Official Fulqrum Publishing forum
Page 2 of 8 1 2 34 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)
-   IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=189)
-   -   Talk about how to include the tanks gameplay (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=29970)

badfinger 02-24-2012 06:27 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by pupo162 (Post 393866)
well, a question:

what tank battles took place in the battle of britain?
That's kind of my question, too. Even if the tanks are for the Battle of France, this is a flight sim. We need to have air battles over France, with a sim that improves with each patch. Showing me what tanks may do in the future sounds an awful lot like bait and switch. As in saying "I can't improve the FM right now, so let me show you some pretty tanks that I hope will divert your attention for at least a week."

binky9

ATAG_MajorBorris 02-24-2012 06:29 PM
Well played Bliss.

Its about gameplay, and added content that gives mission builders strategic and tactical options makes "gameplay" more varied and interesting for the players(which in turn could fire up the builders creative juices).

I doubt this could ever replace Steel Beasts as a tank sim but it sure will be cool for the missions in CoD.

csThor 02-24-2012 06:33 PM
If realism and historical accuracy is your goal then not at all. For starters who's fluid in tank tactics 1939-45 style? Hardly anyone. Would players stick to these tactics? Nope. Can historical strengths and weaknesses be depicted? Nope.

The thing is any kind of human involvement in the ground war will end in some kind of brawl, inevitable leading to a stalemate of some kind. Quite honestly I'd prefer more FMB control over the ground AI (like telling artillery which area to shell and when, telling tanks when to advance in which formation at what speed etc etc). ;)

David Hayward 02-24-2012 06:40 PM
Adding more ways for people to be involved in Cod/BoM/IL2 battles is awesome.

How about if we try assuming that they'll get it right and wait to start complaining until they actually screw it up.

SlipBall 02-24-2012 06:42 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by csThor (Post 393901)
If realism and historical accuracy is your goal then not at all. For starters who's fluid in tank tactics 1939-45 style? Hardly anyone. Would players stick to these tactics? Nope. Can historical strengths and weaknesses be depicted? Nope.

The thing is any kind of human involvement in the ground war will end in some kind of brawl, inevitable leading to a stalemate of some kind. Quite honestly I'd prefer more FMB control over the ground AI (like telling artillery which area to shell and when, telling tanks when to advance in which formation at what speed etc etc). ;)

What's the difference? look how people fly...certainly tactics are ignored by most...hey Bub, fill the tank!...oh, and check the oil:-P

JG52Uther 02-24-2012 06:47 PM
I still think the original title Storm Of War was more apt. This was never just a flight sim. I can't believe that anyone who has been here for any length of time, and has followed this thing since the beginning, would think anything different.
David, your post made me lol and is spot on. :)

ATAG_Bliss 02-24-2012 07:24 PM
I think it's quite clear many people didn't pay attention to the updates at all. It's was fairly obvious more than 2 years ago about the vehicles, just not to the extent. And I'm sure they have many more surprises up their sleeves. Gotta love the ambition.

badfinger 02-24-2012 07:43 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by ATAG_Bliss (Post 393931)
I think it's quite clear many people didn't pay attention to the updates at all. It's was fairly obvious more than 2 years ago about the vehicles, just not to the extent. And I'm sure they have many more surprises up their sleeves. Gotta love the ambition.
Being one of those that did pay attention to the updates, I remember several things that were fairly obvious more than 2 years ago, and I still haven't seen some of them.

The weekly updates still seem to me to be bones thrown to the pack to keep them happy. Mind you, I like CoD as it is, and fly it 3-4 times a week. I just want weekly updates that talk about what is coming next month, not next year, or in the next sequel.

binky9

David Hayward 02-24-2012 07:50 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by binky9 (Post 393938)
updates that talk about what is coming next month, not next year, or in the next sequel.
Lots of people will be complaining about the CoD dev team working on tanks. That is coming next month, next year, and with the next sequel. Then the people who complained about tanks will be complaining that their tanks aren't using the right fuel and don't have the right ammo loadout.

Consider yourself updated.

badfinger 02-24-2012 07:54 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by David Hayward (Post 393941)
Lots of people will be complaining about the CoD dev team working on tanks. That is coming next month, next year, and with the next sequel. Then the people who complained about tanks will be complaining that their tanks aren't using the right fuel and don't have the right ammo loadout.

Consider yourself updated.
But nothing specific about what everyone knows needs to get fixed? Damn.

binky9


All times are GMT. The time now is 02:35 AM.
Page 2 of 8 1 2 34 Last »
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.