posible 1.11 feature

[flecha]

I´ve read rumors hat HTC may be considering adding a 1st person type module for the field capture phases. That may be what Pyro calls "exciting news for 1.11" in his last post.

It sounds like they´re getting away with the AI troops letting the players do the job. Sounds really exciting to me adding this new dimension to the game. Just dreaming of those ground battles

what do you think guys ?

[Tumor]

...I think jumping on a vehicle with my trusty rifle, spending 10 minutes riding to battle, jumping off and getting killed over and over and over in WW2OL kinda sucks.  I sure ain't gonna do it here lol

[flecha]

That wouldn´t be an issue. I think it´ll be same as in bombers where you can join as a gunner at any time.

Our buddy goon/ troop truck driver will call when close to target.

[BenDover]

i heard it was a spawn point in the map room

but i wonder if this will be ai (bots) or players

[Sabre]

HITECH: On ground warfare, what I envision at some point is a first-person shooter run as a secondary item to base capture.  What I’m sort of envisioning in the end is something that would run along the lines of a C-47 dropping a spawn point at the [enemy base’s] map room.  The map room now is expanded to a full, underground bunker-warfare, first-person shooter.  The defender always gets to spawn in the bunker.  The attackers, now for the next thirty minutes, they can spawn people in the bunker, and there’s this big, first-person shooter war happening underground to do an actual [base] capture.

SABRE: So your going to take it basically all the way down to the individual with a rifle and some hand grenades?

HITECH: Absolutely!  What I’ve figured out is, there are four aspects to combat.  You’ve got fighter planes, you’ve got ground vehicles, you’ve got bombers, and you have infantry.  None of the four people, none of the four aspects want to go fight each other.  Vehicles want to fight with vehicles; bombers want to go bomb stuff; fighters don’t want to mess with bombers; bombers don’t want to mess with fighters; and infantry don’t want to mess with anybody…they just want to go fight the other infantry.  What you do is provide a mechanism in the game that makes that happen.

From my interview with HiTech at last year's Con...

[Dux]

Originally posted by Sabre
HITECH: ...none of the four aspects want to go fight each other.  Vehicles want to fight with vehicles; bombers want to go bomb stuff; fighters don’t want to mess with bombers; bombers don’t want to mess with fighters; and infantry don’t want to mess with anybody…they just want to go fight the other infantry...

This just doesn't ring true to me... does anybody else feel this way? I feel that the combined theater (all vehicles vs. all vehicles) is one of the great immersive factors of this game. It would be a shame if the option were programmed out.

2 cents.

[HFMudd]

bombers want to go bomb stuff; fighters don’t want to mess with bombers; bombers don’t want to mess with fighters;

"Vehicle vs. vehicle" I agree with.  "Infantry vs. infantry" I agree with.  But the quote above I have a hard time with since I love attacking bombers should I find myself co or better alt.  

I would also suspect that Ostwind and M-16 drivers like to "mess" with fighters.

[senna]

their doomed! Well thats a great idea. Imagine that getting in early to reccon the landing beaches before an invasion. Having your metrics for your side already in place as the troops land. I like the idea mentioned above of an air land and even possibly sea battle all at once. How? Maybe through two or three seperate products all interlinked in strategy. So the army guys fite and they can see a distant air battle. They need an airstrike so they light off some smoke grenades, whola air strike like in Wolfenstien Online or something. If the jabo comes too close they can shoot at it. Hum, someday... I'm a dreamer, lol.

This way, each game can bridge off in development and have code that is unique to the requirements of that genre however the networking, strategy, and many other apsects can be shared in common. This would also help ah spread to other gaming markets. Pretty far out I know, thought I would throw the idea out.

[Kevin14]

Yeah, I was wondering if something like senna's idea would ever happen. Three products all compatable so the air force could cooperate with the GIs, etc. The GI maps would have to take place on hills and beaches and airfields or else the FR would go to about nill. Then this could be MASSIVELY MASSIVE MULTIPLAYER

[majic]

I think it would be fun to sit at the end of a runway and snipe pilots as they are just about to lift.  

Seriously, I would imagine there would be quite a bit of work to do before they could get into infantry.  I'm not a programmer, but I would bet that this would be quite difficult to do.  On top of that, it seems to me that GV gameplay and the terrain would need a good amount of work if the troopies are supposed to be out in the open, instead of just fightin' inside.  Oh well, we can only wait and see where HT takes us.

[flecha]

Thanks Sabre for that first hand quote; that´s a bit different of what I had envisioned.
 However I disagree with Hitech when he says that each type of player don´t want to mess with each other. In fact I think they are choosing this way rather based on economics.  Adding the human troops thing would probably absorb a lot of HTC resources for quite a while; ( designing the module itself, modifying the terrains so the troops have a more suitable terrain instead of the open spaces we have now. Modifying the AI AAA wich is unapproachable by "soft/slow" targets right now).

But i can´t quit dreaming of this. In fact i thought that HTC was after this from the begining when I first saw that the pilot after bailing out was able to walk  bearing a rifle (and back in warbirds you were also able to fire your .45 although the sortie was over same moment you hit ground) So ,the next step seemed  logical; to add this infantry environment in the same way we have gv´s today.

Well, let´s wait and see..

[Sabre]

Dux: I interpreted HiTech's remark differently than you have.  I don't believe he meant this quite as literally as you've taken it.  The impression I got was that what he was trying to say is that the focus of each of the four elements was not to battle with the others.  Yes, bombers do encounter fighters, and fighters and bombers do attack gv's.  However, it's not the primary reason people choose those vehicle types as a rule.  Bombers want to make it to the target and blow stuff up; fighters want to shoot down other planes (primarily fighters and defenseless Goons:)); tanks want to slug it out with tanks, etc.  The idea behind this implementation of infantry combat is to provide an environment where the troops can do what they were primarily meant to do - fight other troops - without being slaughered wholesale by gv's and airplanes before they can reach the objective.

By confining the majority of infantry combat to room-to-room bunker fights, they avoid much of the problems WWIIOL has struggled so unsuccessfully to overcome.  It doesn't require them to provide all the ground-clutter in their terrain that WWIIOL has (with its attendent hit to framerates for flyers), and is less likely to bumb up against player-in-view limits like WWIIOL does.   In effect, it will be a game-within-a-game, where the outcome of the bunker fight will impact the air and/or naval war.  Eventually, computers and bandwidth will catch up to the WWIIOL vision of totally interwoven air and ground warfare.  Even when technology finally does, it may be desireable to keep infantry confined to base and town assaults, rather than try to perfectly recreate open terrain, combined arms battle.

[AKWarp]

I understand what HT is after, and I agree with it to some extent, however I do see one possible glitch should this be implemented the way he has suggested.   Once the enemy infantry forces have their spawn point, and the battle goes internal to the bunkers, then ownership of the airfield lies solely in the outcome of the bunker fight.  The ground vehicles, aircraft and naval forces on the outside will have no method to intervene in any manner.  The war "outside" simply becomes superfluous and has no use. m Also, what happens if a country has infantry inside a maproom already fighting and someone comes along in a goon or m3 and drops troops on the maproom?  

Personally, after considering the limitations of the internet and the game as a whole (as we know it now), to me the best implementation of "infantry" might best be relegated to open area fighting....but on one condition....true cover and concealment are available and actually work!

I've heard many mention in the past (and even HT I believe) about possible considerations for artillery.  That would be a perfect scenario for infantry use.  Forward spotters calling in firefor artillery batteries in the rear or near front areas.  HT could implement a 2.5 ton truck or something that carries "artillery equipment" to an area (like an m3 carrying supplies), setting up and then letting the infantry troops move ahead to call in fire (in essence, using the current grid system with range and windage adjustments in yards, or something).  This certainly would not be the limit of infantry use, but I think this would be a good starting point.

[Dux]

Maybe I did misinterpret it, Sabre. I'm sure HTC has a pretty clear vision of what direction they want to go in... maybe something that words don't quite grasp fully. I enjoy what they've done with the game so far, so I suppose we can trust them.

[flecha]

While HTC makes up their mind I´m thinking that whatever way they choose it certainly be cool if they loose the old 'capture the flag' system of deciding the outcome of the battle. I´d rather see a sytem where the defender will see the number of spawns per minute limited, based on how the battle is going. For the attacker the victory condition can be to keep a spot clear of enemies for a certain amount of time.


The towns near the airfields are natural places for infantry battles. Modifyng the current 3d model (To a set of ruined buildings when they get destroyed, instead of the flat spot they
become right now) and the hit model (so the obstacles properly afect the path of projectiles and explosive charges blasts) may be not too costly to do  for HTC

The AI ack is a problem. Maybe the fast way is disabling it for infantry. (they always can man the ack for that purpose)

The soldiers itself dont have to be too different of what they are today. they will be basically another vehicle type, for ordance you can carry eithar a rifle and several grenades, or an MG and ammo

I will not ask for the ability to dug /build shelters just now