View Full Version : What is your opinion about WinSPMBT OP fire?
Gentlemen,
I have been involved at the Shrapnel forum in a debate about an improvement proposal that I made.
The proposal is about a feature which could make some odd OP fire draining tactics not feasible any more. I summarized the proposal in the first post and a long debate follows.
I would ask everyone interested to go to the forum and hear your opinion whether you agree on it or not. It would be a good input for the designes to have a real picture what the community thinks about it. Just say a simple yes or no if you feel you would not like to add anything specific. Of course keep it civil.You only need to invest 10 minutes to read and post.
The thread can be found here
http://www.shrapnelcommunity.com/threads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=wspmbt&Number=398947&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1
Thank you in advance,
Artur.
Double Deuce
06 Feb 06, 17:29
I have been involved at the Shrapnel forum in a debate about an improvement proposal that I made.So how goes the war? :laugh:
I haven't added any comments to the debate because IMHO I do not play the game enough to be able to provide a good argument either way. I spend way too much time playing in the editor. :whist:.
I see they are testing some things relating to the Op Fire coding. Interested in seeing what they have come up with or how they implement it.
I must admit I have a similar opinion about it as you, Artur.
Though I also see the difficulties involved in it :D
I'll see to make post on the Shrapnel board tomorrow.
Then guys at least post "I agree on letting the player set the target types"...
Why don't you post there? :OHNO:
I am fighting alone and I guess I had enough. I thought a lot of people will sign it and hell not even my friends who told me they agree with it want take 5 minutes to sign that.
Too bad...
Artur.
IMHO an automated OP fire routine will never be good enough. Only the player can assess the situation and make the right decision here. It would also help the scenario designers as well.
Artur.
Then guys at least post "I agree on letting the player set the target types"...
Why don't you post there? :OHNO:
I am fighting alone and I guess I had enough. I thought a lot of people will sign it and hell not even my friends who told me they agree with it want take 5 minutes to sign that.
Too bad...
Artur.
Hey Artur,
Don't lose your faith...
These discussions are not something new for the developers and if everything goes right, the new modified OP system, not only will affect some of the old SP gamey problems, but will also present new tactical choices. :smoke:
Btw, I name you knight of the "SP OP-fire" order. :laugh:
cheers,
Pyros
Hey Artur,
Btw, I name you knight of the "SP OP-fire" order. :laugh:
LOL.
If they only would made it selectable by player I could make them something for exchange of their hard work...
A campaign maybe? :devious:
Artur.
Artur,
IMO, the best possible option for OP fire would be the combination of the 5 following elements:
1/ Reaction range for soft targets
2/ Reaction range for hard targets
3/ Reaction range for "possible threat" target
4/ Setting for a specific number of participating units in each OP-fire according to the best "to - hit" percentage number (of all available units)
5/ Setting of the OP sequence according to certain priority rules
But I don't think that we will ever see any of these in any of the SP variants, perhaps in another "title"...:)
cheers,
Double Deuce
08 Feb 06, 09:12
But I don't think that we will ever see any of these in any of the SP variants, perhaps in another "title"...:) Out with old, in with the new. :smoke:
Would be nice to see the CAMO guys take a shot at designing a next generation of Steel Panthers version since Matrix's Combat Leader may never see the light of day. I know the talent is there, I think it would just be a question of the time and financial resources to allow them to pursue it.
It I was to ever win the lottery . . .;)
Artur,
IMO, the best possible option for OP fire would be the combination of the 5 following elements:
1/ Reaction range for soft targets
2/ Reaction range for hard targets
3/ Reaction range for "possible threat" target
4/ Setting for a specific number of participating units in each OP-fire according to the best "to - hit" percentage number (of all available units)
5/ Setting of the OP sequence according to certain priority rules
But I don't think that we will ever see any of these in any of the SP variants, perhaps in another "title"...:)
cheers,
I ageree with that with the addition of light armor and air ranges.
Have you seen my info screen proposal picture?
Do they say it is really so hard to put some swithcable controls on the info screen? It would require similar code as the weapon and smoke discharger switching on/off as far as I can see...
Or do they think the feature itself is no good?
Artur.
Then guys at least post "I agree on letting the player set the target types"...
Why don't you post there? :OHNO:
Because I can't even register... ! :cry:
Col.Phil1
12 Feb 06, 07:06
They should make it like the spwaw op fire. You left click if you want the shot and right click if you dont. This saves shots for the target you want. You have the option to turn off to regular op fire and also time for op conformation. I like this sysyem alot better then the current spmbt system.
They should make it like the spwaw op fire.
I disagree... :)
I would be very surprised if the SPWAW style op-fire made it's way into the SP CAMO games as it's considered a cheat against the AI (something I have to say I agree with).
I've always had the impression that veteran SPWAW players turned the op-fire confirm off...?
I disagree... :)
I would be very surprised if the SPWAW style op-fire made it's way into the SP CAMO games as it's considered a cheat against the AI (something I have to say I agree with).
I've always had the impression that veteran SPWAW players turned the op-fire confirm off...?
Yes, the SPWaW-like solution is not good IMHO as well...
The usit should have as much fireing points as normmaly.
But it would be good to set to what kind of stuff it would spend those shots.
Artur.
Yes, the SPWaW-like solution is not good IMHO as well...
For me it's much better than it was before but that's not what I'd like to have for MBT or WW2.
But it would be good to set to what kind of stuff it would spend those shots.
THAT's what I'd like too! :) The actual system for MBT is a good compromise between the original system (no discriminations) and what it should be. Having armored units only shooting at what they suppose to be a threat is excellent but I, as the player, would appreciate to have some extend of a control on what they shoud actually consider priority targets; not only for armor but for inf. units as well.
I disagree... :)
And so do I... with you :)
...the SP CAMO games as it's considered a cheat against the AI (something I have to say I agree with).
And what about being able to *see* mortar fumes at night or driving off-road at full speed without penalties, no matter the terrain? And what about being able to buy hundred of mines? Come on, even being able to actually move your units each turn is the main and first cheat against the AI! The only *no cheating* game is the random battle mode with all options left to the AI for both sides! :laugh:
I don't understand this point of view where a programmer refuses to include an option with a toggle On/Off and let the player decide what to do with it. In SPWaW you're free to use it or not (the opfire option) and despite it's not as tasty as many so called "grognards" would like it to be, it's still far better than not having provided it, saying: "it would be a cheat! ". Don't get me wrong (talking to the CAMO designers) I understand your point (and have respect for your views) when it comes to "design" decisions but please, consider the game options for what they should be: a players choice.
I've always had the impression that veteran SPWAW players turned the op-fire confirm off...?
Really? And so what? First, I've seen MANY vets playing WaW with Cē off... ! I even saw some cheating... ! Second, I consider myself as a vet (played SP since 1995 and each and every mod/version of the game serie) and still play with Opfire on. So, as you can tell, the truth is somewhere else :alien:
Double Deuce
13 Feb 06, 05:39
I don't understand this point of view where a programmer refuses to include an option with a toggle On/Off and let the player decide what to do with it. In SPWaW you're free to use it or not (the opfire option) and despite it's not as tasty as many so called "grognards" would like it to be, it's still far better than not having provided it, saying: "it would be a cheat! ". Don't get me wrong (talking to the CAMO designers) I understand your point (and have respect for your views) when it comes to "design" decisions but please, consider the game options for what they should be: a players choice.Lets not forget that both SPWAW and SPMBT were built on entirely different game engines at least 10 years old. I'm no programmer but there may only be some much you can do with what what you have available. Without seeing the code we are only guessing what can or can't be done. Besides its still essentially a free game and if there was a market for a new game like this, wouldn't a company have made it by now? :halo:
Really? And so what? First, I've seen MANY vets playing WaW with Cē off... ! I even saw some cheating... ! Second, I consider myself as a vet (played SP since 1995 and each and every mod/version of the game serie) and still play with Opfire on. So, as you can tell, the truth is somewhere else :alien:He never said it was a fact, only that it was his impression. I play with neither C2 or OP Fire in SPWAW and many I know do not either. Some do, some don't. :smoke:
Davide,
I consider my self as an experienced SP player and I think that in many occasions its better to have more firepower rather than a couple of random shots.
If you try to adjust the reaction range (&weapon slot availability) of your assets you will find out that you may create defensive rings with multi-level of defenses that will provide you with some very good strong-points.
cheers,
Pyros
And so do I... with you :)
By all means :smoke:
I don't understand this point of view where a programmer refuses to include an option with a toggle On/Off and let the player decide what to do with it. In SPWaW you're free to use it or not (the opfire option) and despite it's not as tasty as many so called "grognards" would like it to be, it's still far better than not having provided it, saying: "it would be a cheat! ".
I've created a couple of scenarios, and really, the AI needs all the help it can get. The confirm thing in SPWAW opfire benefits the human player and in my opinion the human player doesn't need it. I don't much like the SPWAW "two shot response" either..., that's why I'm not particulary fond of the idea of using SPWAW style op-fire in the CAMO games.
Really? And so what?
Just an impression I had. I could be wrong. Haven't played much SPWAW these last few years...
...Without seeing the code we are only guessing what can or can't be done...
Did I say something different? No, I did'nt. I know the differences between these two games. I know the code is messy (I had a look at it; even if I'm an amateur I can tell how bad a piece of instructions is embedded when I see it :) ). I don't know what can be done exactly in tweaking the Opfire part of it and that's not my aim here in responding to this thread. I give my thoughts on the system, that's all. Anyway, I see what as already been done on MBT (and WW2) and I know what did the Matrix staff responded a while ago about the difficulty of making the tanks drive backward with the SP3 code... ;) I'm pretty sure the Opfire code can be tweaked as well. What the Camo group will do about it I don't know but I really hope they'll find a way to make it even better than it already is.
He never said it was a fact, only that it was his impression...
And so did I.
Some do, some don't. :smoke:
That's exactly what I wished to demonstrate but it seems that I failed :)
I've created a couple of scenarios, and really, the AI needs all the help it can get...
Trust me when I say some players do need it either... ! :laugh:
Seriously, I agree with you (to some extend) even if I really think it's not related entirely to the AI weaknesses on this very subject. I don't think being able to choose wether a tank will fire on that target or the one next to it will unbalance the game (remember that I'm talking about a toggle (On/Off option)). I really think the "tweaks" already used by many players (disabling weapon slots; using fire range 0 and so on) are only here to balance the lacks of the opfire system. That proves there's really something missing here. It's not about cheating (what would be the interest in always winning the game?) but about finding a way to make the gameplay more fun or reallystic, if it may be?
The confirm thing in SPWAW opfire benefits the human player and in my opinion the human player doesn't need it...
...and therefore the rightful player :laugh: has the possibility to toggle the option off... !!!
I don't much like the SPWAW "two shot response" either...
Toggle it off as well! :o
...that's why I'm not particulary fond of the idea of using SPWAW style op-fire in the CAMO games.
Sorry to say that but I don't think your reasoning stands here. What's the big deal about an option the newbies -or others willing a different feel for the gameplay- can toggle on and the grognards off??? :confused:
I don't understand this kind of "integrism" :)
Just an impression I had. I could be wrong. Haven't played much SPWAW these last few years...
Did'nt mean you were wrong. As DD said: "some do and others don't". That's all.
It's not about cheating (what would be the interest in always winning the game?) but about finding a way to make the gameplay more fun or reallystic, if it may be?
Ok, fair enough..., though I don't think SPWAW style op-fire would add much fun or realism to the game....
I'm not going to stand in the way if this really is what people want :confused: , but as far as I'm concerned thanks, but no thanks. When playing SPWAW I turned the op-fire confirm off partly because I thought it boged down gameplay too much...., it wasn't of any use in PBEM either so I have some trouble really seeing the worth in it. This is my personal opinion of course and I have some understanding if players used to SPWAW might be more familiar (and maybe miss) the SPWAW style op-fire....
Ok, fair enough..., though I don't think SPWAW style op-fire would add much fun or realism to the game....
And so do I! I don't want to see this system added to MBT either. What I would like to see is something closer to what was done with the Talonsoft's Campaign Series.
When playing SPWAW I turned the op-fire confirm off partly because I thought it boged down gameplay too much...
That's right, it can be tedious when many units come to play. Personnaly, I use it in combination with the various firing ranges, the weapon slots turned to 0 and I also set the time limit for response to 3s. :laugh:
...so I have some trouble really seeing the worth in it.
Well it seems much more useful to me when refering to the Opfire system WaW used previously! With this game your tanks could fire all their weapons to non threatening targets and be bursted out by the next coming AT unit! Using the new Opfire system is the only way to avoid this behaviour in solo games. On the over hand, did you never lost a PbeM game to a player using this tactic? Of course you can partially counter this by pre planning fire arcs and combined forces but what's the use of, say a CS tank, if he can't support the inf squads marching before it because it fired all it's shots to a passing truck (and an empty one, too bad!) instead of pounding the MG nest?
But I'm digressing here, we're talking about MBT :)
Double Deuce
14 Feb 06, 18:00
And so do I! I don't want to see this system added to MBT either. What I would like to see is something closer to what was done with the Talonsoft's Campaign Series.I'll have to fire up my copies of the Campaign Series to see what this is. I know its not an SPWAW style OP fire. Can you give a quick overview?
Have you all been following the discussion over at Shrapnel? Even those that can't register? I'm interested to see what they come up with.
I'll have to fire up my copies of the Campaign Series to see what this is. I know its not an SPWAW style OP fire. Can you give a quick overview?
Well, it's rather generic but really effective (keeping in mind that the scope and gameplay of the Campaign Series is really different than SP is!). The principle is that the units are classified in two groups, Soft and Hard, then categories as Inf/Arm/AT/AA, and finally attributed firing ranges (short/medium/long) vs the first two groups. Plus you can set Opfire globally for all the units of one group vs another or both types of targets (ie: all the Armored units firing at Soft targets within 2 hexes (250m) and vs Hard within 5 hexes) or individually, unit by unit. This allows simple strategies like firing at Inf only when it reaches a threat threshold and simultaneously defending against armored vehicles within a larger area. Combining infantry, AT/AA guns, main battle tanks and CS tanks is really effective, easy to set up and fun!
Have you all been following the discussion over at Shrapnel? Even those that can't register?
I didn't but will give it another try and see what comes out of these suggestions too.
vBulletin® v3.7.0, Copyright ©2000-2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.