The 13th RaptorThis would lead to weary tankers to load up HE rounds and blast a town to pieces before driving trough it. Not quite realistic.
And that is the exact reason why Dice decided not to include it on the full scale. They tried it, but they said it was not fun playing the map that was completely destroyed. They have great code for destructible bridges. It can be blown up in several places, and leaves a good destroyed-model behind. Could be adapted to blow up concreate walls surrounding a flag, so that infantry can pour in through the gaps They have a good code for things to knock-down, like the street signs, which could be adapted to knock-down metal fenses. They also have a good code for destructible fenses (wooden fenses) which a tank/jeep can pretty much ram through. And of course the regular code for destructible objects (like boxes) which was present even since BF42. I am sure FH team will put all these code bits to good use, as long as they don't make destructible forests
GF best viewed w/ pants off
23rd February 2004
I surely will be taking out some animosity on fh2 trees(that are hopefully destructible) for the greif their bf1942 predecessors have caused me and my tanks. Even though the trees in bf2 dont fall over, i know the road signs can be knocked over, and therefore this can be done with the trees. As for destructable terrain and the absence of it is in my eyes a good thing. I remember playing red faction online and any map with a rocket in it there was surely to be a giant crater of a map by the end of the round.
maybe some pieces of a wall specificly marked? like say this part of the wall is more damaged than the other then the others so that one is specificly able to be driven threw by tanks or hedges, for a bocage map now for our dozer and rhino tank that make it harder to use tanks in the bocage which could force tanks to go along with each other to go threw one spot? and forcing then to using roads since none deozer or rhino tanks can get threw the hedges?
The 13th RaptorAnd.. In real life, tankers whom fired at random buildings for no good reason other then "there might be a camper there" would be discharged or disiplined, you cant conquer/liberate something that you shot to dust. Thats why there were still city's and towns after wwII. In FH, with its rather static gameplay (x soldiers will be likely to occupy x-house because it has a good position). This would lead to weary tankers to load up HE rounds and blast a town to pieces before driving trough it. Not quite realistic.
No kidding numb nuts? its a game not real life. and i under stand your talking about realism, but say there were soldiers barrakaded in a abandon house, yes they would fire upon it. Plus i was talking about destructon on a small scale. Not the entire city of somethin like paris to be destroyed!!
'[21stHermann']No kidding numb nuts? its a game not real life. and i under stand your talking about realism, but say there were soldiers barrakaded in a abandon house, yes they would fire upon it. Plus i was talking about destructon on a small scale. Not the entire city of somethin like paris to be destroyed!!
What is with the namecalling? As for FH, EVERYTHING is on a small scale. Every tanker is going to destroy EVERY house that might have enemy anti tank troops in it. In Forgotten Hope 2 one will encounter the same house and the same situations time and time again. Once a tanker gets blown up by zook-troops once, he sure as hell will return to destroy the same building, and every next time he plays the map for that matter, just to be sure. And yes, tankers in wwII didnt go around destroying houses because they might be occupied, unless they had reason to believe there might be, they would leave things intact. My point is, if you make buildings destroyable, there wont be anything left 15 minutes after the game has started.
And i was kidding... and i ment only a few building that are distructable...
The problem also was that if you destroyed a building you would create better hiding spots than the standing house. Ingame the rubble won't be simulated properly. As for dice having tried it, doubt it - just because they're dice ;)
just leave a ruin instead of total destruction, makes a great hiding spot for the defenders...and you can shoot the ruin as much as you want, all you will do is expending ammunition...
If you want to make destructable buildings, include more that serve functions. You could make ammo dumps, and medical tents/buildings, which could encourage a few more people to stay behind and defend the uncap/spawns since these would be very valuable, and hard to repair.
ArisakaAs for dice having tried it, doubt it - just because they're dice ;)
Dice did try it. The battlefields became unplayable very quickly. They also tried 128 player servers but all the companies that rent out game servers bitched that they would not be able to support this. So Dice removed fully destructible environments because it wasn’t fun and 128 player servers because it couldn’t be supported (yet). The ability to have a lot of destroyable objects is in and supported though so reducing bunkers to rubble (yes, rubble that soldiers can still hide in)is entirely possible.