Matrix Games Forums

Command Ops gets a Massive Update!Lost Battles AAR: Smolensk 41War in the East: Lost Battles is here!Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! Let's Play videoLost Battles Scenario Manual excerpts available!A sneak peek from Allied Corps!Harpoon 3 ANWs Free Ultimate Update!All good Deals always come in threesDistant Worlds: Shadows Approaches!Lost Battles AAR: Moscow 41		 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

Patch question

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Close Combat: Wacht am Rhein >> Patch question Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
Patch question - 3/9/2009 10:38:25 AM   
berndn

 

Posts: 205
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline 		I know that you had seen this Maps errors not fixed in the new WaR patch... but it would be nice to discuss it here as this is for me the primary forum for game related questions. And yes, the LOS can be a bit strange
Post #: 1
RE: Patch question - 3/10/2009 1:03:04 AM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6112
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		Strange that thread opened by stalky.

You would think that WaR maps had been coded in a new and unrealistic way compared to the way all Close Combat maps had been coded.

I just checked a few maps and the coding seems fine and suitable for the intended purpose.

Although in theory he has it almost right, there are a lot of other contributing factors in coding a map... size of the graphic/size of the building/type of building etc etc.

If we were to make cookie cutter stamps of each building they would become boring to play and not play at all realistically.... I want to have LOS through windows for instance, not windows that block LOS.

Thats not to say there may be errors... 64 maps is huge, if you would like to point out anything that is particularly worrisome I'll be glad to take a look.



(in reply to berndn)
Post #: 2
RE: Patch question - 3/10/2009 2:29:42 AM   
squadleader_id


Posts: 302
Joined: 10/29/2006
Status: offline 		Like I said over at CCS...why don't you guys experiment on re-coding the buildings the way Stalky explained (with the pics and huge lettering )...and then test them out in the game to see if this solves the LOS anomalies.
Edit: BTW, I don't think Stalky meant that the CCWAR map coding was drastically different to previous CC map coding...looks like you guys just missed 2-3 pixels in the building elements codings...but those 2-3 pixels can produce LOS anomalies.


< Message edited by squadleader_id -- 3/10/2009 2:36:32 AM >

(in reply to Andrew Williams)
Post #: 3
RE: Patch question - 3/10/2009 9:12:12 AM   
berndn

 

Posts: 205
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline 		Thanks Andrew for responding.
And 64 maps is for sure huge so errors may be possible.

The test which stalky had uploaded seem to indicate that a fix, if needed, would not be that big in size but for sure it will mean a lot of work. A question I had in mind yesterday was if shooting through 2 windows from a tank/gun/rifle/pistol would be realistic and if shooting through windows can be limited to only allow shooting through the first window instead of going through the whole house.

And I sure appreciate what you are doing and I'll thank you all for the ongoing support.

(in reply to squadleader_id)
Post #: 4
RE: Patch question - 3/10/2009 9:32:18 PM   
Korsun


Posts: 126
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Status: offline 		I think there was a discussion going on somwhere in this forum about that matter (shooting through 2 windows). Btw, I have never noticed any problems with LOS. Which map does Stalky refer to in his post?

(in reply to berndn)
Post #: 5
RE: Patch question - 3/10/2009 10:03:06 PM   
Platoon_Michael


Posts: 854
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline 		Personally I wouldnt be normally expecting to be on the recieving end of a shot like this LOS shows.
Whats also hard for me is the LOS that sometimes seems to make it over wooded areas too.




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Korsun)
Post #: 6
RE: Patch question - 3/10/2009 10:10:12 PM   
Pzt_Serk


Posts: 92
Joined: 10/30/2008
Status: offline 		C'mon Micheal, you should know how easy it is to shoot from a window, cross an indoor door and then throught the exit window in the heat of a battle...The only time I coudnt do it was due to curtains...

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)
Post #: 7
RE: Patch question - 3/10/2009 10:16:42 PM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6112
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		Ha , What a shot

But two windows are lined up... If you want to wait there and hope someone walks into your LOF and get of a quick shot that's up to you... I wouldn't do it.

(in reply to Pzt_Serk)
Post #: 8
RE: Patch question - 3/10/2009 10:34:23 PM   
Platoon_Michael


Posts: 854
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline 		The waiting isnt the hardest part.
It's understanding where it is




Attachment (1)

(in reply to Andrew Williams)
Post #: 9
RE: Patch question - 3/10/2009 10:50:29 PM   
Platoon_Michael


Posts: 854
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline 		I’m not trying to pass judgment.
But it does make one wonder what are the limits of LOS or LOF?.





Attachment (1)

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)
Post #: 10
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 12:31:39 AM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6112
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		The tank is adjacent to the Level 3 buildings Stone Wall.

Being adjacent means you can fire through the wall.... it assumes you take a pro-active decision and knock a peep hole or remove a brick.

This won't work in reverse eg one way LOS. (it assumes you have the upper hand by taking this position)

The the large 2 story building has Factory walls .... Flimsy and allow LOS/LOF under certain conditions.

The small 2 story building the LOS is going through the window... as you would have seen moving 1mm or 2mm to the left or right will block the LOS with the buildings walls.

You can drive around all the maps and find cunning spots with LOS to far off in the distance... the focus will only be very small to the left and right though.  eg if your Tank  waited in that spot for an infantry team to enter the Town Hall it would only have limited opportunity to do damage.. the team would just have to run to the left or right a couple of mm and it would be out of LOS.

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)
Post #: 11
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 1:15:47 AM   
Platoon_Michael


Posts: 854
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline 		Good answer but I think what your really missing is that the corner of the house in CCIV 4.02 blocks LOS
WAR doesnt.

(in reply to Andrew Williams)
Post #: 12
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 1:49:53 AM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6112
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		In CC4 you can still get LOS to that building through the Lvl 3 Building.

The big building in WaR is a flimsy factory in CC4 it is heavy duty stone which will block LOS.

It's not correct to compare the two... as you will no doubt find the reverse is the case in other areas if you look around... if the building has been changed, like in your example , you will have a different experience.




Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Andrew Williams -- 3/11/2009 1:50:49 AM >

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)
Post #: 13
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 2:05:43 AM   
Tejszd

 

Posts: 2677
Joined: 11/17/2007
Status: offline 		Checked the Stavelot coding for the factory and it looks okay. If you look at your pictures your tank is in a different spot, albeit only slightly, but it could be enough to give you the LOF/LOS....

Having said that I'm sure there are some problems on some of the maps (example some the houses on the Assenois map). It is bound to happen when you have to click on so many element squares (every 5 pixels x 5 pixels). Stavelot for example is X = 1920 pixels by Y = 1680 pixels thus there are 129,024 element squares to be defined....


< Message edited by Tejszd -- 3/11/2009 2:07:26 AM >

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)
Post #: 14
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 3:03:07 AM   
TheReal_Pak40

 

Posts: 185
Joined: 10/8/2003
Status: offline 		Ummm, did the make "flimsy" factories in the 30s-40s? What was it made out of, paper mache? I've never heard of a wooden factory so it must have been either stone or brick. Even if it was wood it would block LOS and LOF just as if it were stone or brick. A right click on the wall says it is a "factory wall", not a "flimsy factory wall". So this begs the question, are all factories in Belgium considered flimsy?

Another issue I have with some of the wall/window coding is that the windows are rarely where the graphic shows them. I understand that it is hard to line up the coding to the graphic but usually it is way off.

(in reply to Tejszd)
Post #: 15
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 3:25:28 AM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6112
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		Our factory walls are flimsy ... Think of a warehouse in this instance

If they are required to be more than flimsy they are stone or brick.

i think Tin sheet might be the closest match along the lines of a nissen hut.





< Message edited by Andrew Williams -- 3/11/2009 3:26:19 AM >

(in reply to TheReal_Pak40)
Post #: 16
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 5:48:59 AM   
Joe 98


Posts: 3964
Joined: 1/5/2001
From: Wollondilly, Sydney
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoon_Michael

The waiting isnt the hardest part.
It's understanding where it is






I prefer flat maps such as in Close Combat the original.

With flat maps, LOS is never a problem.

For Close Combat: The Next Generation, I vote for flat maps!

-

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)
Post #: 17
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 5:52:40 AM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6112
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		There's a lot to be said for non-mountainous maps... I don't know about flat, maybe a few undulations, slight hills and hollows?

(in reply to Joe 98)
Post #: 18
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 8:55:34 AM   
Moss Orleni

 

Posts: 201
Joined: 11/3/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Williams

The tank is adjacent to the Level 3 buildings Stone Wall.

Being adjacent means you can fire through the wall.... it assumes you take a pro-active decision and knock a peep hole or remove a brick.

This won't work in reverse eg one way LOS. (it assumes you have the upper hand by taking this position)



Hi Andrew,

The screenshot below shows the reverse situation: the wreck next to the factory wall is a TD that was knocked out by a Panther in the previous turn.
The Panther didn't have to stand next to the factory wall to get the LOS. I don't know it this is a coding issue or not, but a Panther firing from a distance, through two factory walls and right through the peep hole made by a defending tank seems a bit unrealistic. The Stavelot factory is just one example of course, but we've seen the same situation on other maps as well.
In gaming terms, the problem is more on the defending side: when setting up in ambush position behind a house, you of course do not expect to be hit through 2 windows from a point not even near the other side of the house. Having to check the whole map area behind the house to see from what position your TD could be hit is a bit unpractical and time-consuming. If the peep hole would really be one-way LOS, there might be a case for it, but if not, I'd prefer to see these LOS lanes closed.

This said, to me this issue is more annoying than really critical to gameplay. If it's easily solvable, then yes, please . If not, well, pity then...

Cheers,

Moss

BTW, Andrew: tried to send you a PM, but your box is full; I sent it to your mail address instead, you might want to check it out...






Attachment (1)

(in reply to Andrew Williams)
Post #: 19
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 11:40:24 AM   
squadleader_id


Posts: 302
Joined: 10/29/2006
Status: offline 		About the mystery of that ghostly see-thru Stavelot factory...you guys might want to take a closer look at the elements.txt file.
Eventhough Schrecken...err...Andrew pointed out that the factory has flimsy walls...it should still be a LOS/LOF obstruction but with low protection values.
Look for "Factory Wall" (column A, row 234 - or 237 in the Workbook), check "Visibility Hindrance" columns (KLMN)...notice that they're set at low values of 100 (same hindrance value as doors, and even lower than windows).  Change those values to basic "wall" values of 450...and you should still get flimsy Factory Walls but not see-thru anymore.

(in reply to Moss Orleni)
Post #: 20
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 11:47:29 AM   
berndn

 

Posts: 205
Joined: 1/5/2007
Status: offline 		Thanks guys for discussing it here as well. I'm sure that not all are registered at the linked site or some may have the same problems I have (I can login in but have no access to the forums anymore. Browsers tried: Opera & Firefox). So please accept my apologies for creating this thread here.
Another reason why I prefer to discuss it here is that Matrix gives us support here and I feel it belongs to this. I know that Andrew visits the linked site too but find it better to discuss things which may need to be addressed at the publishers forum :)

(in reply to squadleader_id)
Post #: 21
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 11:49:15 AM   
Korsun


Posts: 126
Joined: 11/18/2005
From: Frankfurt, Germany
Status: offline 		Well, I can live with the current situation. In order to attack the hidden tank it has to be spotted, right? So, if the panther commander knows that there is a tank why not put one through the first window? A Panther Tank could engage enemy tanks at distances beyond 1km which is a very small target in relation to a factory window at a 20m distance. The question is whether the Panther can spot this tanks by itself through a dark factory and a peephole. This I would say is rather unrealistic. But if it is spotted by infantry...What do you guys think?

(in reply to Moss Orleni)
Post #: 22
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 6:52:14 PM   
TheReal_Pak40

 

Posts: 185
Joined: 10/8/2003
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Williams

Our factory walls are flimsy ... Think of a warehouse in this instance

If they are required to be more than flimsy they are stone or brick.

i think Tin sheet might be the closest match along the lines of a nissen hut.


Be realistic Andrew, this kind of building did not exist in 1944 Europe. Certainly not in rural Belgium. Pressed tin buildings were rare at best even in the U.S. at this time.

My main point is that you only have one designation for "factory wall". So, assuming that all factories that are present in the WaR maps use the "factory wall" coding, then they all have "flimsy" walls and can be seen through in such a manner. This, I think, is completely misleading. When I think of a factory in 1944 Europe, I think of Brick buildings with smoke stacks etc. Even warehouses would have been made of wood at the very least and should be coded as such.

(in reply to Andrew Williams)
Post #: 23
RE: Patch question - 3/11/2009 8:18:02 PM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6112
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		I just used those pics as an example of the type of protection given by the walls s opposed to brick or heavy stone.

It doesn't have to be pressed steel, just something flimsy that affords little or no protection... and that is what those walls are coded as.

I don't believe there are a lot of them sprinkled amongst the 64 maps, but there would be a few.... there are a lot of wooden, brick and stone buildings.



< Message edited by Andrew Williams -- 3/11/2009 8:27:26 PM >

(in reply to TheReal_Pak40)
Post #: 24
RE: Patch question - 3/12/2009 12:04:50 AM   
TheReal_Pak40

 

Posts: 185
Joined: 10/8/2003
Status: offline 		OK, that's a better explanation. However, I personally checked that particular building on the Stavelot Map and the green line seems to go through wall, not window. The picture above is 95% window and if one were modeling as such then I would expect to see mostly "factory window" instead of "factory wall". Plus, the building graphic itself has small windows and tends to have thicker walls than the stone buildings that are near to it. Both of these tend to give the player the impression of a hardy building, not a flimsy glass frame as pictured above.

(in reply to Andrew Williams)
Post #: 25
RE: Patch question - 3/12/2009 12:20:45 AM   
squadleader_id


Posts: 302
Joined: 10/29/2006
Status: offline 		Unless all factories in Belgium were built with "green house glass walls"...then I suggest that the you guys re-examine and fix anomalies in the elements file (drive:\Matrix Games\Close Combat Wacht am Rhein\Data\Base\elements.txt). See my post above for details of the elements data glitch.
Even greenhouse glass walls should not be more see through than open windows

(in reply to TheReal_Pak40)
Post #: 26
RE: Patch question - 3/12/2009 1:12:17 AM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6112
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		Had time to have a long look at that map.

I've found an error in the factory wall element (used very rarely in WaR)... thank you stalky for helping here.

Also errors in the way that map has been coded.

I'm working on a fix.

I'm quite happy keeping the Factory wall element as a flimsy element... we have more heavier duty elements that can be used when appropriate.

See the building a little further south of that "factory" and this factory is coded with stone walls.

Also the "Factory" in question is coded with Factory floor element allowing vehicles to traverse it... only problem if the AI sets up in there , there is no way out... I'm changing the coding of the floor so vehicles won't/can't set up in there.

Stay tuned... I might have to post this as an optional update for users.... until we can make a new patch worthwhile.


< Message edited by Andrew Williams -- 3/12/2009 1:23:55 AM >

(in reply to squadleader_id)
Post #: 27
RE: Patch question - 3/12/2009 1:30:24 AM   
squadleader_id


Posts: 302
Joined: 10/29/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Andrew Williams

Had time to have a long look at that map.

I've found an error in the factory wall element... thank you stalky for helping here.

Also errors in the way that map has been coded.

I'm working on a fix.



Thanks for looking into this, Shrecken!

quote:


I'm quite happy keeping the Factory wall element as a flimsy element... we have more heavier duty elements that can be used when appropriate.

See the building a little further south of that "factory" and this factory is coded with stone walls.

Also the "Factory" in question is coded with Factory floor element allowing vehicles to traverse it... only problem if the AI sets up in there , there is no way out... I'm changing the coding of the floor so vehicles won't/can't set up in there.


I personally don't mind the flimsy factory walls...but don't forget re-check the "Hindrance" values in the elements file.

quote:


Stay tuned... I might have to post this as an optional update for users.... until we can make a new patch worthwhile.



Looking forward to the update!

(in reply to Andrew Williams)
Post #: 28
RE: Patch question - 3/12/2009 4:21:25 AM   
squadleader_id


Posts: 302
Joined: 10/29/2006
Status: offline 		Looks like the value for "block LOS" (col AB) for Factory Window is also wrong in the CCWAR elements file...thanks for pointing this out in our little chat, Stalky!
It should be "1" like all the other window elements...not "0".
That's why the Stavelot factory ended up the ghostly see-thru building in the game ;)

Here's the now not so ghostly Stavelot factory with fixed elements file:





Attachment (1)

(in reply to squadleader_id)
Post #: 29
RE: Patch question - 3/15/2009 11:34:12 AM   
Andrew Williams


Posts: 6112
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline 		For those asking why there is LOS on the inset picture.

Walls are coded so that they give LOS if you are immediately adjacent as in the inset pic.  This makes the assumtion that when you are right up against a wall you can make a peep hole or similar. 

If you are not immediately adjacent to the wall like in the larger pic, you do not get LOS.

(in reply to squadleader_id)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> Close Combat: Wacht am Rhein >> Patch question Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.563