realistic infantry

[...]

[ATTACH]243481[/ATTACH]

[Bob_Bushman]

I'd much rather have realistically behaving infantry than photo realistic looking ones.

 

And you really don't need this much model\texture detail when looking through a LANTIRN at 30k' to be realistic.

[...]

I'd much rather have realistically behaving infantry than photo realistic looking ones.

 

And you really don't need this much model\texture detail when looking through a LANTIRN at 30k' to be realistic.

 

 

I ask for both things, realistic graphics and realistic behavior. If you don't mind graphics, you can have fun in Spectrum simulators and let graphics evolve for everyone else. Thank you.

Edited July 26, 2020 by La Unión | Atazar

[sirrah]

Considering all current challenges concerning performance (an VR performance specifically), I don't really like the idea of having 50 highly detailed infantry units in my area of operations.

 

I much rather see a crew chief/maintenance unit added (one that can move instead of the current SC static personel) for more lifelike airfields.

 

So for now, -1 for highly detailed infantry

[notproplayer3]

+1 for all around infantry overhaul, the Russian units and the rebel models are pretty good but there are just some units that have 10 year old models and look horrendous, also better A.I is really needed, especially cover and scattering mechanics under fire. This would probably call for better animations also.

I feel like the infantry is really something that needs to be better especially when flying helo missions. And infantry sitting in the helos would be very good too.

[razo+r]

Considering all current challenges concerning performance (an VR performance specifically), I don't really like the idea of having 50 highly detailed infantry units in my area of operations.

 

I much rather see a crew chief/maintenance unit added (one that can move instead of the current SC static personel) for more lifelike airfields.

 

So for now, -1 for highly detailed infantry

 

There's this really nice technique called "LOD", with which 50 detailed soldiers shouldn't cause any troubles.

[BarTzi]

You are absolutely right.

I don't think you need extremely high detailed units, but they could use an overhaul. Obviosly, the most important thing is to give them the right equipment and weapons (HMG, LMG, ATGM, sniper rifles and so on).

[...]

Considering all current challenges concerning performance (an VR performance specifically), I don't really like the idea of having 50 highly detailed infantry units in my area of operations.

 

I much rather see a crew chief/maintenance unit added (one that can move instead of the current SC static personel) for more lifelike airfields.

 

So for now, -1 for highly detailed infantry

 

 

Highly detailed units should only reduce performance within a few meters of the player. At great distances, they shouldn't have a big impact, and you shouldn't see the buttons on the officer's shirt.

Edited July 26, 2020 by La Unión | Atazar

[sirrah]

There's this really nice technique called "LOD", with which 50 detailed soldiers shouldn't cause any troubles.

 

Well ok, I have no software development knowledge, so I guess I stand corrected..

 

Allow me to rephrase my previous reply: It's all ok with me, as long as it doesn't negatively influences performance :)

[FlankerKiller]

Reading some of the comments has me confused. We have highly detailed infantry, and it works fine. I was watching a fire fight the other day involving the British soldiers with there bolt guns. They actually cock them. That's pretty detailed. I don't see the issue with wanting the old units brought up to the same standard. Also we definitely need more unit types. Every nation should have riflemen, AT, and some kind of LMG, as well there could be DM, and grenade units. The AI is ok ish. They will move a bit to get a shot. But some basic assault behaviors would go a long way. It doesn't need to be an FPS level of ground AI, but we need a bit more.

[Baco]

Oh I agree, better than stelar graphics, would be better behaviour. Basic squad movment or at least have them seek cover or disperse like the vehicles do... not just stand there ang recieve fire...

[The_Pharoah]

Not just that - I actually want to see infantry load onto and off a Huey/Mi8 AND i want to see them when I look back into the cabin.

[Moafuleum]

I much rather see a crew chief/maintenance unit added (one that can move instead of the current SC static personel) for more lifelike airfields.

 

I very much agree on this one. Having targets is nice but after all it is a flight sim too. It makes zero sense and looks a bit ridiculous too when two static riflemen are guarding a fire truck near a plane on an anyway friendly airfield but no personnell is there that actually refuels the aircraft. Having pilot models or crew chiefs walking around would bring the base to life. No fancy band signals and stuff like on the SC needed

[upyr1]

Not just that - I actually want to see infantry load onto and off a Huey/Mi8 AND i want to see them when I look back into the cabin.

I'd love to see this as well. I have said it before I want loading and unloading troops to be simplified on the editor and give you an option to pre-load troops on transports