far as terrain creation, having no real 1st hand knowledge mind you, it appears to not be the scoop and carve type creation you might be familiar with in some games.
It looks to me more along the lines of worldcraft type of creation, which is tedious. Not rocket science, but hugely time consuming.
I am unfortunately very familiar with building terrain that way from another project.

I am not sure what tool they have available for it, but i get the impression it is not the friendliest tool in the toolbox.
I get the idea that doing anything with it means locking a guy in the closet, covering him in gravy, and stationing rabid wolverines outside and he does nothing else for however long it takes to create assemble test and debug it.

That doesn't factor in researching the historical location and designing a layout that isnt simply arbitrary, for like adding towns etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

I may be wrong, but i think what we are talking about is only a client side rendering engine?
And if so, the backend would remain unaffected, the coding required to make an FB exist and function would remain.

As far as terrain creation, having no real 1st hand knowledge mind you, it appears to not be the scoop and carve type creation you might be familiar with in some games.
It looks to me more along the lines of worldcraft type of creation, which is tedious. Not rocket science, but hugely time consuming.
I am unfortunately very familiar with building terrain that way from another project.

I am not sure what tool they have available for it, but i get the impression it is not the friendliest tool in the toolbox.
I get the idea that doing anything with it means locking a guy in the closet, covering him in gravy, and stationing rabid wolverines outside and he does nothing else for however long it takes to create assemble test and debug it.

That doesn't factor in researching the historical location and designing a layout that isnt simply arbitrary, for like adding towns etc.

I can't comment on the inner workings or details as I have no knowledge of them.  

 

All I remember hearing from the Rat chats is that terrain is off the table for now.  When we asked about the invisible Prof CP building in Namur (a bug that is like a decade old) we got the same response, which lead me to believe that the terrain and object placement (buildings, FBs, etc.) are linked in some fashion.  That may not be inherently true; it was just an assumption.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Capco said:

which lead me to believe that the terrain and object placement (buildings, FBs, etc.) are linked in some fashion.  That may not be inherently true; it was just an assumption.  

I might be wrong, so be prepared to shoot me.

But i believe that to the game, the buildings and the terrain are one.
I know that kind of sounds wacked, but what i gathered from docspeek is the buildings at things are not independant objects like PPO's and player units
But specialized terrain pieces with code attached.

That makes things about as clear as mud, but gives the impression that doing something to one entails a trip into the terrain editor and coding tools.

Take that with a grain (or bucket) of salt, cause i have never seen the stuff, so have 0 inside knowledge, but you know how DOC used to love to write you a book on how something is done, if you'd listen (or pretend to listen).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, merlin51 said:

I might be wrong, so be prepared to shoot me.

But i believe that to the game, the buildings and the terrain are one.
I know that kind of sounds wacked, but what i gathered from docspeek is the buildings at things are not independant objects like PPO's and player units
But specialized terrain pieces with code attached.

That makes things about as clear as mud, but gives the impression that doing something to one entails a trip into the terrain editor and coding tools.

Take that with a grain (or bucket) of salt, cause i have never seen the stuff, so have 0 inside knowledge, but you know how DOC used to love to write you a book on how something is done, if you'd listen (or pretend to listen).

That's generally how I see it as well.  

 

Also, you're at 10k post count.  Don't forget to do your OT duty ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Capco said:

Don't forget to do your OT duty

OT duty? I rarely go there.
Thought i had 10k years and several forum softwares ago?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.