Carrier Command Beta due out tommorow... [Archive]

CaptainHaplo

04-07-12, 10:07 AM

OK I have played this for a little bit. Remember - its still beta.

Right now the beta has no tutorial, but it did come with a basic manual. Its easy enough to figure out how to do things, but that is only because I played the original. The first few missions in the campaign are set to be tutorial in nature.

Beta has no campaign, right now just a single, randomly generated 9 island map. You can modify how many islands you vs the AI control. I expect there will be a setting for number of neutral islands later.

The game LOOKS gorgeous. Now with that said, realize my standards are lower than most when it comes to graphics. I would say its very "Crysis" like regarding realisitic looks. It does suffer from some drawbacks, sight distance is not as high as I (or others) would like.

Interface is well designed. Controls are good, though you do have to fiddle with them initially to keep the mouse from seeming "heavy". Turn down the sensitivity (called horizontal/vertical resolution) and it becomes much crisper.

Gameplay - well now - this is where its at. This game FEELS like Carrier Command did back in the day, with a great look and lots more flexibility.
All islands have some defences, and you have to tackle each island with forethought to crack it. Your choices are "hack" it or destroy the command center and build anew - just like the original. However, to hack it you have to recon the island, find the various firewalls and take them out, or else the hack takes longer (which exposes your Walrus to greater fire - thus more likely to be destroyed before the hack completes). Want to just take out the Command Center? I remember in the original, a fully loaded A2A Manta could hit the CC with every missile, then kamikaze in and take out the CC. Nice trade at the time. Not so here. The CC is shielded - and yes - just like firewalls, you have to take out the shield generators if you want some decent chance to make the CC go boom. Ground units now fire at you (and you can fire from your Walrus at enemy Manta's), close air support is a necessary task unless you want to try and send your units in under AI control. Combat is basically a major step up, it takes some thinking, but only to minimize losses. I expect the tactical AI will mature some.

About the AI... it is a work in progress.... Tactically its a bit careless with its units right now. When it gets replacements (yes, until the CC is down it does get some replacements) - it throws them at you immediately - basically a hull and machine gun - no armor because the AI feels it HAS to stop you and doesn't take the time to properly equip its units. Yes - changing loadouts on a hull takes time. Static defenses are done well. mobile units tend to be used in semi-random ways. I can't seem to figure out how the AI decides to counter certain things - one time its a Manta doing CAS, others its a single walrus trying to get me in range of static defences, and others its 5 units coming over a hill or in the air or both to take me out.....

Strategically the AI does need some work. It seems to use a somewhat random choice for what island should be what type. Where common sense says "choke point" - it might put a factory instead of a defensive island. Things like that. I am fairly sure that is also being worked on. I have seen the AI attack islands where it has little reason to do so, because the island would not connect to its chain, nor would it break mine.

Defensive islands not only are tougher, but they actually help "connected" islands with their defenses - supposedly. Haven't been able to prove that yet. If so, its a nice touch. One great thing is that the island types can be changed remotely now. It takes time, but if you have a larger map that will come in great usefulness. A lot of the "I wish I could" from the original are now available in this game. That means a lot to gamers like me.

I have personally not encountered any hangs or crashes. Others have. Its still beta to be sure, but it doesn't FEEL like one most of the time, so it feels closer to an RC.

One final note. I sprang for the base purchase. The "upgraded" version only includes a soundtrack thing from the game and some other minor stuff... I am one who always turns off the music in a game - its a distraction. Suprisingly, I didn't with this game - and won't. The musical score is hauntingly beautiful, is tempo'd with the game, and just amazing. I am looking to upgrade my purchase if possible for the soundtrack - its that good.

Fincuan

04-07-12, 11:12 AM

A BIS game using the Arma engine that doesn't get trashed around for being insanely buggy? :DL

Now that's something...

Drewcifer

04-07-12, 12:44 PM

CaptainHaplo

04-07-12, 01:42 PM

The secondary guns do little damage - only the plasma is worth using against the carrier.

Against islands, your best friend in the demo is rockets - 3-5 rockets take out almost any target building. Add in they are good against airpads, etc - and you can use hit and run tactics to great advantage.

Use your carrier - put it in close to an area and watch it it knock enemy manta's out of the sky.

Skybird

04-07-12, 04:08 PM

Ok I couldn't resist I bought it... so far it is EXTREMELY hard. Not to say complicated or hard to understand I know what to do and where to go... but the units are very fragile and once your down a manta or two its like game over because resupply takes a LONG TIME and by then I've generally got no choice but to retreat to my stock pile island.

Also Carrier vs Carrier is just all out chaos and you NEVER win. You can't really control or direct anything while this battle royal is going on other then a single unit. (if you try to direct everyone they just sit there and die. and if you control the carrier NONE of the guns will fire at the other carrier.) so its pretty obvious you need to be in something else which means you have little effect on the actual battle as the enemy carrier shreds you with its massive weaponry.
Going back 25 years I recall that this was exactly my description of the original program. :D

I wish they would implement two playing modes, one dedicated to the original as close as possible for those hardcore players wanting it to be like in the good ol' times, and an improved mode where the AI does assist to run several units simultaneously and to give the carrier an autonomous battle mode, at least partially.

I NEVER have won the game won 25 years ago, and never was able to defeat the enemy carrier. The game was great due to its design, not due to its balancing.

CaptainHaplo

04-07-12, 04:13 PM

Skybird,

In this rendition you can do both - you can launch multiple units and have the attack, you can launch one and drive it yoursellf. You can set the carrier to passive (I think) or you can let it chew up anything that comes near, etc.

The AI is designed with some flexibility in mind it seems.

Drewcifer

04-07-12, 05:33 PM

Yes the carrier will automatically devour anything that comes at it, IF your not actually steering it.

So like I said you essentially have to NOT control the carrier and instead pilot a walrus or Manta during a carrier fight which amounts to throwing stones at a steel giant armed to the teeth.

The ai is atleast somewhat competent although to be honest I hope it is improved on quite abit before actual release version. My walrus team always gets stuck in a ravine or on a wall. Also my mantas always bump into eachother unless I fly lead myself and have 3 wingmen in formation.

NeonSamurai

04-07-12, 11:27 PM

I've beaten the original several times. The trick I used to defeat the enemy carrier was to stay out of range and send suicide walruses armed with missiles, which would spam missile fire and ram the carrier (to figure out how to do the most damage vs a carrier I experimented using all the weapons on my own carrier). There was also an exploit where you could get unlimited equipment as well.

One thing I don't like about the new version now is that the surrounding sea away from the islands seem to be a dead area where you can't launch anything or attack from a distance. One of my main strategies in the original was to keep my carrier out at a distance and use mantas for recon and early assaults. I also don't like that you can't launch mantas while moving, and the UI is giving me trouble (in some ways i think the original's ui is better).

Drewcifer

04-08-12, 08:09 AM

not launching while moving is dumb... real aircraft carriers do it all the time.

The walrus idea sounds good on paper but I'm pretty sure the defense drones would slaughter you... as they basically just latch onto your walrus and explode like a mine = insta-death.

Also it appears the AI rage quits anyways everytime I lose the game runs fine but when I have the upper hand and am about to win the game crashes.

NeonSamurai

04-08-12, 08:27 AM

It did work really well in the original, but i doubt it would work in the new version. But at least in this new version your units are AI controllable and can fight on their own

CaptainHaplo

04-08-12, 09:18 AM

Actually, I have yet to see the enemy carrier deploy drones so far...

If you get under the guns, via walrus or aircraft, you can attack the enemy carrier with impunity - and it can do the same to you. The guns on the carriers cannot depress below the horizon. This has been listed as a bug. Also will allow the guns to be used for shore bombardment more.

Launching at speed should be allowed, but not recovery.

Oh, and the enemy carrier should not be able to go almost as fast as a manta either.... I found it once, some distance away, launched with a laser and started shooting its engines - it turned and RAN - over 150 on speed. The player's carrier is limited to less than half that. Not cool.

Drewcifer

04-08-12, 10:51 AM

Strange because the enemy carrier ALWAYS has its drones out when I attack it. It always charges straight at me like we are playing chicken.

The easiest way to defeat it is simply to control your own plasma cannon and blast the enemies until its gone, once it is he is basically toothless.

This of course is a game of luck as if you lose your plasma cannon your dead.

Anyways he ALWAYS has his drones out and if I launch my walrus two of them are instantly killed as he has only two I suppose and they don't replenish or atleast not that I have seen.

CaptainHaplo

04-08-12, 11:05 AM

Well there is no doubt that the enemy carrier AI is wonky - but considering its beta status, I am ok with that. Patch fixeses will be ongoing for a while as we get closer to release.

I am seeing a performance bug that I can repeat but don't know if anyone else is seeing it. After playing a while, the map screen (and menu screens) get laggy. First person screens show no lag.

I am running 8G of memory, and the game loads and takes about 1.2G - I tried turning up the priority on carrier.exe to high - that helped - but 5 minutes later it was back again. Mem usage was up a little, but not significantly. If I exit entirely and restart the game it works fine.

Thing is, this happens within 10 minutes of play time - every time. Either of you guys seen this?

Drewcifer

04-08-12, 07:24 PM

negative I have not noticed any slowdowns.

Infact i've only encountered two bugs so far. The game crashes, or freezes if you are about to defeat the enemy carrier, and if you have any units outside of your carrier during an auto save once it finishes your units vanish as if they were destroyed.

Skybird

04-09-12, 06:15 AM

By your feedbacks I think that maybe they reach to copy the original too exactly in behaviour - especially the features that already had to be considered back then, for example the speed-racin enemy carrier.

In our days, titles like this stand and fall with a rasonable AI. What I read here, does not delete all my doubts, nor does it fully convince me. Since this is a Beta, it is difficult to judge what is a bug, what is a feature they plan to polish more, and what is intention and will not be adressed anymore. But reading here I think the thing still needs very much of polishing and bug-squashing.

Considering that the company behind ArmA is behind this one as well, I am not raising hopes too high on AI quality. Their record on game AIs is really unimpressive.

Skybird

04-09-12, 06:20 AM

Video from August last year, giving an idea on how it looks like and what it is about:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oJMbtdAFVDY

P.S.
And one form the beta, this month - 27 minutes:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sR7gir9ApMM

What's this foam dripping from my mouth?

NeonSamurai

04-09-12, 06:57 AM

In our days, titles like this stand and fall with a rasonable AI. What I read here, does not delete all my doubts, nor does it fully convince me. Since this is a Beta, it is difficult to judge what is a bug, what is a feature they plan to polish more, and what is intention and will not be adressed anymore. But reading here I think the thing still needs very much of polishing and bug-squashing.

Considering that the company behind ArmA is behind this one as well, I am not raising hopes too high on AI quality. Their record on game AIs is really unimpressive.

This is true, but on the good side this is BIS which is infamous for supporting their titles well after release. All in all the number of bugs are not too bad, more just UI and balance issues (plus the AI needing work), and they still have several months to go before release. I would also say given the complexity of the games they make, the AI is not all that bad all things considered. This game should be a lot simpler in many ways AI wise compared to the ARMA series.

Skybird

04-09-12, 09:57 AM

This is true, but on the good side this is BIS which is infamous for supporting their titles well after release. All in all the number of bugs are not too bad, more just UI and balance issues (plus the AI needing work), and they still have several months to go before release. I would also say given the complexity of the games they make, the AI is not all that bad all things considered. This game should be a lot simpler in many ways AI wise compared to the ARMA series.

BIS has a good record on lpongtime support indeed. Unfortunately, improving the miserable AI-engines of theirs rarely, if ever, was part of that ongoing support, instead features got fixed to some degree, and graphics got improved and new content added. The AI in ArmA and ArmA2 more or less stayed the same.

I do not know if ArmA and CC had the same programmers team, I assume not. What I mean is that the publisher obviously does not put pressure on programmers to get the AI done well, nor seems BIS be willing to delay releases over low AI quality. In the videos at youtube, the game looks nice and well, just the steering gives the impression to be extremely sensitive or jerky so far, hopefully that changes. I would hate to see this title loosing over AI or steering control issues.

CaptainHaplo

04-09-12, 08:41 PM

For those that have the game - please look at Bug Report #172 - I filed it just a few minutes ago and included the quicksave that is in question. Please dl the quicksave, extract and see if you can replicate the problem. If you can - or can't - please note it in the additional notes section of the report - I am VERY curious to see if you guys have the same results with that file.

Also, you can let me know here too. Thanks!

CaptainHaplo

04-10-12, 06:52 PM

Still having the lockup problem, others are too.

I have resolved the map lag issues - turns out that was my video card overheating - setting it back to defaults solved that and I can play for extended periods now.

Drewcifer

04-10-12, 07:12 PM

BIS has a good record on lpongtime support indeed. Unfortunately, improving the miserable AI-engines of theirs rarely, if ever, was part of that ongoing support, instead features got fixed to some degree, and graphics got improved and new content added. The AI in ArmA and ArmA2 more or less stayed the same.

I do not know if ArmA and CC had the same programmers team, I assume not. What I mean is that the publisher obviously does not put pressure on programmers to get the AI done well, nor seems BIS be willing to delay releases over low AI quality. In the videos at youtube, the game looks nice and well, just the steering gives the impression to be extremely sensitive or jerky so far, hopefully that changes. I would hate to see this title loosing over AI or steering control issues.

Honestly I can assure the steering feels good... without a joystick even the manta handles very well. The Walrus is slow enough that the steering isn't really an issue either however I took out a bare warlus no armor, no weapons zero weight max speed setup and I did get squirrelly and roll it but I was also driving it like a 16year old.

The release is september I am very confident this game will be great... for a beta this thing is in really good state.

Skybird

04-11-12, 06:07 AM

Honestly I can assure the steering feels good... without a joystick even the manta handles very well. The Walrus is slow enough that the steering isn't really an issue either however I took out a bare warlus no armor, no weapons zero weight max speed setup and I did get squirrelly and roll it but I was also driving it like a 16year old.

The release is september I am very confident this game will be great... for a beta this thing is in really good state.If they get it right, and if it does not come with Steam or any constantly-online-security scheme, I'll be turning into a customer in autumn for sure. :up: Just in time for the darker and colder season of the year. If I get infested by the CC-fever again, I will play this excessively.

CaptainHaplo

04-11-12, 04:41 PM

The controls are NOT jerky. Manta controls are very realistic.

The Walrus controls do need work, mainly because you don't drive it with the mouse. The mouse controls the turret, you control with adws keys. The only control problem is that the Walrus lacks the ability to turn and keep speed at the same time. Its like driving a car with no torque. Bu then again - its an electric vehicle - so maybe its simply realistic physics, The control issues with the Walrus have been noted and I expect a fix for it.

Overall, the bugs are not nearly as many as you would expect - I would bet on a highly polished game when it comes out.

Also - it is being made moddable - to what degree remains to be seen.

CaptainHaplo

08-28-12, 05:06 PM

A new beta is due to be out very soon - probably within the week. This will be the final beta as the game goes gold before long. However, this will allow for further feedback that may result in a fast (or possibly 0 day) patch.

Skybird

08-31-12, 06:40 AM

In waiting mode. Still interested.

You still like the game, or did it become desinteresting soon?

CaptainHaplo

08-31-12, 06:12 PM

Definitely still interested in the game. The scope of the beta was very limited - so it did become somewhat repetative (7 "repeat" islands in demo vs 30+ unique ones in final version). However, that is entirely understandable. The beta was aimed at troubleshooting gameplay - not meant to capture the player long term. Even so - I have to say that I know beyond a shadow of a doubt that I will get "my moneys worth".

It should be noted that BI has decided to open up the file system in the final - making modding much more possible than was originally intended. This alone to me insures the game is going to be well worth it and then some.

Pyrolosis

08-31-12, 08:37 PM

I saw a trailer for it, seemed cool enough but I have been burned by sooo many cool trailers that I'll just wait until it comes out. Even beta testing is not wholly accurate anymore. On a side note, I'm kinda waiting for Planet Side 2 to come out. I loved the 1st one.

When in doubt, take the high ground. You can always give it back later. Pyrolosis

Arclight

09-13-12, 10:15 AM

Regarding Carrier Command, Bohemia’s Other Game (http://www.rockpapershotgun.com/2012/09/13/regarding-carrier-command-bohemias-other-game/)

Skybird

09-14-12, 08:23 AM

A video made just days ago, so although representing the xbox version it probably is representative for the state of things right now, since thgey made no simple port-overs, but ran dediacted developements for every platform. After one year of public beta here is hope that the game also does not suffer from major bugs. I therefore consider to get it on release date.

Skybird

09-23-12, 06:23 PM

I have had a look at their forums. A third Beta is out since three days, one week before release of the final version! - and the forum is slaughtering it.

In best, long-time established Bohemia tradition, the AI seems to be the problem,. especially pathfinding issues with Mantas, even worse with Walrusses, and the carrier itself. Some of what was reported I would rate as game killers.

Some readers also are angry that not only reported bugs from Beta 2 have not been solved - but even more, new bugs have been added.

And this just one week before release of the final product?

I have moved over to Amazon and canceled my pre-order. If they don't get their job done, I don't pay money for it, that simple.

Arclight

09-23-12, 11:53 PM

That's really the only concern I have about it; Bohemia's track record.

I don't much care about people whining on a forum; there's enough of that on any game forum to think every single game ever created is absolutely terrible. But in this case I'll certainly wait and see what (professional) opinions form after release before taking the plunge.

Skybird

09-24-12, 05:46 AM

It's not just whining over some cosmetic details. Some of the pathfinding issues reported, are show stoppers, plain and simple, leading to player units killing themselves.

What also worries me: that these issues have been reported already months ago - and Bohemia still has not reacted to them. Instead publishes a final beta less than a week before release date where these bugs are still present - and new bugs added that before where not there.

Sounds chaotic. The DVDs surely are printed already, they should be in stores in germany this Friday. So why releasing a Beta 3 one week before that date? Or is release date maybe September 28th 2013?

I hope it all gets sorted out, and hope for a happy end . I really would love to get this title. I played the original so long ago, and loved it. To see this evolution from back then to today, is an irresistable sight.

Arclight

09-24-12, 02:44 PM

I'm sure it'll get sorted, just not sure about the state of launch.

NeonSamurai

09-24-12, 07:35 PM

Well in BI's defense, they also have a history of supporting the heck out of their products with numerous patches and additions. Which is one of the reasons why I preordered.

Arclight

09-24-12, 11:05 PM

Aye, I'll grab it shortly after release if I know I can actually enjoy it then. Arma 2 ended up being shelved for I think half a year because of the state at release.

Drewcifer

09-26-12, 03:29 PM

I'm a little pissed a friend of mine has gotten the full version so far from his Play and contribute preorder... I've checked and so far I have no steam key in my email and its not up on the Bistudios store page yet. lame. :shifty:

Skybird

09-26-12, 05:05 PM

Advertised official release date is Friday. ;)

Drewcifer

09-26-12, 06:50 PM

Advertised official release date is Friday. ;)

Oh I know but I can still be jealous that somebody else has a game before me! :O:

Skybird

09-27-12, 05:37 AM

First feedback posts about the final version have started to drop in in their forums. The enemy AI as well as pathfinding AI continue to take fire. What I read in this regard, to me is show stopper category. Combat units getting endlessly stuck or destroying themselves by navigating into mountains, disqualifies any game from landing on my HD.

BI has done much patching on ArmA games in the past - fixing the terrible AI nevertheless never has been a priority of theirs, taking them sometimes over a year to get something vital and elemental fixed, more or less - substandard quality their AI always has remained to be. They just seem to not knowing how to do it, programming-wise or design-wise or both.

The chaos about their 3rd Beta is not encouraging either.

My expectation level has dropped considerably, and I currently do not have the game on my interest list anymore. Maybe I will recheck next summer or so. Judging by past ArmA games, it is not worth to recheck earlier than after many months.

People say BI has a good record on patching. One could also see this the other way around: one could see endless stream of patches as a lousy release policy.

Drewcifer

09-27-12, 11:30 AM

I still don't have it, but my friend does and trust me when I tell you... everything you said is correct. If you don't actually control the walrus yourself each one individually you will lose every single one of them. Mantas don't seem as bad you can give them flight paths and targets and the can somewhat get things done although not as good as you can do it yourself.

Skybird

09-27-12, 04:39 PM

Hate to hear that, on the other hand I am low on money, so the delay in a way is welcomed.

And I play Virtual Pool 4 currently like crazy. Superb! :yeah:

Drewcifer

09-28-12, 11:19 AM

For those that got the P & C preorder I think everybody is unlocked now. Steam will unlock in about an hour to everybody else.

Skybird

09-28-12, 02:32 PM

Patch is out. Already, on day one. Release day. And it adresses things they know since many months.

:dead:

I know that some will dance and cheer and saying "Oh look how dedicated to supporting their game they are." I disagree. To me this illustrates just again how very illprepared their release has been. If you release a game in a known broken condition, fire a beta when the DVDs already shipped, and release a patch already on day one, then something went terribly wrong earlier. Must be a very chaotic company.

No feedback on the quality of the patch so far. Readme just lists "Walrus AI". No word on Manta AI, pathfinding AI and such. 13 MB in size. Sounds more like a quick emergency hotfix. Damage control? Something tells me there will come more patches - or the title will disappear quickly from the shelves.

Arclight

09-28-12, 02:47 PM

13MB? That's a hell of a lot of code. Good on 'm.

Skybird

09-29-12, 06:32 AM

More Walrus-bashing in their forum, even when giving feedback on the "patch". Some say it cripples the game beyond reasonable playability.

They got told month after month, and did nothing to fix it. A patch now - also does not fix it.

That reminds me of some ArmA patches where also occasionally "improvements to the AI" were listed in the readme. Just that I never was able to see the differences, with the exception of just one single patch for ArmA2 were there was a small improvement indeed. And I think that patch was a community patch, wasn't it, no official BI patch.

I hereby formally and officially declare Carrier Command a KIA, as far as my wallet is concerned. Will stop check it out and worry about a decision now. Such lousy policies should not be supported - by paying money for them.

Such stories really anger me. So self-repeating. So unnecessary. So disappointing. With every game of theirs, the same bull: AI broken. Obviously they are resistant to learning effects. Or they have learned that financially they get away with it.

:arrgh!: :down:

P.S. First site-reviews of CC can already be found on the web. All that have been filed, point out the bad AI as well, and it makes the scores to drop. The reviews I read this morning, three of them, say the title is rich in good features - and gets too massively hampered by the bad AI - even by console standards.

Arclight

09-29-12, 08:50 AM

Ah well, as expected then. Arma AI initially couldn't drive down a straight road either.

Hopefully it won't take too long, would love to throw some money at them.

Wonder how capable the Mantas are...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nd3v6Dztr08&list=UURJG7rgZhQ9Q7A2Nb_lAPOw&index=13&feature=plcp

Skybird

09-29-12, 09:33 AM

:har: Oh my FSM!

But I love that Buster Keatonesque reaction of the guy in the foreground. One could really imagine his facial expression, staring.

Skybird

09-29-12, 10:47 AM

BTW, if somebody in Germany still wants to buy it: at German Amazon it costs 38 Euros, at British Amazon already just 25 Euros (20 Pounds). Just add 2-4 additional days shipping time (telling by experience). No taxes, no shipping costs.

Drewcifer

09-29-12, 01:07 PM

Alright I own it and I've put in some serious time with the Single Player "Campaign" not the free form sandbox strategy part. Heres what I have to say...

First let me address the AI... yes the Walrus AI stinks. Sending one to a point isn't bad but if you group them up they do the honey bee dance around eachother for 15 minutes before they get sorted IF they get sorted. Some of it can be avoided by just controlling the lead walrus yourself and drive to the destination the others just sort of manage to tag along but barely if a rock jumps out in the road you'll lose one.

The FPS sections of the game are done so poorly well... I don't even know why they are in the game frankly. You character runs SUPER FAST you can't use cover but hell you don't need to you can just run full speed through the level and shoot everything and it dies and it can't hurt you. Its really pathetic.. worst FPS game I've ever played not to mention now in a couple of levels the gun in my characters hand started having texture issues and went from HD to pixelated to upside down and bent... all of which I could control but where I was walking in the level. OF course the actual meat and bones of the game doesn't suffer from that the Graphics have been flawless in vehicle and buildings which is essentially the whole game.

All in all I think its a great strategy game. For the most part the Walrus stuff is not excusable to I understand that much however the mantas do very well aslong as you keep them away from hostiles that try to kite them back into AA fire.

Overall I would give the game a 8/10 The single player campaign is basically a giant tutorial teaching all the features of the game over a long and slow unlocking process. The game would have been ALOT better if they had working walrus pathfinding, or simply allowed the walrus to turn in place like a tank... and they should have cut the on foot FPS sections they are a horrible and disconnected feature that somebody will see and say Nope horrible game I'm not getting it.

+ I forget to add in the FPS sections you take damage from running into things... just like the vehicles which I understand the bumper impact on a walrus but seriously why am I getting hurt for running into things?

soopaman2

09-29-12, 09:36 PM

I caught this on my steam window, and if not for other games I would have bitten.

I liked being able to control different units, but is the transition fluid, or do you have to choose one or the other? Like can I go from a plane, to a tank. etc?

This game is on my list once I get bored with what I have.

It really looks beautiful, from what I saw.

soopaman2

09-30-12, 01:37 AM

To address previous posts, thoughts on most official forums are whiners.

Happy people are typically playing, and not bitching.

I am still waiting for non scripted sea invasions in Empire total war, since pipe dreams come true.

Bohemia is a good gaming company, Then again EA is my benchmark of badness, and "screw you" to customers.

This is on my list, as soon as my mortgage check goes through, and I get through some DLC on other games. AC3 is due out too, plus time with the family. Sheesh, I should have married my computer. (I am so in trouble for that if she sees that one)

More hours in a day, and higher tolerances for lack of sleep in humans would make me happy.
Grrrrrr
Any demo versions?

I loved the ArmA series.

Skybird

09-30-12, 06:35 AM

Happy people are typically playing, and not bitching.

Aha. So that so many people are "bitching" instead of playing, indicates in return that they are not happy with what they have gotten.

Maybe because the playability is seriously suffering? :06:

Just checked the latest feedback. It doesn't become any better. Many people already have abandoned the game for the time being. And many agree that it was released many months too early. Since the Walrus-AI and Manta AI are welldocumented since months and the Walrusses being the most prominent showstopper, there are many other, though smaller issues as well, with balancing, carrier logic, supply system...

What I just do not get over is that they released another Beta with the Gold version already printed on DVD and in delivery to the shops, and that they ignored the most devastatic issue since many months, despite plenty of feedback on it and existence of that bug in earlier betas as well, and completely ignored it until the very end. These two things really tell something.

Sonarman

09-30-12, 07:56 AM

Probably spent most of their time fixing/revising the console versions knowing they could return & fix the PC version post release.

Drewcifer

09-30-12, 01:02 PM

I caught this on my steam window, and if not for other games I would have bitten.

I liked being able to control different units, but is the transition fluid, or do you have to choose one or the other? Like can I go from a plane, to a tank. etc?

You move from Carrier-Manta-Walrus instantly with the click of a button no matter where you have sent it no matter what it is doing and take direct control, the second you leave it the AI picks it up and continues doing whatever it was doing. Unless you have say taken something so far off course that it is unsure of what it was sent to do it will go into suspended mode and wait for updated orders.

CaptainHaplo

10-05-12, 03:12 PM

OK - for the record I was one of the first P&C members. Bought it 3 days after they opened the test program. I later upgraded. I played all three demo's and the patched version.

#1- the campaign
It is a VERY long tutorial. Overly long. The FPS portions are there for a storyline - but honestly it was a mistake to put this in. Lacking in story, character attachment and usefullness. I can not recommend the campaign other than just to learn how to do things. For that, however, it is very useful.

The only reason to play out the entire campaign is the on the final mission you fly against a recorded flight by one of the devs and you have to shoot him down. Bragging rights at best?

#2 Strategy challenge.

Very good - but it needs a little tweaking. Additionally, the ability to allow for non-aligned islands - and control over how many islands each side has to start - is very important and will give some legs to this mode. Overally, still very enjoyable.

#3 Gameplay
Wow - I have to say - I love this game because of how it plays. It is faithful to the original to a point, yet takes advantage of a lot of the improvements that were needed. Some people don't care for some design decisions - and a few stick out in my mind as well - but overall its great fun. The strategy for attacking each island - balancing the tactical and the strategic along with the logistics - is just great!

"Walrus" pathfinding..
OK - I guess I take issue with this. I am going to paraphrase what someone once said about Command and Conquer....

Its Carrier Command - not walrus micromanage. The AI is servicable - and that is all it needs to be. The idea here is these are remote drones - with limited ability without a human in control. Being upset because they don't travel well in groups - is silly. The players who complain - are wanting the walrus's to do their work for them - they want to just "assist me" and then run around shooting anything that moves, and wondering why they left their "help" back in the dust.

The game makes it clear they are limited in ability. It makes SENSE. If the players took that into consideration - stuck one AA walrus assisting them instead of another ground assualt, an AA and a "healer" walrus all together, and then went flying up ridges and down valleys where the AI is bound to struggle, they wouldn't have cause to complain.

On the rare occasion I allow the computer to control a walrus - its an AA one that is there to simply follow me and provide antiiair cover. It does great following me and knocking enemy manta's down. Only struggle is when I go up a huge rise or down an incline instead of taking the road that goes the the same spot. I sacrifice a little health for speed - the AI won't. I see no reason to complain about that.

Really - its a non-issue for those who don't want to just tell the drones to go conquer something and sit back to read a book.....

Skybird

10-05-12, 04:50 PM

Hm. I got the impression it is not that simple, Haplo.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=YAdgkTD29Mk

It is not about AI drone having the war brought to victory for you. It is about being autonomous enough to be able to negotiate a path around a simple rock or tree.

Compare to the AI of NPCs in Skyrim, for example. They are able to keep up with you if they are your followers. They meet an obstacle hindering the direct line from their position to yours? A ridgeline? They immediately evade to the side, flanking the obstacle, finding a route, sometimes quite complex routes and on multiple levels, and reach you reliably, with a delay. - So much for autonomous pathfinding.

Compare to the AI in SBP. You lead a formation, and even while driving you can alter formation type and width. Your AI buddies reliably accelerate or slow down to fall into their right place. When holding a battle position, they will autonomously react to the presence of detected threats, according to their firing orders that allow them to aggressively engage, to only return fire, or to never shoot back, they will stray away slightly their formation positions to find better firing positions and protect their hull behind terrain features as best as possible. After threads disappeared, they will fall back into positions. Infantry chooses by rigidity of defend-command whether they stay outside building, seize the ground floor, or take up positions as high as possible. Small groups of obstacles every unit can negotiate by itself. Granted, the AI in SBP is not good at detecting small holes in the ground with water that could get a tank stuck, and it is more easier confused in later versions n that in early ones when it gets trapped in a street with too tight buildings. But all in all the system works quite well in 6 out of 7 situations or so. - So much for formation AI.

But how is it with vehicles in the ArmA series? Simply terrible. The absence of believable physics does not help to improve the situation. Have they ever healed the issues in any of their titles over time? No. Many patches sometimes, long support. But improving the AI? Sometimes claimed, sometimes listed in readmes, but not convincingly taking place.

Check their forums. The issues with Carrier Command's AI and pathfinding, says their forum, has been fed back to them since the Betas, since months. They did not react to that. On Monday, a representative or speaker of the developer first time showed up in their forum, sayng big and loud and warm Thankyou for the cheers as if there were no criticism at all, and opening two subsection in the existing forum, one about technical issues and bugs. Some of the already existing threads about other bugs got moved there. None of the then three existing threads on Walrus and pathfinding AI got touched and moved. He also answered in several threads to problems people had - but did not answer a single time to the intense criticism of the pathfinding AI. Yesterday or this morning, a new long thread was opened in the technical subsection, about the AI. Again, no reaction to that. And somebody else, a newcomer, asking about the AI issues, got warned not to scatter the forum. Now, over the week I did several Google searches for customer feedback and reviews. And I stumbled over comment by peopel saying that their posts in the BI forum, and whole threads, which were critical of the AI, got deleted, so they claim.

I think it is fair to say that the game has potential, but suffers from some serious bugs, and some of them are showstoppers for many people. Lousy AI affectes not only the Walrusses, but the Carrier and the Mantas have issues, too, though no such crippling issues. I think BI has a well-documented record of not knowing garbage about how to do AIs, and that it would have been good advise for them to hire somebody from outside to do that part of their job (a recommendation you hear often in present web comments). I think the chances are very thin that they will fix the AI, and I think their months-long non-reaction to reports about AI and their forum policy indicate that they intend to just ignore it and keep it hidden as best as they can to not hurt their sale numbers.

So: outlook is negative. I wish they will teach me for the better, and surprise me and all of us, but I am sceptical - very. I do not know how the AI is implemented and whether it is available for open modding, if it is, then there may be hope. But then I am not willing to pay them for letting others do their homework, and will consider buying it not before one year or so is over, the issues have been modded away, and the price is no longer two-digits.

Great potential, partially good execution - and allowing laziness and incompetence messing it all up seriously. That's the impression carrier command currently gives to many people.

I do not get it. Since almost a decade BI takes heavy flak for their incompetence to master AI issues and reliable pathfinding - only that the ArmA series is multiplayer saved it from disappearing from the scene. If it were a single player title only and not offering better AI, nobody would talk of it anymore today. But CC is single player exclusively, and thus a working AI is vital for it to live. Have they pledged an oath not to learn and not to accept assistance from an expert for AI tuning that they could hire, and not to listen to the community telling them over and over and over again?

TheDude107

10-05-12, 06:12 PM

Great potential, partially good execution - and allowing laziness and incompetence messing it all up seriously. That's the impression carrier command currently gives to many people.

I do not get it. Since almost a decade BI takes heavy flak for their incompetence to master AI issues and reliable pathfinding - only that the ArmA series is multiplayer saved it from disappearing from the scene. If it were a single player title only and not offering better AI, nobody would talk of it anymore today. But CC is single player exclusively, and thus a working AI is vital for it to live. Have they pledged an oath not to learn and not to accept assistance from an expert for AI tuning that they could hire, and not to listen to the community telling them over and over and over again?

It could be they wanted to keep the gameplay the same as the original(3 same units, same gameplay, same two modes) but knowing BI as of recent, I would assume they skimpped out and got lazy. ARMA brought them back from obscurity. ARMA 2 was a success.... but it would have been a very minor success without Dayz mod. Maybe even a failure.

And after looking at previews of ARMA 3 it seems like BI is getting a little lazy concerning their games because they decided to make fictional units for the upcoming title set in Limnos.

The "reasoning" behind this was that they wanted to create something of their own and relax a bit after ARMA 2. Which is understandable. Until you realise it takes too much money to get the rights to model some real life vehicles and weapons, which probably scares them when looking at pre-Dayz mod sales numbers(Which were sad). It probably is alot harder to accuratly model the damage done to a fictional vehicle. Even harder for the fans to claim that the damage was modeled badly because the vehicle doesn't exist in any form, nor does any stats on it outside the game. Thats just a wild guess from a long time fanboy, though.

Hope my favorite developer isn't going down the COD road due to getting cocky. They will fail hard if they loose their sim fans. We may be small in number but we are dedicated to our games and shell out cash for value. Regardless the fans will yell at BI until they release the mod tools and we will have re-skinned units+new models for years and years to replace anything lacking in quality for the real deal.

Skybird

10-05-12, 06:54 PM

I fail to see in how far their desire to stay close to the original - which I know, I played it back then on Amiga - limited them in implementing a reasonable algorithm for pathfinding, and do some better bug squashing. In fact the feedback recognises that they seem to have done a good job in designing the game - saving the principal design of the original, but improving it by using additional features. The design idea of their sis not the problem. Everybody agrees that by what it wants to be, the game indeed is deigned great. I also have that impression. Time enough they have had for sure. CC has been first announced - how many years ago? Six? Seven? Or even more? I think it was short after the Gulf War 03 that I first posted a link about Carrier Command being redone. But memory could fool me.

Skybird

10-06-12, 09:55 AM

Maybe they are serious when having set sail for proving me wrong...?! :)

An official comment/announcement has been released. They formally recognize the existence of "problems" with the AI and pathfinding, they recognize that these are widely known by now, and they announced to have started working of a dedicated patch for these issues, indirectly indicating that it is a huge task.

I would be happy indeed to be proven wrong, and would be the first to admit it. I recognized above that BI indeed offers longterm patching support for their ArmA series, I just criticized that in the past they were not successful in patching AI problems. If this time they score a first in achieving that, I'd be happy.

Arclight

10-06-12, 10:33 AM

Actually, they were pretty succesfull addressing issues like this in the past. Like I said before, ArmaII AI couldn't drive down a straight road initially. Nowadays I can issue a move order to an AI driver to go clear across the map and they drive there without much issue.

I gave the demo a try (btw there's a demo (http://www.carriercommand.com/2012/10/demo-for-windows-pc/)) and got through it without much trouble. There's definitely issues; when I had more than 1 following me #3 and 4 would end up bumping and trailing behind. One of them failed to drive across a bridge. Solution: make teams of 2. #2 follows 1 and #4 follows 3, orders given to 1 and 3.

Come to think of it, Arma can't handle convoys either. Not without hilarious results at any rate. :haha:

Think I'll give the full game a shot soon. After trying the demo and experiencing the issues first-hand I don't really see what the big deal is. Even if only due to years of experience with BIS AI and knowing how to make it work.

CaptainHaplo

10-08-12, 06:03 AM

Hm. I got the impression it is not that simple, Haplo.

Well, Arclight seems to have found the same experience as I did. One Walrus following you does fine, make a whole team of them and the last 2 have trouble. As I said - for people wanting to just run around and have the AI cover their backs, this is not its purpose.

In fact, in the campaign, there is a part where they specifically talk about the "limited AI" that the vehicles have. The units are all field adaptations that allow remote control - thus the AI itself is considered a "new" edition to the unit in the field and would be expected to have performance issues.

The examples you cite, Skybird, are excellent points. The problem is, each one is an AI that is supposed to be emulating the smarts of a human. Either a AI squadmate or a human type AI driving a vehicle. I would expect them to be somewhat "intelligent".

However, if a game even tells me they are "limited" (I even think it uses the term "crude") then I have a different expectation. Especially when the entire storyline accomodates that fact.

Having been part of P&C from nearly the outset, I have extensive testing time on all three betas. During that time, Walrus AI was never an issue for me. Mainly because my playstyle doesn't expect 3 other tanks to run around with me, one to protect me from Manta's, one looking for ground threats and one to repair me if I get damaged so that I can just rampage around and feel cool driving what would then be a nearly invulnerable tank around a pretty island.

It is all about how you use the units you have. It is Carrier Command. Back in the day, since you remember the original, there was no AI for your units - you controled each one or it just sat still. They have improved on the original in some ways. Just not to the point where the "player" can select his four "tanks" - tell them to attack the island, and then go heat up a pizza while they do his job for him. Now will the AI allow the player to create a team of AI's that will provide unbeatable support to the player. It does this by making the player make tactical decisions. Will an AA walrus be better - or will a healer walrus do the trick? That makes the players choice of weapons on his own tank critical - laser or plasma? Each decision feeds another - which shows some really great design choices.

I don't have a problem with that. I don't have a problem with an AI that isn't "smart". Its all within the scope of the game.

Let em fix some of the pathfinding issues. It would make the final missions of the game much easier (as you do have multiple walrus's following you to provide support). Great. But the complaints are well out of proportion to the needs of many players.

It really comes down more to play style and preferences. If the player wants to make it a FPS (and there are questions on whether that style of gameplay can be modded in from the campaign), then they want all the support they can get. If they are an old school player who doesn't rely on the computer to play against itself and win - then its pretty much a moot point.

The only time walrus pathfinding has been anything of an issue with me has been the rare niggle where it doesn't recognize an obstacle in the way, or when winding paths make it take a very lengthy, back and forth route. Even in those cases, it simply takes a little longer than a human driven unit would. That to me is reasonable.

Skybird

10-08-12, 10:41 AM

One really should differentiate behavior AI from pathfinding AI. The issues with the walrusses that get reported time and again, are almost all pathfinding-related.

You implied that my referring to Skyrim followers and SBP tanks acting smart, and "intelligent". Well, the movement of the enemy - is completely scripted by the mission designer, paths and triggers. Sop is the behavior of units in my formation who adapt to my own tank'S movement when I am the leader, or who follow the lead tank if it'S AI has a path-and-trigger script to follow. The followers in Skyrim only know how to not launch a fight if the enemy is not aware of their presence, or to go for it if an enemy is within reach (internal triggers that can be accessed via some mods, originally this was not open to the player). Skyrims followers are only very competent in pathfinding. It is remarkable how they find a way around even a whole mountain, to catch up with the player, with you sitting on the peak and watching them. Trees, stairs, cliffs - usually no problem, they zig-zag home to mama and usually in the shortest possible way.

If there is something like a real set of AI for autonomously engaging in , disengaging from and manouvering during combat, then it seems to me that you find it in dogfighting simulations.

The problem with CC is not that people expect walrusses and mantas to be smart like humans, but that their pathfinding has serious issues. But in a single player game where you control several units simultaneously, a pathfinding AI for mastering even the basics, is a must. You give a string of waypoints, and then you should be able to expect that they follow these waypoints, not being stopped by a single tree or a rock in their way, or not landing on the beach. When instead a walrus slams into a rock and spends the rest opf the mission with spinning around it, or when it meets a bridge and simply falls down from it or ignores its presence, then you have indications for a seriously broken pathfinding AI. When Mantas fly and the ground elevates and climbs into a mountain peak and they do not climb and do not fly around, but slam right into it, then there is some stuff seriously broken. I do not expect them to be smart like humans, nor have I ever read in a forum post that somebody else does. What I expect is that when you leave the AI with an order to move from here to there, it just does that and is able to use bridges, avoid mountains, and can turn around small obstacles like trees and rocks and can climb a small step or a shallow hill by itself. I do not complain that they get shot into pieces if I am dumb enough to give them a path that exposes them to enemy fire. I do not expect them to fight for me and conquer the base for me all by themselves. I only want them to work reliably with getting from A to C via B, and that they return fire or engage when they take fire or somebody enters their firing range.

BTW, the old classical CC had the ability to have one unit move on by itself. You saw it in a separate small window when having teleported back to the carrier, and you could equip it with a range extender for the remote control signals from the carrier. You could jump into the cockpit any time you wanted. Mostly this was used with Mantas, since walrusses were so slow even back then. There were also fuel tanker kits available, to refuel units that had run out of fuel. Pretty innovative for that time. And very difficult - I never defeated the enemy carrier when I met it.

Anyhow, here is hope that with delay they still get their homework done. If they get their acts together and heal the thing, then all will be forgiven and forgotten sooner or later.

Until then, my money stays with me. :arrgh!:

Arclight

10-08-12, 11:26 AM

Think you're missing the point somewhat: a single Walrus can be ordered clear across the island and/or over rough terrain with trees and rocks without any problems.

The problem comes from the "follow" behaviour. A single Walrus following another does decent but will fall behind over distance. Having 3 following a "leader" just plain doesn't work.

As far as combat goes, they are pretty crack shots. Stationary targets are nailed in 1 shot, moving targets are trickier but dealt with efficiently.

The game works just fine if you give units orders individually, or at least break them down to pairs.

Seriously, try the demo.

CaptainHaplo

10-08-12, 01:45 PM

Skybird - let me see if this analogy helps...

You have 2 people. One is told to follow the other. This works fine.

You have 4 people. Three are told to follow the 4th. The three do not communicate. They thus either:

A) bump into each other and surrounding obstacles as each tries to be following the first person to the exclusion of the others

or

B) They keep one eye on who they follow and one eye on the others - meaning they now don't have time to look for all the terrain hazards.

Take your pick.
Now - as humans we can decide a "follow order" - choosing amongst ourselves who is going to "follow first". Such decisions are outside the scope of the "follow" command - because the gamer didn't tell player 4 to follow player 3 who follows player 2 who follows player one. Insert Walrus as player - and there you go. The gamer simply told unit 2/3/4 to follow unit 1. And they all do so - either tangling up in themselves because they were NOT told HOW to do it - or getting caught in the terrain while trying to be "first".

The complaint's your referencing amost all have to do with the same problem. Not pathfinding truly, but following. As Arcligh said - order a walrus across an island, and it will get there. Sure, it may not take the most ideal route, it may have to adjust on the fly a little. Oops - a hazard it didn't expect, so it backs up and turns and goes around it. How THAT is bad pathfinding I don't know. Is the admittedly "limited" AI supposed to know and see all navigation hazards at unlimited range?

The idea of a manta on autopilot just flying into a mountain? Really? I have never - from Beta 1 to patched release - seen anything like what you are describing. Could combat AI for manta's be tweaked? Sure. But I haven't ever seen a manta - on either "side" - just kamikaze into anything.
Having spend the hours of testing and then playing, I am going to say that is either a gross exaggeration that your repeating, or a fluke.

Regarding "following" - there is not a good way to tell your units to individually follow another. If you could chain the follow 4->3->2->1 then I suspect a lot of the issues would be solved by those players that want the AI to basically play the game for them.

Actual pathfinding has a few bumps, mainly because the Walrus AI is unclear on what it can and cannot traverse reasonably. But the complaints regarding real pathfinding are rare. The "follow" pathfinding is the major gripe - and I don't see it as a real problem because its obvious WHY its a problem. Not a programming issue as much as laziness on the part of the player.

I respect you want to hold onto your money. So go try the free demo!
Free is good!

Skybird

10-08-12, 04:38 PM

Haplo,

I refer not to my experience, but to the experience as reported by many people. The problem is not just 3 walrusses following the lead vehicle (they are a problem obviously, too, but not the only one), but the problem is that even the lead vehcile or a singular vehicle all to often messes up, gets stuck, circles around obstacles, rocks back and forth between two points, cannot catch up the next pathpoint it set because it set it too close, not recognizing bridges, or falling off from them, trying to climb too steep hills, getting bogged down by a single stair.

I linked one video. There is no second walrus in sight anywhere.

I cannot help it but many people report many more issues than just the little minor things that you are willing to admit. And many people said they have shelved the game because they consider the pathfinding issues a back-breaker. It also gets listed in quite some formal reviews around the web.

Nicetalking it does not help to motivate the studio to get the work done that it avoided so far. What they claim to do now should have been done already - several months before release, after the issues were reported after the first Beta.

Anyhow, nice to hear that you like it. I think the standards people expect to be met regarding quality in some regards, maybe just are different. I judge it by common, not too exotic standards of the market. And I think there are many titles out there that show how to do it better, and that it can be done better, and that a competitor aiming at the wallets of customers must do better indeed.

We have started to move in circles here now. So I pause until the feedback for the patched AI starts to come in. As long as that patch does not become a reality, I will not buy it anyway.

Arclight

10-11-12, 06:57 AM

Grabbed it. Love it. AI can use work but is perfectly servicable. Internet people are a bunch of whiny crybabies. News at 11.

Skybird

10-25-12, 05:14 PM

After a two weeks break from monitoring their forums, I went back in and looked and found this.

And this is rich. Really rich. They had this thread in their forum, just two posts long:

http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?141827-Wouldn-t-buy-again

Says the paying customer who correctly feels ripped of his money, is critical but remains cool but polite:

This game has crashed maybe 10 times on me today - every time losing ground and having to start back 20 minutes earlier or 10 minutes earlier.

Pathfinding is just...

Seriously BI, I didn't buy into a BETA.

This game was supposed to come finished. Sooner or later the gaming industry has to wake up an realise it's part of the rest of the commercial world - it's a lawsuit waiting to happen.

Won't be buying another half-finished BI game.

What a ripoff.

Replies the forum mod who represents BI's interests:

Thanks for registering just to rant. Do some research before buying a product and you would have known about specific issues. And you would also have known they are working on a patch to fix the most important issues thus saving you from registering and posting the (seemingly) useless rant.

And locks it.

A customer complains about having lost his money over what many see as a seriously broken product. The mod tells him it is his own mistake if he bought it in good belief and trusting the producer's self-advertising, and calls it a useless rant, then kicks him. Or do you read anywhere in the BI-adverts how lousy the state is they deliver the game in?

That's what I call good customer service and valuing the paying customer whom you expect to pay your income. First messing up and delivering a broken product. Then taking customer'S money nevertheless, and then holding the customer guilty for having been buying this unfinshed - thing...

I do not read on BI's webpage advertising that they deliver their unfinished thing it in a broken state and as a Beta. And when reading about the many, many, many things that indeed are reported and described as malfunctioning or broken, "broken" seems to be the only attribute giving a correct description of it.

That they plan to patch it, is no excuse. Things in such a lousy conditions should not be released int he first.

I have had the demo meanwhile. Painfully long 1.5 GB download. Then checking it. Terrible. It is an impudence to release stuff in such a condition. And maybe not clever to demonstrate it even in a free demo. Must be a decade or so since last time I saw something like this.

P.S. Anmd what did the mod mean when saying they plan to fix the most important issues - the rest of the mess stays uncleaned, or what?