cuando algo estalle y punto.
creo que te has leído más de ese hilo que yo, no tengo claro si seguirán con esa decisión después del CMSF. Me parecería un error. Además, si ahora quieren más profundidad a cambio de menor amplitud, hay menos unidades, por lo que está menos justificado aún que no muestren información detallada en el juego. Si en el CMSF no lo ponen por problemas de tiempo, bueno, no me gusta, pero me aguanto. Pero si pretenden establecerlo como un standar, creo que cuando llegue el momento habrá que protestar en sus foros.Lannes escribió: Lo que no tengo claro, porque no acabo de estar seguro de la traduccion, es despues que le preguntan si para el futuro juego en la IIGM, que si se saben todos los datos, no son aproximaciones, si los enseñarian en el juego en alguna pantalla de info, y me parece que contesta que lo mas seguro es que no, que lo dejeran como en este CMSF y que si alguien quiere consultar los datos que mire el manual o internet...
Lo importante es la ultima frase, todo la discusion es sobre la poca informacion que daran en el juego, y la ultima es la contestacion a que espera que al menos en la version WWII si tendra el mismo nivel de info. Y le dice, creo, algo asi como, improbable, aunque si habra mas informacion en una pantalla secundaria de algun tipo. Y que la razon es porque algunos de los datos que en CMSF encuentran irrelevantes en WWII si son relevantes. pero vamos que yo entiendo que pondran algo mas pero no tanto como en CMx1...quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This suggests that generalizing stats, making no distinction between Turret and Hull (with all respect to Hull Down positioning argument), as well as not giving any weapon data can potentially misguide player and force him to memorize weapon abilities from the manual rather than to learn them on the fly by playing the game. Minimizing required info to play the game for a newbie may be a plus, but reducing a chance to master it by denying him in-depth stats from which to learn doesn’t seem to me as a big plus.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is nothing preventing the Grog from looking up some stuff in the manual, books, or on the Web. Since everything is simulated within the game it doesn't matter where you get your info from and therefore we aren't denying anybody anything.
What we intend to do is put certain rules of thumb in the manual. ATGMs are a perfect example. The US forces have basically four armored vehicles at their disposal; Abrams, Bradleys, Strykers, and various trucks. We can easily state something like:
AT-14 - can kill practically anything from any angle.
AT-7 - has a decent chance to damage an Abrams, good chance of taking anything smaller out of action.
Etc.
What is more important for the ATGMs is to know range, chance of hitting, limitations (must maintain visual vs. fire and forget, etc.), and other such things. These can be partially shown within the game, such as CMx1 style "mouse help" when over a target, partially through ingame UI, but a few things will no doubt have to be left in the manual. Again, this is pretty easy to do since there aren't many systems to be concerned with and most of the Soviet based ATGMs have fairly similar and obvious limitations.
I'm a semi-grog and have played the game. I think it is a HUGE plus for both the newbie and the hardcore Grog. But then again, I also purposefully designed the UI this way so I'm kinda biased
The reason why is that this level of info you're looking for amounts to little more than clutter. Again, the same arguments were made to show things like movement points and what not for the first CM game. Funny how people aren't demanding we put that stuff into CM:SF (and follow up wiseass comments by people will be ignored ).
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Let’s hope that WWII version will be at least at the level of previous CM games.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Unlikely, though we will no doubt have a lot more information available in some secondary screen of some sort. The reason why is that SOME of the data we find irrelevant (or practically so) in CM:SF is relevant for the more "primative" WWII stuff.
Termales tanto para el comandante del carro y el gunner, capacidad Hunter-Killer, mejora en el Fire Control Sistem , mejora de las capacidades de fuego en movimiento sobre blancos en movimiento. Uso del misil AT-11. Mejora en el blindaje (supongo que sera un ERA modernizado..) Quedaran unos excelentes T-72sJane's Defence Weekly
August 6, 2003
By Alon Ben-David, JDW Correspondent, Tel Aviv
The Syrian Armed Forces are upgrading a brigade of T-72 main battle tanks (MBTs) and have acquired some 1500 Kornet-E anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs), intelligence sources in the region have told Jane's Defence Weekly.
Syria signed in 1998 a contract with Galileo Avionica of Italy - a wholly owned subsidiary of Finmeccanica - to upgrade 122 T-72 MBTs. The estimated value of the contract is some $200 million. The upgrade includes installing Galileo's Tank Universal Reconfiguration Modular System T-series tank (TURMS-T) fire-control system (FCS).TURMS-T is a modular third-generation computerised day/ thermal FCS especially developed for the fire-control modernisation/ upgrade of Russian-originated T-family tanks. The system includes gunner's and commander's stabilised sights (both with second-generation infra-red cameras) and a new turret-management computer and set of sensors, so that the gun stabilisation and accuracy is improved to the level of latest-generation tanks, even in move-to-move firing. The upgrade includes installing new armour and an attachment for the Russian KBP Instrument Design Bureau 9K119 Reflecks (AT-11) ATGM, which is fired through the T-72's 125mm smoothbore main gun. The armour and missile attachment are supplied by undisclosed subcontractors to Galileo. The upgrade programme began last year, with all of the systems now delivered to Syria. Installation of the systems is being conducted in-country, with about half of the T-72s modernised to date. A Finmeccanica spokesperson declined to comment on any details regarding the Syrian upgrade.
)
.
