Home Trending Latest threads New posts Developer diaries

Not the "Ruse" style infantry

Jump to latest Follow Reply
  • We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Steel Division: Normandy 44 2266 Please link&sync your Paradox account to Steam Steel Division - Let's Plays and AARs!
Kriegs_ said:
Oh yeah, i have failed to consider this problem, guess i'm a dreamer right? :D
But yeah, i just hope that the AI doesn't cheat on this one, what keeps getting me out of playing Red Dragon is the lack of Coop and the cheating AI on campaign, but hey, nothing is perfect right?
Click to expand...
Yeah, I hope the AI is good and doesn't cheat. It didn't exactly impress in Red Dragon. "Imma build lotsa units and have them blindly attack-move piecemeal straight into your lines!".

Then again, I'm looking forward to jumping into MP for Steel Dragon :) . Since it's a new game, there will be lotsa other noobs like me, even though other RTT veterans will come from Wargame and whatnot too, of course :p .
 
UltimateIdiot said:
I can't be bothered to write up a reply as I don't see this going anywhere but circles, so we'll just have to disagree.
Click to expand...
Agreed. Seems to be a cycle, and reminds me fo the NATO counter debacle before HOI4 (which I too admittedly participated in :p ). Maybe it can actually be constructive to summarise.
  • One side points out that Wargame, in particular Air Land Battle, had a problem with suicide scouts, or as "chaff" to prevent tanks from being targetted by antitank units.
  • The other side counters that other dirt cheap and/or unarmed units can perfectly well be used in the same way, such as militia units or logistics trucks, and that you could for example have a "tax" on transports that is refunded when the transport reaches safety.
  • One side points out that infantry in WWII was typically just driven to the front, and then the trucks returned to their FOB/HQ/whatever to be given new tasks.
  • Which is a good point. I suppose I can only say something like gameplay>realism :p .
  • One side says they feel managing transports is too micro-heavy and doesn't add to gameplay.
  • The other side points out there are ways around the micro, and that having to protect transports adds to depth the same way you have to protect logistics vehicles and artillery units.
Don't know if there are more arguments like this one, but these seem to be the ones being thrown back and forth. "Your mileage may vary" gets thrown around alot, and I think there is something to that. To be fair, I was surprised when I liked features in Hearts of Iron 4 that I thought I would really dislike -- things like the "sandbox" approach rather than telling the story of WWII; airplanes flying over the map and even shooting at each others; that sort of thing.

I feel that at least for me, my first impressions are of course coloured by how I want a "Wargame in WWII". Of course Steel Division is an all-new series and they're free to take it in any direciton they want, and I think I'll give it a chance regardless. I do worry though that the Wargame formula doesn't neccessarily lend itself well to a more "simplified" approach.
 
safe-keeper said:
I do worry though that the Wargame formula doesn't neccessarily lend itself well to a more "simplified" approach.
Click to expand...
I think you'll be decently surprised. Can't tell you since NDA, but in HOI4 terms, remember the uproar over the removal of resource stockpiles where people thought resource management wouldnt matter anymore and its a dumbdown, and how the AI battle planner is just draw lines and push, yet another dumb down? It's kind of like that, since before a game's release all we see is the presentation of the mechanic, whoever is playing the game has already made the logical decisions for us and thus the mechanics look simplified compare to its predecessor. But when actually playing the game, you'd find that the new mechanics are different, but not necessarily simplified so to speak. There are things you no longer have to consider, but there are new things you now have to consider.
 
What is the solution to move troops once they have deployed to one location or is the only way to move them slowly by foot? I didn't notice this in Stream or in this discussion, altough I did not read it completely.


Could the trucks just appear back when player uses fast move? That would simulate that the trucks are parked, called or whatever when troops actually need new transportation. That would ofcourse take out the option to kill the trucks so that the infantry can't move to other location in the map which could lead to different kind of problems.
 
ssg said:
What is the solution to move troops once they have deployed to one location or is the only way to move them slowly by foot? I didn't notice this in Stream or in this discussion, altough I did not read it completely.
Click to expand...

They have to walk just like they did in WW2. Mechanized infantry keep their transport so they do have the luxury of redeploying. That makes them special because everyone else did fight on foot.


Could the trucks just appear back when player uses fast move? That would simulate that the trucks are parked, called or whatever when troops actually need new transportation. That would ofcourse take out the option to kill the trucks so that the infantry can't move to other location in the map which could lead to different kind of problems.
Click to expand...

They could but then it wouldn't be a WW2 game anymore. Leg infantry should have to leg it.
 
Makes sense, I don't see any issue here unless it makes gameplay horrible, but there is no way to know it before we actually get to play the game. Disappearing trucks also solve the annoying issue of truck spam recon.
 
Fonz said:
I think you'll be decently surprised. Can't tell you since NDA, but in HOI4 terms, remember the uproar over the removal of resource stockpiles where people thought resource management wouldnt matter anymore and its a dumbdown, and how the AI battle planner is just draw lines and push, yet another dumb down? It's kind of like that, since before a game's release all we see is the presentation of the mechanic, whoever is playing the game has already made the logical decisions for us and thus the mechanics look simplified compare to its predecessor. But when actually playing the game, you'd find that the new mechanics are different, but not necessarily simplified so to speak. There are things you no longer have to consider, but there are new things you now have to consider.
Click to expand...
I hope so :)
 
Graphic said:
Re: the issue of transports, I understand why people might not like it. One thing I haven't seen people bring up though is its use as a compromise to make leg/static divisions playable by getting their infantry to the battle in a reasonable amount of time (reinforcements walking to the battle might arrive by the time the match is over) but making sure its not possible for these divisions to mass redeploy their units, thus removing any meaningful difference between them and motorized/mechanized divisions. Something to consider.
Click to expand...
This is fine, but the trucks should automatically drive off map the way they came. Having them evaporate is jarring.
 
Edited so it actually makes sense: Hey guys, I just want to chime in and say that on a screenshot posted before, seemingly a mortar on a truck had the correct arch of fire and perhaps this truck thing will be a gripe some will have with the game but some won't mind (or it might even be changed in a later build, paradox does like its expansions).

I'd trade the time spent making an elaborate ai coding scheme for trucks moving back and forth whilst having taxes on things ingame later being refunded (I mean seriously guys? Taxes in a game? I've had enough dealing with taxes IRL, and I just might hire an attorney to fix my truck tax in the game) and refining of that so your computer doesn't seize up and crash because of the various ai truck movements, for things like a better combat AI so you actually can play offline properly this time around or having extra time spent balancing so the Panzer-Lehr doesn't Lehr all the way to Omaha Beach or maybe just even a couple extra frames.

But I see the argument of it being a bit, - dare I say it? Arcadey with trucks disappearing. But it's nothing to invade Poland about IMHO..
 
Last edited:
Ownage said:
Hey guys, I just want to chime in and say that on a screenshot posted before, seemingly a mortar on a truck had the correct arch of fire and perhaps this will be a gripe some will have with the game but some won't mind (or it might even be changed in a later build, paradox does like its expansions).

I'd trade the time spent making an elaborate ai coding scheme for trucks moving back and forth whilst having taxes on things ingame later being refunded (I mean seriously guys? Taxes in a game? I've had enough dealing with taxes IRL, and I just might hire an attorney to fix my truck tax in the game) and refining of that so your computer doesn't seize up and crash because of the various ai truck movements, for things like a better combat AI so you actually can play offline properly this time around or having extra time spent balancing so the Panzer-Lehr doesn't Lehr all the way to Omaha Beach or maybe just even a couple extra frames.

But I see the argument of it being a bit, - dare I say it? Arcadey with trucks disappearing. But it's nothing to invade Poland about IMHO..
Click to expand...
A truck being moved by AI wouldn't seize up anyone's computer. AI have been moving things in games for a very, very long time.
 
Baane said:
A truck being moved by AI wouldn't seize up anyone's computer. AI have been moving things in games for a very, very long time.
Click to expand...
Well, it has some kind of performance impact. On weaker builds I remember large unit concentrations being an issue in Wargame. Sure, AI has been moving things around for a long time but look at for example Hearts of Iron where top machines would have severe framerate related issues post 1942 for months until a patch made it better but it's still not good.

Incase you didin't play HoI, it was due to the AI having to manage so many divisions late in the game and it wasn't optimised and made efficient enough that it drove the framerate into the ground. Now imagine that translated to SDN44: phase C on a 4 v 4 battle with high resources where there are 7 AI led battlegroups and each of these had to manage a large number of vehicles just ferrying around. I can already hear the fans of countless mid-low end computers run on max RPM.
 
Ownage said:
Well, it has some kind of performance impact. On weaker builds I remember large unit concentrations being an issue in Wargame. Sure, AI has been moving things around for a long time but look at for example Hearts of Iron where top machines would have severe framerate related issues post 1942 for months until a patch made it better but it's still not good.

Incase you didin't play HoI, it was due to the AI having to manage so many divisions late in the game and it wasn't optimised and made efficient enough that it drove the framerate into the ground. Now imagine that translated to SDN44: phase C on a 4 v 4 battle with high resources where there are 7 AI led battlegroups and each of these had to manage a large number of vehicles just ferrying around. I can already hear the fans of countless mid-low end computers run on max RPM.
Click to expand...
Your comparison to HoI is irrelevant. HoI is not built on IRISZOOM. As far as your allegations that large unit movements caused problems in Wargame: I am on a hand-me-down computer that is at least ten years old. I have never had an issue with the AI moving things in IRISZOOM.

This is all coming off as very disingenuous.
 
Baane said:
Your comparison to HoI is irrelevant. HoI is not built on IRISZOOM. As far as your allegations that large unit movements caused problems in Wargame: I am on a hand-me-down computer that is at least ten years old. I have never had an issue with the AI moving things in IRISZOOM.

This is all coming off as very disingenuous.
Click to expand...

Well, I had issues in Wargame before with my opponent piling together loads of transports and helicopters into one pile and upon attacking said pile or said pile attacking me - I noticed frame drops. You cannot negate that complicated AI scripts taxiing off loads of vehicles on efficient and safe paths on a large scale won't be a resource drain, all those calculations will tax the hardware. Remember that in PvP in WG most things where microed and had very little AI interaction, - nothing like this truck ferrying business anyhow.

Maybe this version of IRISZOOM is perfect for having a tonne of units coming from all sorts of places from the front calculating their routes on a large scale but I really doubt it. Just imagine the amount of trucks used by 8 infantry divisions mostly using infantry ferried in by trucks. Of course there would be an issue with not only the calculations for the AI but also the amount of units and effects displayed on the screen at the same time as high intensity combat is going on. It would be taxing for hardware.

And as a non-native speaker, you'd have to enlighten me on "disingenuous" and what that means and whatever I wrote that came of that way. Do you mean the way I try to keep things light and bright? With a few jokes and some play on language? o_O

The Hearts of Iron example is most accurate as it shows off how taxing AI interactions are.
 
Baane said:
A truck being moved by AI wouldn't seize up anyone's computer. AI have been moving things in games for a very, very long time.
Click to expand...
I would argue that is pretty much the sole purpose of RTS AI, is to move things. Ideally it would do so in a logical and strategically proper manner, "send the tucks back where they came from" AI wouldn't even need to do that.
 
gronank said:
It's jarring for 20 seconds followed by hours and hours of appreciation for the absence of useless visual clutter.
Click to expand...

Concerning the useless visual clutter I have to respectfully disagree. I'd rather take useless visual clutter in the form of an Opel Blitz parking in the wrong spot than witnessing troops morphing from wheels to legs.

Feeblezak said:
I am amazed this discussion is still ongoing.
Click to expand...
the old Wargame spirit still lingers
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back