Spring:1944 dev and testing - Page 21

Spring:1944 dev and testing

Discuss game development here, from a distinct game project to an accessible third-party mutator, down to the interaction and design of individual units if you like.

Moderator: Moderators

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line » 21 May 2007, 15:06

1v0ry_k1ng wrote:there is no need for fix defences to take care of scouts. scatter a few cloaked sharpshooters around your perimeter, gg scouts
because that has realism stamped all over it [/sarcasm]

my point being, i could make a ring of pillboxes around my base, but thats not efficient (and the scouts are cloaked too remember, so they could just walk right up and into my base) id much rather have the option of making a barbed wire fence around the base with cheap little guard towers spaced along it. this would also, imho, add more feeling to the game (as well as making some fun mission situations possible)
0 x

User avatar
Abokasee
Posts: 222
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 21:51

Post by Abokasee » 21 May 2007, 18:28

SpikedHelmet wrote:Unfortunately we can't just invent crazy camo schemes that didn't exist. For all intents and purposes the three Allies (USSR, USA, UK) used very similar greens.
Then give them different colours, such as, british brown-ish and russian white? White for russian winter and stuff, and brown for british because... you can
0 x

SpikedHelmet
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1945
Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 08:25

Post by SpikedHelmet » 21 May 2007, 21:00

Pressure Line wrote:
1v0ry_k1ng wrote:there is no need for fix defences to take care of scouts. scatter a few cloaked sharpshooters around your perimeter, gg scouts
because that has realism stamped all over it [/sarcasm]
Go back to playing C&C if you want that kind of "realism".

Nobody used "guard towers" in combat areas, for the very important reason that it effectively creates a big, gigantic target that anyone within a kilometer or two will be able to shoot at. It would be suicide. The closest anyone came was German observation towers and "observation poles" which were essentially a treetrunk with iron runs that an observer could climb up with a pair of binoculars to spot artillery.

Anyway, Panther:

http://spring.clan-sy.com/phpbb/viewtop ... 248#190248
0 x

SpikedHelmet
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1945
Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 08:25

Post by SpikedHelmet » 22 May 2007, 00:34

Eh, it was more the Russians who had the brownish-green, the US had an olive green and the British had a more bronze-green...
0 x

User avatar
Abokasee
Posts: 222
Joined: 03 Nov 2006, 21:51

Post by Abokasee » 22 May 2007, 09:00

SpikedHelmet wrote:Eh, it was more the Russians who had the brownish-green, the US had an olive green and the British had a more bronze-green...
hmmm... You might just get away with the US, but hving russia and British have simular colours... could be pretty confusing, you know anything about scripting? you could give russians robes/trench coats or what there called because thats what they were in RA2 and in some of the black & white russian clips of russian infantry on the charge
0 x

raikitsune
Posts: 241
Joined: 09 Aug 2005, 15:41

Post by raikitsune » 22 May 2007, 10:25

Abokasee wrote:
SpikedHelmet wrote:Eh, it was more the Russians who had the brownish-green, the US had an olive green and the British had a more bronze-green...
hmmm... You might just get away with the US, but hving russia and British have simular colours... could be pretty confusing, you know anything about scripting? you could give russians robes/trench coats or what there called because thats what they were in RA2 and in some of the black & white russian clips of russian infantry on the charge
great goats were only in common use during winter and autumn fighting. Infantry wise british american and russian troops all had (well to me atleast) distinctive uniform and gear. Russian helmet and the strange type of trousers.
UK commonly sans helmet or alternativly the strange looking kind of half a ball helmet the name illudes me.
And the US you can just go and put a different coloured pair of trousers with the top. All fairly distinctive unless of course i'm just amazing and can see everything in spring in super detail for no apparent reason :P
0 x

j5mello
Posts: 1189
Joined: 26 Aug 2005, 05:40

Post by j5mello » 23 May 2007, 04:57

for u WWII nuts out there thought i would post something i found on YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STQHH_hJ ... ed&search=

German propaganda film about infantry fighting tanks...

some interesting stuff here wonder if any was actually used
0 x

maestro
Posts: 352
Joined: 08 Jun 2005, 11:10

Post by maestro » 23 May 2007, 06:37

raikitsune wrote:
Abokasee wrote:
SpikedHelmet wrote:Eh, it was more the Russians who had the brownish-green, the US had an olive green and the British had a more bronze-green...
hmmm... You might just get away with the US, but hving russia and British have simular colours... could be pretty confusing, you know anything about scripting? you could give russians robes/trench coats or what there called because thats what they were in RA2 and in some of the black & white russian clips of russian infantry on the charge
great goats were only in common use during winter and autumn fighting. Infantry wise british american and russian troops all had (well to me atleast) distinctive uniform and gear. Russian helmet and the strange type of trousers.
uhm... watch movie 'stalingrad' russian fight even when they half naked...
so make russian soldier half naked or random casual wretchful swampy clothes...
that make them distinctive.... :lol:
ps : dont forget side color on russkaya vodka bottle
0 x

SpikedHelmet
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1945
Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 08:25

Post by SpikedHelmet » 23 May 2007, 13:53

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vPlCodPcqZ8

In *some* other language. Has footage I believe from Cologne in 1945...

Here's most of the same stuff, but in English (from the History channel). It covers the same incident but with narration! It's about US armour hunting a Panther in the city. The Panther kills a Sherman and then runs, and a M26 Pershing (!) goes after it, hunts it down and kills it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LqH_WEqNK5Y
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line » 24 May 2007, 03:36

Just a question about the German bunker with the pillbox on top, the "R117 Oberkommandobunker"

Is it supposed to be a power plant or a metal extractor? currently it has a metal extractor radius, and thus it gets treated by spring (and AIs) as a metal extractor. this is fine, except it doesnt extract metal :( it gives +500 power, but no metal. this is a problem because the AIs (AAI in particular) upgrade the flags to the bunkers, but then go into metalstall because there is no metal being generated.

bug or feature?
0 x

User avatar
Snipawolf
Posts: 4357
Joined: 12 Dec 2005, 01:49

Post by Snipawolf » 26 May 2007, 04:47

Anything new? You guys are unusually quiet...
0 x

SpikedHelmet
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1945
Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 08:25

Post by SpikedHelmet » 26 May 2007, 15:43

That's a bug.

And I've started working again so I don't have much time during the week. Expect stuff this weekend tho!
0 x

Phonomenal
Posts: 17
Joined: 20 May 2007, 13:27

Post by Phonomenal » 26 May 2007, 18:27

how the heck do I build the plane building thingies :?
0 x

User avatar
Peet
Malcontent
Posts: 4381
Joined: 27 Feb 2006, 22:04

Post by Peet » 26 May 2007, 18:30

Geothermal spots.
0 x

User avatar
Pressure Line
Posts: 2283
Joined: 21 May 2007, 02:09

Post by Pressure Line » 30 May 2007, 01:53

MOAR PLAYTESTING RESULTS!

been extensively playtesting 1944.b3h vs ai's (AAI and RAI) and ive run into a few issues (most of which ive solved, some will require attention from you guys, some from ai coders) Bear in mind that these are all AI related issues, a real player can think past them.

Issues:

*Global
1) SMG and Rifle troops being able to build flags means that the AI's think they are construction units, meaning that an AI can never win a game because it cannot destroy enemy flags (fixed by removing the build ability of these units)

2) Mine spam. (Told AAI to build no fixed defenses)

3) Max water depth is inconsistent. tested on 'EE Delta Glade' and all of the infantry, and most of the german vehicles (except a few of the halftracks) can get through the water, but all of the light US vehicles cannot get through (even though the M2 Inf. Carrier is much taller then a StuG III, the StuG can get through the water, while the M2 cant.)

4) Total inability to play on maps where there is water too deep to get through. RAI does nothing, AAI just spams infantry then lets them stand at the edge of the water until the end of the game. AAI seemed completely uninterested in building planes, even though it has used them before on all-land maps.

*Germany
1) Bunker energy costs. the bunkers are incredibly energy expensive, this isnt really an issue in terms of nanostall because of the long build times, but ai's (AAI in particular) dont like having build projects in progress that are in excess of the total energy/metal storage values. ie if they are building a munitions bunker, no vehicles will be built till it is finished (which usually leads to the German ai getting thrashed by the US ai because it is building bunkers to support its energy need, but nothing other than infantry, even if it has idle vehicle/gun/plane factories)

2) Command Bunkers. Bugged, known issue. (Removed from build tree to stop the AIs from getting bogged down building them for no benefit other than the energy, then ending up nanostalling due to low metal.)

Suggestions/Balance:
1) Switch the power outputs of the Command Bunker (500) and the Munitions Bunker (300) otherwise there is little point in having the Munitions Bunker because the Cmd Bunker not only produces more energy, it also extracts metal and can defend itself against infantry.

2) Deep wading tanks. The DD Sherman is nice, but id prefer tanks that
just have a deeper max depth than usual, (especially if the units are staying the current size, AAI has trouble on maps like Tropical where there is shallow water that OTA size units can walk through, but its slightly too deep for anything other than Tigers to wade through [other than the DD Sherman, Dukw and Amtrak)) also, the lack of even light infantry sea carriers and LVT's makes an amphibious assault hard for the US (can use Dukws shermans and Amtraks) and impossible for the germans (who have no amphib units, other than the slightly amphib Tigers) could easily add snorkels onto existing tank models and adjust the firing arcs of the guns.

Still loving the mod. cant wait for the new models to come through!
0 x

User avatar
FLOZi
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 6109
Joined: 29 Apr 2005, 01:14

Post by FLOZi » 30 May 2007, 02:01

Pressure Line wrote:MOAR PLAYTESTING RESULTS!

been extensively playtesting 1944.b3h vs ai's (AAI and RAI) and ive run into a few issues (most of which ive solved, some will require attention from you guys, some from ai coders) Bear in mind that these are all AI related issues, a real player can think past them.
AI testing tends to lack behind with us as we are usually ahead of the curve with development exes... Though that isn't really an excuse anymore I suppose.
Issues:

*Global
1) SMG and Rifle troops being able to build flags means that the AI's think they are construction units, meaning that an AI can never win a game because it cannot destroy enemy flags (fixed by removing the build ability of these units)
Unfortunatly, that's too key a gameplay concept to simply remove though.
2) Mine spam. (Told AAI to build no fixed defenses)

3) Max water depth is inconsistent. tested on 'EE Delta Glade' and all of the infantry, and most of the german vehicles (except a few of the halftracks) can get through the water, but all of the light US vehicles cannot get through (even though the M2 Inf. Carrier is much taller then a StuG III, the StuG can get through the water, while the M2 cant.)
Yeah, we need to overhaul move classes entirely imo. :(
4) Total inability to play on maps where there is water too deep to get through. RAI does nothing, AAI just spams infantry then lets them stand at the edge of the water until the end of the game. AAI seemed completely uninterested in building planes, even though it has used them before on all-land maps.
I've never seen AAI use planes in S44 :o
*Germany
1) Bunker energy costs. the bunkers are incredibly energy expensive, this isnt really an issue in terms of nanostall because of the long build times, but ai's (AAI in particular) dont like having build projects in progress that are in excess of the total energy/metal storage values. ie if they are building a munitions bunker, no vehicles will be built till it is finished (which usually leads to the German ai getting thrashed by the US ai because it is building bunkers to support its energy need, but nothing other than infantry, even if it has idle vehicle/gun/plane factories)

2) Command Bunkers. Bugged, known issue. (Removed from build tree to stop the AIs from getting bogged down building them for no benefit other than the energy, then ending up nanostalling due to low metal.)

Suggestions/Balance:
1) Switch the power outputs of the Command Bunker (500) and the Munitions Bunker (300) otherwise there is little point in having the Munitions Bunker because the Cmd Bunker not only produces more energy, it also extracts metal and can defend itself against infantry.
yeah, all that needs sorting.
2) Deep wading tanks. The DD Sherman is nice, but id prefer tanks that
just have a deeper max depth than usual, (especially if the units are staying the current size, AAI has trouble on maps like Tropical where there is shallow water that OTA size units can walk through, but its slightly too deep for anything other than Tigers to wade through [other than the DD Sherman, Dukw and Amtrak)) also, the lack of even light infantry sea carriers and LVT's makes an amphibious assault hard for the US (can use Dukws shermans and Amtraks) and impossible for the germans (who have no amphib units, other than the slightly amphib Tigers) could easily add snorkels onto existing tank models and adjust the firing arcs of the guns.
In the new version things are 1.5 times bigger so max water depths should rise a little atleast. It is something of an issue we need to think around though.
Still loving the mod. cant wait for the new models to come through!
hurrah! :-)
0 x

User avatar
Nemo
Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1376
Joined: 30 Jan 2005, 19:44

Post by Nemo » 30 May 2007, 02:09

Thanks for the report, but we're doing a complete rebuild with the next version, so bughunting in the current release isn't really needed. However, given that we're building everything from scratch, we'll need a LOT of help testing - Pressure_Line, would you be up for helping out with that when the time comes?
0 x

SpikedHelmet
MC: Legacy & Spring 1944 Developer
Posts: 1945
Joined: 21 Sep 2004, 08:25

Post by SpikedHelmet » 30 May 2007, 02:14

Well I wanted to include an Amphibious Sherman (with tall air intakes, could go in deep water) but some people wouldn't even consider it...
0 x

User avatar
Snipawolf
Posts: 4357
Joined: 12 Dec 2005, 01:49

Post by Snipawolf » 30 May 2007, 04:45

Ya know what I wanna see?

A sherman, underwater.. Take a torpedo hit from behind! God, that would look sweet :twisted:
0 x

User avatar
Zoombie
Posts: 6149
Joined: 15 Mar 2005, 07:08

Post by Zoombie » 30 May 2007, 05:02

A sherman underwater would be cool...ever read My Tank is Fight? I want to see a Ratte. I don't care how tottally impractical it is, I want to see my Landkruiser!
0 x

Post Reply

Return to “Game Development”