PDA

View Full Version : Battlefield Vietnam



Voigtkampf
03-21-2004, 09:15


Battlefield Vietnam had big shoes to fill, since its predecessor, the extraordinary online multiplayer experience game called Battlefield 1942, introduced a very interesting new way of how people looked at FPS experience on the battlefield. Many of my friends back then have switched from whatever they were on and joined the BF community. Their affinity for that great game wore slowly down by the time and appearance of the new great titles such as Call of Duty.

But now, with the appearance of the Battlefield Vietnam, the much expected title and the title from which much is expected, have we found a decent heir to the throne? The feelings are mixed and the community is divided, but I believe the things may seem much sharper in a month or two, as soon the first announced patch has been released and the game starts receiving its intended shape.

First of all, for those who don't know what Battlefield series is all about, the answer is as simply as much as it is astonishing; on the Battlefield, the soldiers have the ability to virtually control any vehicle available and fight their battles on ground in huge tanks, on water in boats and under it in subs, as well as in the air, flying all sorts of aircraft. Of course, if you are not interested to do it, you can always take refuge to the old fashioned way and charge the enemy on foot, using various sets of weapons in that process.

Battlefield Vietnam continues in the same manner, transferring the place of conflict to Vietnam, some twenty years after the end of the WW2, changing many features and adding new ones, deepening and extending the game. The involved parties, now Americans and the Vietnamese, will wage war upon each other with new, authentic weapons, using a good number of new vehicles on various terrains, reaching from the deep jungles, seaside to the city combat. The campaign part that was incorporated in BF 1942 has been dropped out in BF:V, leaving only the possibility of instant action for the singleplayer where you can engage in fighting in fifteen big war operations. This can be easily disregarded because the main strength of this game is its orientation on the MP experience, so you may want to observe the instant action as merely as for what it was meant to be; a training for the real online action.


Now, let us move in and sweep the game clean. First of all, you will soon notice that the BV servers available at this point all suffer from a rather large ping issue (bigger is not always better), and the reason for that is easily found in an imperfect net code, something I sincerely hope that will improve itself with upcoming patches - remember that BF 1942 1.0 was also very difficult to wade through until the extensive support and patching has put the game up on its feet. Once online, you may also experience some significant lag from time to time, but mainly the things will run smooth. The graphics for BF:V have been significantly improved, yet they appear to be rather demanding, rendering game almost unplayable if you try it out on max setting, so I would advise against. No great loss, since there is little difference between high and medium setting for the graphics. Generally, the looks of soldiers, the vehicles and surroundings gives little reason to complain, quite the opposite in fact.



http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/games/voigt_BF_vietnam1.jpg
Capturing the enemy spawn point


BF:V has a distinct BF tempo to itself that separates it from similar FPS games, and at the first place when we come to speak about it, we can think of only one term; space. The maps are generally much larger than standard FPS games, so that the use of vehicles becomes a necessity rather than a neat gag. The battle is being fought over spawn points where killed soldiers and destroyed vehicles are being respawned continuously, whereby you can chose at which spawn point that is under the control of your side you will reappear on the map. The spawn points get neutralized when an enemy soldier comes into the reach of the flag and then it slowly turns to the conquerors faction, while the greater numbers of soldiers mean that the spawn point will cross into their possession much quicker. Needless to say that these games require a lot of players to be connected, anything under twenty soldiers is simply not it, since you do not want to bore yourself to death while you walk across this big map in a search for your enemies.



http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/games/voigt_BF_Vietnam2.jpg
How lives by the sniper shell die by the sniper...



But walking is not necessary, since you can drive a great number of various vehicles, from jeeps with mounted machine guns and rocket launchers, tanks with different stats concerning armor, weaponry and speed, river gunboats, assault choppers and big transport helicopters up to the various jets from both sides. Most of the vehicles can take two or more soldiers at the time, where one player can drive and other can man the guns; the rest can simply sit and wait for the arrival to the drop zone. Another neat thing that has thrilled me to see is the sight of a transport chopper airlifting a heavy tank and carrying it all over to the other edge of the map This deepens the all around tactical approach and boosts the game's addiction level.



http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/games/voigt_BF_Vietnam3.jpg
Nice lookin' death trap...



As for the vehicle control, they are well done with one great exception; the helicopters. After successfully playing two helicopter simulations lately, Apache Longbow Attack and Fair Strike, I have had the impression that I have entered some odd space ship rather than a helicopter when I started it and made my first lift-off. Some forty crashes later (I was offline, practicing) the best I managed to pull of is a rough, near crash landing, and I don't even think about going into air combat with a helicopter. There are however people that seem to pilot them with ease, and I salute them, but to my experience, the helicopter needs a patch. And fast. Until then, I ride shotgun and drop off with a parachute, thank you very much. Jets are much better and easier to control, but my all time favorites are tanks and fast jeeps; jump in to the jeep behind the wheel, honk few times and when someone joins you on the machine gun, you are menace indeed.



http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/games/voigt_BF_Vietnam4.jpg
Three easy kills; I just love outflanking



There are a lot of complaints about unbalanced way of this games approach, and I reluctantly agree with it. An American soldier with a M60 and few LAW rocket launchers is a walking tank that can wreak havoc in no time, what I have performed in few occasions, busting into enemy spawn point, mowing down the enemy soldiers and destroying any panzers that have set up their position there in no time. This could have been handled smoother, indeed.



http://www.totalwar.org/patrons/games/voigt_BF_Vietnam5.jpg
Panzer power, baby


So, at the end, what to say about Battlefield: Vietnam? It's a good game indeed, no question there, but it seems that it has left the forgery too soon, so we hope for patches and further support as we have seen it for the BF 1942. Most of the old BF veterans complained to me about how the gameplay itself seems poorer than its predecessor, along with other issues like a flawed net code, some graphic glitches (the game friendly offers you to install the latest drivers from the very game CD) that should be corrected with the expected patch. At the end, the community is somewhat disappointed with this sequel, it remains to see whether the massive support like mod development tool kit and the included map editor persuade people to base their future mods on the new engine, in which case this game may still thrive and prosper.



OVERALL RATING: 9.1 out of 10

ShadesWolf
03-21-2004, 12:20
Purchased the game yesterday, and spent 6hrs trying to play it last night.

However, my poor little Laptop is just not powerful enough. The game plays nad is excellent, but really needs a good graphics card. It kept freezing and by the time it unfroze I had been shot.

But I must say it is excellent and if you like fire shooters then IT IS A MUST. I played about 6 of the maps and they are packed with great stuff and it looks beautiful.

Well done guys.

Voigtkampf
03-22-2004, 08:06
Yes indeed, I hear complaints all around, but the issue is more than a weak graphics card; the engine itself needs a lot of tweaking, and there are strange graphic bugs like the appearances of awkward triangular forms of distortions. Also, there are times when you look from far away and actually see only the enemy player who is hiding in grass, but when you come closer, you don't see him because the grass appears as you get closer. Like…huh?

There are some awkward physical occurrences, the last happened to me few nights ago; I started of with a helicopter, determined to learn to fly the darn thing, and promptly I had the devil's machine upside down and bumped on the ground, rotor first. But I was actually very slow, so the chopper didn't explode, it just remained standing on a whirling rotor while I was watching with my eyes wide open, laughing and thinking this isn't happening. Then I start turning the chopper around, and I swear, it began rotating like a frenzy break dancer, spinning on his head After some five or six turns I even managed to get airborne again

I wouldn't believe it myself, but I made some screenshots, so I have some kind of proof for it.

Antalis::
03-22-2004, 08:09
Well I love this game, but sometimes I get stuck in a bush for no reason and I need two minutes to get rid of it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/frown.gif

This happens often, when I´m a sniper, lieing in the grass and use my scope.

Very wired.

The_678
03-22-2004, 13:42
The game is great already, but I feel the developers rushed the released. There are many bugs and issues out right now and in some ways it has things that were fixed in BF 1942. But my only real complaint is with the M60. It's too good. Obviously the first patch will fix this and that alone will improve this game immensly. So except for the M60 the game is great.

Matt Deckard
03-22-2004, 19:22
Oh man, i swear to god someone damn near SNIPED ME with an M60....its ridiculous. Now i use and M16 on principle http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
Anyway, there is a rumor that the patches arrival is very close at hand....one can hope...

Oh yeah, great review voigtkampf.

ShadesWolf
03-22-2004, 20:24
Does anybody know of any good server address's ?

ShadesWolf
03-22-2004, 20:25
BTW has anybody been onto the offical site ?

It has quite a nice little radio http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Voigtkampf
03-22-2004, 20:58
Quote[/b] (Samurai-ninja_fusion_of_doom @ Mar. 22 2004,12:22)]Oh yeah, great review voigtkampf.
Thank you, it was my first I did online for the Org and in English, there could have and should have been more information, but there was just too little time. Usually I get the games much sooner, since the developer send them directly to us some month or so before the actual release, but this time it was tighter than usual. Whatever, I'm glad you liked it

Matt Deckard
03-22-2004, 21:00
The screenshots were a nice touch.

The_678
03-22-2004, 21:13
Quote[/b] ]Does anybody know of any good server address's ?

Do you use All Seeing Eye? If not you should. It is free and always finds great games for me. Using ASE I can find games with 30 ping. It supports tons of games too.

Big King Sanctaphrax
03-22-2004, 21:41
Just to stick in my two cents on the whole M60 issue-In my opinion, the m60 should be given to the assault class, while the anti-tank recieves either a shotgun or the CAR-15. It should also be made wildy innaccurate while standing/running or unable to fire unless the player is in a prone position. It would be cool also if you could Dig in the bipod and use it as an emplaced gun, like the MG42 on RCTW.

RisingSun
03-22-2004, 23:24
I hear that the point is now to NOT fight, since the map is so large and it takes so long to get anywhere on foot, that most people end up sneaking their way to the enemy base rather than fight.

And I was looking on the official vehicles list a couple weeks back- WTF is with all this high-tech stuff the Vietnamese are getting? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

Big King Sanctaphrax
03-23-2004, 00:19
Quote[/b] (RisingSun @ Mar. 22 2004,22:24)]I hear that the point is now to NOT fight, since the map is so large and it takes so long to get anywhere on foot, that most people end up sneaking their way to the enemy base rather than fight.

And I was looking on the official vehicles list a couple weeks back- WTF is with all this high-tech stuff the Vietnamese are getting? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif
I'm not sure what you mean? I can't see anything that is obviously ridiculous. Though there probably were some concessions made to game balance-for example, in the Desert Combat mod they made the T-56 equal to the M1A1, .etc, because if they had portrayed it accurately it would have been no fun-the Iraqis would have just lost.

Spino
03-23-2004, 02:41
Quote[/b] ]in the Desert Combat mod they made the T-56 equal to the M1A1, .etc, because if they had portrayed it accurately it would have been no fun-the Iraqis would have just lost.

Friendly FYI, Desert Combat features the T-72, not the T-55. There's a world of difference between the two. The T-55 was so outdated at the time of the first Gulf War that a few were taken out by armor piercing rounds (depleted uranium?) fired by the 25mm cannons mounted on M2 Bradley APCs

The T-72 is still sorely outgunned by its modern western counterparts. It has been recorded that during the first Gulf War armor piercing shells fired by Iraqi T-72s broke up upon impact with the M1A1's armor Had the Iraqi military possessed any T-80s and state of the art Russian AP ammunition they might have given a better account of themselves but since the training and discipline of the average Iraqi tanker was so crappy it probably wouldn't have mattered anyway.

Forward Observer
03-23-2004, 06:59
I hear the the music tracks are spot on for the period, but for some reason a game about Vietnam just doesn't appeal to me much.

Been there, done that, and still have the complimentary green T-shirt--although it doesn't fit very well after 35 years. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Voigtkampf
03-23-2004, 08:16
Yes, the retro music, that is a sweetie for itself, nice tracks that reminded me of Full Metal Jacket.

Big King Sanctaphrax
03-23-2004, 18:03
Quote[/b] (Spino @ Mar. 23 2004,01:41)]
Quote[/b] ]in the Desert Combat mod they made the T-56 equal to the M1A1, .etc, because if they had portrayed it accurately it would have been no fun-the Iraqis would have just lost.

Friendly FYI, Desert Combat features the T-72, not the T-55. There's a world of difference between the two. The T-55 was so outdated at the time of the first Gulf War that a few were taken out by armor piercing rounds (depleted uranium?) fired by the 25mm cannons mounted on M2 Bradley APCs

The T-72 is still sorely outgunned by its modern western counterparts. It has been recorded that during the first Gulf War armor piercing shells fired by Iraqi T-72s broke up upon impact with the M1A1's armor Had the Iraqi military possessed any T-80s and state of the art Russian AP ammunition they might have given a better account of themselves but since the training and discipline of the average Iraqi tanker was so crappy it probably wouldn't have mattered anyway.
Cheers. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

Scipio
03-25-2004, 01:13
Regardless of some of your guys bad reviews and save your money comments I bought the game anywayzGoing to install now, I dunno if I will play multiplayer right away (got to get use to the game first) but when I do Scipio will be the name cya guys on the battlefied http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Kekvit Irae
03-25-2004, 03:40
Quote[/b] (Forward Observer @ Mar. 22 2004,23:59)]I hear the the music tracks are spot on for the period, but for some reason a game about Vietnam just doesn't appeal to me much.

Been there, done that, and still have the complimentary green T-shirt--although it doesn't fit very well after 35 years. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif
I think it has to do with reliving the battles, in my opinion. A friend of mine was in the Mogadishu Mile in 1993, serving in the 10th Mountain, and he refuses to play Delta Force: Black Hawk Down, and only barely stomached the movie.

Scipio
03-29-2004, 04:22
how many peeps are playing mp with Vietnam? I am a bit hesitant as my comp is right at the minimum requirements and I can hardly play a game with 24 bots with out it getting lagy http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

RisingSun
03-29-2004, 05:09
BKS... You are telling me these (http://www.eagames.com/official/battlefield/vietnam/us/nva_vehicles.jsp) are not ridiculous? Those seem a little high tech. Balancing is one thing, but they are going overboard...

Voigtkampf
03-29-2004, 08:39
High tech? May seem so, but after all, it's Vietnam conflict, and as far as I can tell, all of these vehicles have actually existed at that said time period and have been, to larger or smaller extent, used in that war by both sides.

Scipio
03-30-2004, 03:31
Hey any of you guys figure out how to work the map builder? http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/confused.gif

Voigtkampf
03-30-2004, 07:04
Nay, only modding I will ever do is TW related, and perhaps a map for Call of Duty, head down to PlanetBattlefield and you'll get a lot of tips, people have been already making their own mods. This one fella has even modded the marine pulse rifle from Aliens into the game

Sjakihata
03-30-2004, 08:39
Quote[/b] (RisingSun @ Mar. 29 2004,05:09)]BKS... You are telling me these (http://www.eagames.com/official/battlefield/vietnam/us/nva_vehicles.jsp) are not ridiculous? Those seem a little high tech. Balancing is one thing, but they are going overboard...
there is nothing high-tech about them, not at all

RisingSun
04-04-2004, 07:10
Ahem, the portable rocket launchers and the various sophisticated armors seem a bit much for an army which in history used guerilla tactics almost exclusively?

Big King Sanctaphrax
04-04-2004, 07:33
Quote[/b] (RisingSun @ April 04 2004,07:10)]Ahem, the portable rocket launchers and the various sophisticated armors seem a bit much for an army which in history used guerilla tactics almost exclusively?
I think that while the Vietcong were a Guerilla force, the NVA were a 'real' army, with equipment borrowed from the soviets. The RPGs don't seem too implausible to me, and the heat seeking missile was put in to counter the US forces superior aerial strength.

Kraellin
04-12-2004, 21:08
being a viet nam vet also, i thought i'd weigh in here. yes, i just got the game and have played a few missions in single player. very slick game.

let's get the bug-a-boos out of the way first... i didnt like, and still dont like, the unit name things over every person. this is just poorly done and gives way too much away. you can see these things through bridgs, trees, walls and just about anything. very badly done. i sat and watched one AI bot on my team who was pouring lead into a bridge while standing on it. he just stood there firing away through the deck of the bridge, ostensibly at an enemy below him. very poorly done.

havent played enough yet to make any other large complaints, though i did get a lockup on the first mission trying to load it.

ok, you guys have covered the game play and graphics and sound pretty well. only thing missing in the music was jimi hendrix, and they did contact the jimi hendrix folks and they said no. oh well.

that leaves realism and balance. to the person who said the m-60 shld only be fire-able from prone is all wet. i carried one in nam. you wear a shoulder strap and carry it at the hip. fires just fine, thank you. and that's in belt feed mode. you normally carry your belts for the m-60 in X fashion across your chest. the combo of this weapon and the ammo makes for one heavy mutha. only other weapon you could afford to carry at the same time would be a knife and side-arm, like a .45. anything else and you'd have to crawl where you wanted to go. what shld be done is restrict running with this weapon. you'd have to be rambo's physical trainer to run with this thing... at least very far.

an m-16 as a sniper rifle? that's just ludicrous. the m-16 is about the most inaccurate weapon ever made. it's a piece of junk and NO sniper would ever be caught dead with such a piece of trash. an m-15, maybe, but NEVER an m-16. m-16's also jammed a LOT. trust me on that one.

rpg's were VERY real and used extensively by both the nva and viet cong. they werent very accurate and had a tendency to 'loop' or 'corkscrew', but were nonetheless deadly and carried a sufficient whallop to knock any air vehicle down and most land vehicles. never saw one used by against a tank, so dont know about that.

tanks. frankly, they were pretty rare, on both sides. most tanks never went into the field. they were used at air bases or rear bases as defense. the jungle is just no place for a tank. it's a bloody trap to take one there. in the southern rice paddy region, maybe, but never in the jungle. the nva did use them. ask any vet that saw action in the ashaw (sp?) valley. nasty.

in the early part of the war, there were migs and they were actually better than the u.s. forces, but mostly because of the pilot training. the u.s. had fallen down in this respect and so the migs ruled for a short while. the u.s. quickly rectified this with the top gun school and migs became a thing of the past fairly quickly. 'fast movers' played a big part in ground support with the use of napalm and smaller bombs. napalm is the nastiest stuff you ever want to see... or dont want to see. think of a rolling jelly that sweeps across an area and is on fire. just nasty as hell.

ak-47's. very versatile, reliable and lethal. more accurate than an m-16 and never jammed. often, g.i.'s would trade their m-16's in for captured ak-47's. they just worked better.

jeeps and other vehicles...mostly used in rear areas. seemed to be true of both sides.

frankly, the only vehicles that really saw much action were the helo's. when i was there, there were three types commonly used, the small scout copter, the airlift huey, and the cobra gunship. the scout was a 2-seater and no guns to speak of. the airlifts carried about 10 people max, 2 pilots, two door gunners and six troops. the door gunners either had m-60's or mini-guns, though the mini's were pretty rare. the cobras carried an assortment, mini's, and rockets mostly, all wing-mounted. there were two other choppers used, but mostly for logistical action.

so, there's too many assualt type vehicles in the game. sure, you want a couple scenarios with them, but most shld be about ground action and ground support.

now, also bear in mind that this is just one person's perspective about viet nam. i spent time in the south and north, so i saw action in the rice paddies and in the northern jungles, but certainly didnt see everything. that someone else might have seen a completely different viet nam would be of little surprise to me. i also saw action in cambodia and laos when the u.s. decided to go in there. in one of those stints we spent a lot of time on an airbase and got shelled by arty almost daily. sappers were also rampant and got through the wire a couple times.

a game about viet nam shld mostly be about ground troops and support. adding in a lot of vehicles on either side is ok for a couple of scenio/missions, but primarily this was a ground action with lots of air support and artillery on the u.s. side.

oh, and the scenery is all wrong...trust me :) nice graphics, but it's hollywood's version of what viet nam looks like. sorry ;)

K.

Spino
04-13-2004, 20:10
I've played BF:V a few times now and I still haven't taken to it. In fact I'm beginning to regret my $43 investment and wished I had waited several months to grab it in a deal for ~$30. The thick vegetation plays a substantial part in my dislike as I guess I don't care for the sniping and ambush nature of the maps. I suppose I prefer the more conventional, mechanized warfare in BF:1942 and Desert Combat.

BF:V seems to need alot of patching with regard to balancing issues, etc. How on earth they could add the 'Q' key 'See all teammates and objectives' option is beyond me. I guess they thought some people would get confused by the heavy vegetation and terrain. I don't mind having the default colored labels above soldiers in your sights but being able to see all your buddies and objectives through the terrain is ridiculous. You really have to wonder how much time they spent testing this game.

I still find myself loading BF:1942 and playing the Desert Combat mod about 80-90% of the time with the default BF:1942 game taking up the rest. In my opinion DC is the best online shooter out there.

Given my tastes BF:V isn't a total loss; I'm sure the mods based on its engine will be stellar.

Teutonic Knight
04-13-2004, 20:35
Quote[/b] (Kraellin @ April 12 2004,16:08)]being a viet nam vet also, i thought i'd weigh in here. yes, i just got the game and have played a few missions in single player. very slick game.

let's get the bug-a-boos out of the way first... i didnt like, and still dont like, the unit name things over every person. this is just poorly done and gives way too much away. you can see these things through bridgs, trees, walls and just about anything. very badly done. i sat and watched one AI bot on my team who was pouring lead into a bridge while standing on it. he just stood there firing away through the deck of the bridge, ostensibly at an enemy below him. very poorly done.

havent played enough yet to make any other large complaints, though i did get a lockup on the first mission trying to load it.

ok, you guys have covered the game play and graphics and sound pretty well. only thing missing in the music was jimi hendrix, and they did contact the jimi hendrix folks and they said no. oh well.

that leaves realism and balance. to the person who said the m-60 shld only be fire-able from prone is all wet. i carried one in nam. you wear a shoulder strap and carry it at the hip. fires just fine, thank you. and that's in belt feed mode. you normally carry your belts for the m-60 in X fashion across your chest. the combo of this weapon and the ammo makes for one heavy mutha. only other weapon you could afford to carry at the same time would be a knife and side-arm, like a .45. anything else and you'd have to crawl where you wanted to go. what shld be done is restrict running with this weapon. you'd have to be rambo's physical trainer to run with this thing... at least very far.

an m-16 as a sniper rifle? that's just ludicrous. the m-16 is about the most inaccurate weapon ever made. it's a piece of junk and NO sniper would ever be caught dead with such a piece of trash. an m-15, maybe, but NEVER an m-16. m-16's also jammed a LOT. trust me on that one.

rpg's were VERY real and used extensively by both the nva and viet cong. they werent very accurate and had a tendency to 'loop' or 'corkscrew', but were nonetheless deadly and carried a sufficient whallop to knock any air vehicle down and most land vehicles. never saw one used by against a tank, so dont know about that.

tanks. frankly, they were pretty rare, on both sides. most tanks never went into the field. they were used at air bases or rear bases as defense. the jungle is just no place for a tank. it's a bloody trap to take one there. in the southern rice paddy region, maybe, but never in the jungle. the nva did use them. ask any vet that saw action in the ashaw (sp?) valley. nasty.

in the early part of the war, there were migs and they were actually better than the u.s. forces, but mostly because of the pilot training. the u.s. had fallen down in this respect and so the migs ruled for a short while. the u.s. quickly rectified this with the top gun school and migs became a thing of the past fairly quickly. 'fast movers' played a big part in ground support with the use of napalm and smaller bombs. napalm is the nastiest stuff you ever want to see... or dont want to see. think of a rolling jelly that sweeps across an area and is on fire. just nasty as hell.

ak-47's. very versatile, reliable and lethal. more accurate than an m-16 and never jammed. often, g.i.'s would trade their m-16's in for captured ak-47's. they just worked better.

jeeps and other vehicles...mostly used in rear areas. seemed to be true of both sides.

frankly, the only vehicles that really saw much action were the helo's. when i was there, there were three types commonly used, the small scout copter, the airlift huey, and the cobra gunship. the scout was a 2-seater and no guns to speak of. the airlifts carried about 10 people max, 2 pilots, two door gunners and six troops. the door gunners either had m-60's or mini-guns, though the mini's were pretty rare. the cobras carried an assortment, mini's, and rockets mostly, all wing-mounted. there were two other choppers used, but mostly for logistical action.

so, there's too many assualt type vehicles in the game. sure, you want a couple scenarios with them, but most shld be about ground action and ground support.

now, also bear in mind that this is just one person's perspective about viet nam. i spent time in the south and north, so i saw action in the rice paddies and in the northern jungles, but certainly didnt see everything. that someone else might have seen a completely different viet nam would be of little surprise to me. i also saw action in cambodia and laos when the u.s. decided to go in there. in one of those stints we spent a lot of time on an airbase and got shelled by arty almost daily. sappers were also rampant and got through the wire a couple times.

a game about viet nam shld mostly be about ground troops and support. adding in a lot of vehicles on either side is ok for a couple of scenio/missions, but primarily this was a ground action with lots of air support and artillery on the u.s. side.

oh, and the scenery is all wrong...trust me :) nice graphics, but it's hollywood's version of what viet nam looks like. sorry ;)

K.
That must be a very strange experience, to actually play a game simulation based on a war you actually experienced firsthand. How does that feel? Does it cause flashbacks and such?

Tell us...

Kraellin
04-13-2004, 20:50
teutonic,

nah. aint nothin.

ok, played some more. some more objections. sniping is better in this than most games of this genre, but they still are missing the true finesse of sniping.

the maps are too small for jets. you no more make a pass on something than you're out of the combat zone and get threatened with being shot down for being a coward. lol. so you fly in tight little circles which is silly.

helicopers are a bit weird, flyable, but a bit weird and very easy to crash and hard to stabilize.

still way too many vehicles in all the scenarios and the north seems to have a preponderance of them, which is quite weird.

the graphics are great. the music is great. the game play is very good, for the most part. the ai's need more work. they have a tendency to all climb into vehicles and then go run into a wall and sit there, fully loaded and do nothing. the enemy ai does a fair job except they have a tendency when shot, but not killed, to stand there and look puzzled about 50% of the time.

i like the thicker grasses and brush, but the ai still sees you too easily at great distances, even when prone and hiding in these grasses.

overall, i'd still recommend the game, at least in single player. havent tried multi, as the recommendation on that one is broadband only, no 56k, and it's pretty easy to see why.

oh, and these guys are definitely pro-modding. the game comes with a full editor and mod tools and docs for the editor. nice.

K.

ICantSpellDawg
04-19-2004, 16:41
i totally dig the game

when you play with people who take it seriously it is an experience

goin down the river in a pt boat with full crew, full crew heli with gunners who make drop offs (yes, the chopper missions can last a while with an experienced pilot)

there are way too many vehicles for the VC and VM - You dont get a sense that the US was advanced in many ways beyond the capabilities of the VC

sniping is too easy and people see you and kill you too quickly because at some distances all you can see is the enemy - no vegetation


ps - single player is a bit weak - the ai is mentally retarded and your teamates dont know what they are doing

Voigtkampf
04-20-2004, 12:24
Quote[/b] (Kraellin @ April 12 2004,15:08)]that leaves realism and balance. to the person who said the m-60 shld only be fire-able from prone is all wet. i carried one in nam. you wear a shoulder strap and carry it at the hip. fires just fine, thank you. and that's in belt feed mode. you normally carry your belts for the m-60 in X fashion across your chest. the combo of this weapon and the ammo makes for one heavy mutha. only other weapon you could afford to carry at the same time would be a knife and side-arm, like a .45. anything else and you'd have to crawl where you wanted to go. what shld be done is restrict running with this weapon. you'd have to be rambo's physical trainer to run with this thing... at least very far.
Fascinating. How heavy is the M-60? I had an old German MG-42, or was it perhaps some newer version? Can't remember, but it was one hell of a machine, and 12,5 kg heavy. How many rounds could you fire with the M-60? The one I had was able to fire up to 300 rounds, then off you are changing the pipe, otherwise it would bend easily. I figured out right away a simple way how to snipe with this one; simply pull out every second round from the belt and shoot, but I will not discuss accuracy too much. Before the MG, I had an AK-47, which is a very fine weapon indeed-it was, after all, made after MP-44 that was captured from Germans. And I used SK 47 as well, so I know at least some of the weapons that actually appear in the game, aside of side arms and explosives. Too bad I never had an M-16 or anything similar from American weaponry so I could compare them, I only get to use a FAL once and once I even had a Thompson gun in my hands, but that is all.

Kraellin
04-21-2004, 17:03
voigt,

the m-60 was heavy. dont know in pounds or kgs, but it was heavy. add in a couple of belts of ammo and you were seriously weighted down. barrel melt was never a problem, with me at least. the m-16 was another matter, though. those barrels would get red hot in no time. we used to wrap them with various materials just so we could hold onto them. the field modified m-16's were a bit better, as the barrel was cut in half and a better hand support was added that kept the heat off your hand.

i was playing the game yesterday and noticed in one of the scenarios in the load screen they have those little text blurbs. this particular blurb was talking about the accuracy of the m-16. i had to laugh. the m-16 was absolutely the worst weapon i've ever fired as far as accuracy. these things were made for firepower, pure and simple. get as many rounds off as fast as possible and the hell with accuracy. it was the only weapon i ever fired in training that i couldnt qualify in expert. you couldnt even sight these suckers in worth a damn in bench mode.

funny that you mention the thompson. i actually had a chance to use one in viet nam. i never carried it in the field, but i did get a chance to test fire one. those things have a 'travel' that is unbelievable. by 'travel' i mean the tendency of a weapon to traverse upwards as you shoot it. you generally only fire that one in short bursts. anything longer and you'd be trying to shoot a can on the ground and find yourself shooting aircraft out of the sky :)

i am finding it quite annoying in this game that the viet cong/nva have way too many vehicles. this war was fought primarily in south viet nam. the north, where they might have had vehicles to employ there, just didnt bring very many vehicles into play in the south. and even if they could steal the allied vehicles, they just didnt. they'd most likely sabotage them before trying to use them. those folks just werent trained for vehicle use. and the air belonged to us, at least after the first few years. i never saw an enemy tank or plane or any other vehicle, for that matter, nor ever heard of one being used, except for the ashaw valley, where there were rumored to be russian tanks, but we never saw any, working or destroyed. even the u.s. didnt use many ground vehicles in the actual fighting.

the north's primary tactic was stealth. they were outgunned and out manned at every turn. the tunnel systems were extensive. you could walk over the top of an entire battalion and never even know it. and in fact, we had to rescue a team once that had done just that. and that's where i learned about the lethality of the rpg's. nasty weapons. fairly inaccurate, but they do carry a pretty big punch.

and that's another thing, the north did have and use rpg's, but the game seems to give these things to every other nva AI guy. that just wasnt so.

the main tactics of the south were ground, air and artillery, not vehicles. ground goes out, finds the enemy, then calls for support, either air or arty. armored vehicles just couldnt handle the terrain that well. it was often either too closed in or wet or remote. helicopters were the main vehicle and used extensively by the south. you went everywhere by chopper. the nva using choppers in the game is just ridiculous. and the idea of the north using arty in Nam is also pretty silly. they did use it, but it was mostly done by having the arty just outside the borders of Nam and shooting across those borders into viet nam. that puts serious limits on their use. now, when we were in cambodia, that was a different matter, cause that was where some of the arty was. same with laos.

i also wish they'd have done friendly arty a bit different. as a grunt, you can call for arty in the game, but your team never mans the arty, so it never works. and if you man the arty personally, nobody ever calls for it, so it's almost useless. but i'll grant that i may be missing something here, as i'm still checking this out and also havent played multi yet. it might work better there with smarter intelligences working.

and i'll say this again too, sniping in these games just drives me nuts. there just isnt enough cover and camoflage. you get seen way too easily. oh, and snipers dont use tracers and often use muzzle flash retarders to mask their location. the AI spots you way too quickly. there were some exceptional snipers during the viet nam era and this game makes the same mistake that i've seen in all other games of this type. you basically just cant hide well enough. every single game of this type, counter strike, wolfenstein, ET, battlefield 1942, and any others i may have missed, all give snipers almost no cover at all. you might as well have a big red bullseye painted on you. the only way i've been able to maintain any type of stealth with a sniper in BF VN, is to fire at really extreme distances, where you almost cant see the unit you're firing at. and what's with the ammo loadouts for snipers? these are ridiculously low.

the AI also needs some work, particularly in close combat. i've had this happen many times, where some AI jumps me, gets in the first shot, i drop to the ground, and the AI seems to no longer see me and i waste him easily. on the other hand, the AI does do a pretty good general job of capturing the various control points and i do find myself struggling to keep up with that.

now, despite all this technical criticism, the game is still fun. i do recommend it. and when i finally go into multiplayer in about a week or two, i expect to see some pretty good games.

K.

Leet Eriksson
04-21-2004, 17:47
I got the game a couple of weeks ago,it was pretty good,besides the NVA using the helicopters http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif,but if you have'nt played MP yet Krealin you better,although alot of servers are full of retards,especially the big ones,its still fun,especially with some really stupid things that are done by both sides http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

EDIT:i have one gripe about this game,US anti-tank classes carry the M-60 wich is totally unrealistic,but with such a combo like that its a win-win situation,M-60 against infantry,and LAW against tanks http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

Voigtkampf
04-21-2004, 21:08
Funny coincidence; today I was in downtown, picking up some documents from the post when I decided to walk over a big book store only five minutes away, and there I found a small, yet very valuable book - Jane's Guns Recognition Guide, and I have picked it up (along with some poems of Lord Byron, I kid you not). It says that the M60 is 10, 5 kg or 23 lbs heavy, and that is still some two kg (of 4 lbs, if you prefer) beneath the weight of MG42. I was actually firmly convinced that the M60 is at least 15 kg or even more heavy It sure looks that way. Someone reading this might think oh, well, 10kg ain't that much should try to carry it for twenty miles or try firing from those beasts. Don't know about M60, but when MG42 starts roaring, you think all hell is breaking loose and all you want to do is dig yourself in as deep as possible. And, oh dear, I actually said pipe in my previous post instead of barrel, but I am not so well familiarized with all the exact English military terms, bare with me, please

As for the vast quantity of VC vehicles and general extensive presence of a lot of vehicles, it is, too my knowledge, a significant exaggeration, and I am glad that you can confirm us that was really so back then, but I guess you are aware that all of this is done for the sake of balance of the game; who would play the VC if they actually were to be always only on foot and without vehicles, planes et cetera?

You have mentioned one point that I have also grieved about extensively; cooperation and coordination. Of course, no such sign at the AI, but MP is not a bit better. Mostly you get to play with, as faisal said, kids without any grasp of tactics who simply rush. Thousand times the few of us remain behind and shout after the hellis and APC's that simply rush off, and I bet you will never get an arty strike on the designated coordinates when playing MP. Only help to this is a clan, I suppose.

Oh, yes, and as for the M16 lack of reliability; there is a certain mission where at the loading screen there are some notes about US troopers throwing the early types of their M16 and switching them for the AK47 they could loot of the dead enemies. The bad side was that the AK47 sounds specifically different than an M16, so the marines would think there are far more VC's than there actually are.

BTW, have you seen the new upcoming title Soldner: Secret Wars? Modern version of battlefield, should be out fairly soon, 4th of may in the US, around 27th May in Europe. Perhaps our new battlefield of choice, who knows?

Lazul
04-21-2004, 21:50
Intresting reading Kraellin, and I must say I agree with you on the whole realism thing

But i would like to ask you something ells, I dont know what role you played in the war but me and a few friends had us a saw We Where Soldiers some days ago.
After the movie some of us where a bit cunfused with the whole realism in the movie... the movie almost never showes a Viet accualy aiming in that movie... they just crush forward and get shot.
So if you have seen the movie, what did you think of it?

/a swede

Kraellin
04-22-2004, 21:47
voigt,

dont forget to add in a couple of extra belts of ammo to that weight, plus the one loaded in the gun itself :) all i remember is, if you carried an m-60, you didnt carry much else.

also, the laws are single shot weapons. they were 'disposable' rocket launchers. you pulled the tube to extend it, clicked a couple of things and fired. that was it. no re-loading. so, if you want four rockets for an anti-tank weapon, you'd carry 4 laws, not 1 law and 3 rockets.

and no, havent seen the upcoming title or that movie. you have to remember that hollywood takes a LOT of license in creating movies. the game industry does this too. i saw an interview with one of the dev guys for BF VN and he even stated that because hollywood had so instilled what viet nam looked like to folks that hadnt been there, that they decided to make the game look like what hollywood portrays it as, rather than the real thing. i had to chuckle at that one :)

and as for the north 'rushing', trust me, most grunts, no matter what nationality, would rather hunker down to fight, or not fight at all. there are very few 'john wayne's' in any war (though i did know one :)

K.

Lazul
04-22-2004, 23:12
Ah ok, cus in the movie We were soldiers the north almost never fire a shot, they seam to just run... run... and run and allways run towards the enemy.
The thing is in that movie that every single NVA had an ak47, now wouldnt they have superior firepower against a few m16?
Well it is a Mel Gibson movie so i dont take it very seriusly
http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif

Voigtkampf
04-23-2004, 07:50
Don't forget US air support and artillery strikes, but generally, I'd say the AK47 was somewhat superior to early M-16; at least most of the arguments I ever got to hear from anyone that knows something about it confirm that statement.

Krae, yes, the extra weight of ammo is a plus too, and I know that you can't run around like one of those energizer bunnies. I only wanted to say how much heavier the M60 looked to me since I never got to carry it.

But I guess the worse part was reserved for the assistant of the MG42; he got to carry the static foundation (again, the proper terminology? urgh) on which the MG42 was to be mounted, and that baby was 21 kg (some 44 lbs) heavy

Leet Eriksson
04-23-2004, 14:00
Kraellin i would like to know wether US soldiers could carry 4 L.A.W's,an M60,3 Belts of Ammunition,a Pistol,a Knife and a Medical Kit and still could move rapidly,crawl,go prone,run and jump while shooting http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

About the AK-47,in-game it is superior,i could kill peeps holding an m-16 while running and firing in short bursts http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

Kraellin
04-23-2004, 22:04
voigt,

noted :)

faisal,

good god, no. well, maybe rambo could, but certainly not me :) you also have to understand the bulk issue, how much space all this junk takes up when trying to carry it. aside from weight, 4 laws would be a clunky mess to carry all by themselves, let alone also having an m-60 and 3 belts of ammo. laws just werent used much by us common soldiers. they were readily available, but there was nothing heavily armored to warrant carrying them for.

now, i did carry an m-79 for a while. nice weapon. functional, always worked, fairly light for what it did, and a versatile array of loads. the gas 'grenade' for the m-79 was the cool one. if you've never seen a water buffalo gassed, you're missing a rare sight ;)

and NOBODY but a medico carried a 'kit'. you might carry one or two of those small, lightweight, gaping chest wound bandages as a grunt, but not much else in the way of medical supplies. and there is no way in hell they would ever trust a grunt with morphine; we'd never fight ;)

other items that we carried were normal fragmentation grenades, but the newer 'baseballs', not the older 'pineapples' of wwii. and almost everyone carried a smoke grenade or two, but those were mostly for 'lighting' a landing sight. you could also add in the heavy flak jackets and army helmets, but both of those were quite heavy and in the heat of 'nam, were often unused.

oh, and i've got a question for anyone that knows. in the game, there is a mortar, i think one of the engineers carries it, but i cant get that same guy to fire it. i can place it on the ground and i've seen other ai guys fire it when i do, but the guy that carries it cant seem to do it... no shells.

also, i cant seem to make the claymore mines work. i read the instructions on it, but every time my guys drops it, i cant get the right click to change to a detonator.

also, how do you play the north in single player mode? does this have to be set in the options or something? i can see the displays for both teams in the loadup screens, but nothing is click-able.

K.

Lazul
04-23-2004, 23:30
When your in the menu when just before you hit start you can click on the NVA flag and tadaaa.... and if your in multiplayer you can switch when selecting spawnpoints http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wave.gif

Voigtkampf
04-24-2004, 07:02
Yup, the way you chose your faction is odd, I didn't also realize for a while that the flags are the key for changing sides.

As for the mortar, don't know whether the AI guy that carries it can fire it or not, but you definitely can, as an engineer, when you carry it; place it and man it, forgot the quick key unfortunately. Well, G, F or E, not much left, right? Don't remember about claymore though. Boy, haven't played BF:V for two weeks now, CoD is still taking all of my attention away

Leet Eriksson
04-24-2004, 12:37
Thanks for your answer Kraellin,though i don't mind that in-game however,many complained in multiplayer that the Anti-Tank kit is unbalanced due to the M60's+laws and such,in MP when you play a US team especially in the big servers all of them pick the M60,you'll sometimes be touted a noob for that http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif and its hella accurate if you ask me,some dude from over 300 meters or so could kill me(even twice before i knew it),although i know thats the range of effect of a machine gun(i'm basing it on my experience with a SAW)the game could'nt handle anything beyond a hundred meters or so(especially with the fog and foliage in game),i think its kinda annoying http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif...

Whenever i'm NVA however i usully pick the SVD or the vietcong equivelant,can't remember wich rifle they used,becuase the M60's usually crouch to increase accuracy,sometimes go prone wich makes for a perfect stationary target.btw unlike BF42,the sniper rifles,even while standing are stone cold still,while using the scope that is,you can shoot while moving(literally). http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

Knight_Yellow
04-25-2004, 14:03
Ky's advice.

Single player in battlefield games is just no.

its like buying Max payne and expecting Multiplayer.

-------------------------------------------------

Check http://forums.thebattlefields.com/ for any info you need on Any BF game and mod.

I heard some1 ask about mapping

post in this thread http://forums.thebattlefields.com/showthread.php?t=5611

Its pretty simple when you get into it, 2 hours of work on my second map http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/screenshot93_copy.jpg

and an extra hours work into it.

http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/screenshot100_copy.jpg



My over all opinion is that Battlefield Vietnam was Rushed and released too early but so was BF1942 and it turned out great, it just needs a few patches.

Kraellin
04-25-2004, 17:39
ok, i'd completely overlooked that flag picking menu item. thanks, that works.

also hadnt realized you had to 'man' the mortar (e key on my machine). so, that works too. in fact, i found a cute little trick with mortars. as the engineer guy, you can only place one per life. however, if you purposely die, you can place another, then die again, place another and so on. i played the cambodian excursion scenario and had 4 of these set up at the big bridge and AI guys were manning all of them. i also found you can repair them when they get damaged. ok, so, that's working for me now.

but i still cant figure out the mines. oh, and these arent claymore mines. dont even recognize whatever it is they're using in the game, but they arent claymores.

KY,
looking good there.

i notice at the top of your map that you have some commands/directives that i dont see in my interface. did you put those there through the map maker or is that just something you call up with another button i'm not aware of? it also looks like you've got a way to ask for recon so that you can use arty. that would be a nice feature.

i've only done a cursory look at the map making so far, but i might get into it.

K.

Leet Eriksson
04-25-2004, 18:12
The landmines used by the VC are anti-vehicular and blend with the terrain perfectly i might say,try the VC sniper kit that uses the bouncing betty its a cool little mine that jumps up and explodes,its strictly anti-infantry and do not damage vehicles that much.also for suicidal bombing the same kit has a time bomb,if you hold the right click you can set the timer for a full minute,or 1 second,depending on how long you hold on the right click,also In multiplayer when playing the VC you can easily sneak up on ither unsuspecting players and use a plantation knife against them,its pretty fun playing the VC or NVA since they rely mostly on guerilla tactics.

On the US side though,the mines they use(not the claymores) are also anti-vehicular,but i mostly go with the M60 due to the dual purpose of the kit.i still find it hard to aim at NVA helicopters due to the lack of an AA weapon.

Knight_Yellow
04-26-2004, 15:23
Quote[/b] (Kraellin @ April 25 2004,17:39)]KY,
looking good there.

i notice at the top of your map that you have some commands/directives that i dont see in my interface. did you put those there through the map maker or is that just something you call up with another button i'm not aware of? it also looks like you've got a way to ask for recon so that you can use arty. that would be a nice feature.

i've only done a cursory look at the map making so far, but i might get into it.

K.
In the options section of the game there should be a option for expanded icons....

http://www.fpscentral.com/uploads/org.jpg

Clicking it on gives you the classic BF1942 commands and unlciking it gives you the version i have....

If you cant see the commands press F8 and it should turn them on and off.


Some SP commands differ from MP commands.

Kraellin
04-26-2004, 19:56
KY,

the F8 only turns on and off what's currently displayed, but i'll try the options and see what's there. thanks :)

i also found out about the mines a bit more. it seems that the mines on the first engineer are contact types. you simply lay them down and let someone or something walk/ride over them... no detonator.

the 2nd engineer type has C4, not mines, and these do come with the detonator and the right click does work with those. so apparently the manual was a bit errant.

K.

PanzerJaeger
04-27-2004, 06:28
The only thing i liked about the game was the music. :P Call of duty has better graphix, and is much more realistic, plus im partial to ww2. :)

Voigtkampf
04-27-2004, 07:31
Quote[/b] (PanzerJager @ April 27 2004,00:28)]The only thing i liked about the game was the music. :P Call of duty has better graphix, and is much more realistic, plus im partial to ww2. :)
Though I as well like Call of Duty better than BF:Vietnam, I cannot really agree that the graphics are better in the first game.

Knight_Yellow
04-28-2004, 13:49
Quote[/b] (PanzerJager @ April 27 2004,06:28)]The only thing i liked about the game was the music. :P Call of duty has better graphix, and is much more realistic, plus im partial to ww2. :)
Cod is using an ageing quake 3 engine.

BF:V's graphics are far superior.


http://forums.thebattlefields.com/attachm....2&stc=1 (http://forums.thebattlefields.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3522&stc=1)

http://fpscentral.com/uploads/screenshot5_copy11.jpg

Scipio
05-22-2004, 02:53
Just thought I'd let you all know, the first patch is finally here http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/bigthumb.gif

Voigtkampf
05-22-2004, 05:53
Finally. There are some things that bother me with BF:V more then I was aware in the beginning. Tanks taking damage when they drive faster into a sandbag barrier and still not being able to get across, jeeps that you can crash to death by driving into tank for an example, but from minimum distance and driving very slowly, bullet proof choppers that you can't knock down with heavy machine guns while you shoot down an airplane with a 9 mm sidearm.

I believe and hope that the BF:V will evolve and improve with further patches just like BF: 1942 did.

Scipio
05-22-2004, 07:01
Quote[/b] ]I believe and hope that the BF:V will evolve and improve with further patches just like BF: 1942 did.

Im hoping along with ya. Unfortunately I havernt played the game much, I am waiting for my new comp that can actually play the game http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

Leet Eriksson
05-22-2004, 16:35
i got the patch,the LAW+M60 combo is no more,now the NVA and Vietcong are actually going toe-to-toe with UMA and ARVN forces,Also the new alert icon helps get rid of those who go against an abandoned base solo and take over it,this times its more team-based.

The LAW now gets an M14 with it,pretty decent if you keep your distance from the enemy,also the M60+M79 kit has been slowed down a bit,though a NVA with RPD(machine gun similiar to the M60)is a bit faster.

One last thing,US/ARVN players are complaining that it has gotten more unrealistic this time around http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/tongue.gif

dessa14
05-23-2004, 04:04
is that because they can't win anymore.
oh no the enemy is nearly equal with us, we can't beat that.
thanks, dessa

Voigtkampf
05-23-2004, 08:22
What I would like to know is has someone managed to rule the choppers yet? I can fly, but as soon as the combat starts, I spin off and hit the ground. Can't stay up long enough with those beauties. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-bigcry.gif The planes are somewhat better, but not too much. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/mecry.gif

I have seen one guy though that owned choppers big time in an online match I've had some time ago. He looked as he way born in it. But me… fatal crash, again and again… Oh, well, perhaps I'm better suited for a regular footie.

Scipio
05-23-2004, 08:49
I dont find it too hard to fly them choppers.....when my comp isnt lagging like a biatch

Efrem Da King
05-30-2004, 04:16
hUH?

Choppers are easy to fly. Even I can do it. super duper easy.




I don't under stand what your prob is?

Voigtkampf
05-30-2004, 11:26
Yeah, yeah, yeah, just go showing off… http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

The choppers are hard to control; for me, at least. I use the keyboard and spin of most of the time when it comes to combat. I have played a good share of other heli-sims and have never had any problems to control the vehicle.

I have been practicing though, and I'm getting better. Still, I can't even nearly fly as good as I could in all of the other simulations I had before; and I had a lot of them, believe me.

Efrem Da King
05-30-2004, 11:44
I'll give you a hint.


TO turn DON'T use the directional keys


Always use A and D.


Try that and come back to me.

Voigtkampf
05-30-2004, 15:35
Quote[/b] (Efrem Da King @ May 30 2004,05:44)]I'll give you a hint.


TO turn DON'T use the directional keys


Always use A and D.


Try that and come back to me.
LOL

If you were anywhere near, Efrem, you'd get a kick in your well respected behind http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

I am not a retard; I understand how the physics work, and I use WASD + mouse combination and I can fly, I can even glide to left and right, parallel with, say, river coast and shoot up the unfriendlies, it's just that the flying behavior is more difficult then it is in other simulations (and this is only partially a simulation) so t6hat I never manage to control the chopper to the extent I would like to do.

A and D keys, I mean really… http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif

Efrem Da King
05-30-2004, 22:29
Don't use the mouse that is your problem. Use only keyboard. That is the basic of flying anything in a battlefield game and even you should know it.

Voigtkampf
05-30-2004, 23:22
Even you should know it… Now, now, you shouldn't say such nasty things to people, even you should know it http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Leet Eriksson
05-30-2004, 23:52
Quote[/b] (Efrem Da King @ May 30 2004,16:29)]Don't use the mouse that is your problem. Use only keyboard. That is the basic of flying anything in a battlefield game and even you should know it.
Heck no,i use the mouse to shoot down planes,i shot F-4s and A-7 corsairs with my Mig-17,guess what,in one game i got 34 kills and 0 deaths,but i still can't control helicoptersI'll probably try the keyboard exclusively for the helicopter.

Degtyarev14.5
05-31-2004, 15:05
Seriously, how well one flies the choppers seems to depend on whether one is familiar with BF1942's Desert Combat mod. The DC development team, Trauma Studios, designed the chopper code that Dice subsequently employed in BF:V and which, if I'm not mistaken, they road-tested in BF1942's Secret Weapons of WWII expansion.

But they couldn't just use it as it stood, nooooo. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/rolleyes.gif They had to play with it, in an attempt to make it newb friendly. In DC you really need to practise flying choppers a lot before you can fly them with some proficiency, and arguably the hardest thing to do with them is hover, to just hover. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/gc-stunned.gif

However, Dice have added to the chopper code a built-in hover capability, and to be honest, I haven't quite worked it out yet, no doubt because I am accustomed to DC's controls.

I regard myself a competent chopper pilot in DC, able to destroy an APC in one shot at the very limit of visibilty, and yes, I can pull off an impressive hover for an indefinite stretch of time, but even now I find that the smallest error can have me spin out of control - especially when trying to land the beasts.

But isn't this reflective of reality? In the air, the smallest error can be, and often is, irrevocable and fatal. But in real life, there is no respawn. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

A.

P.S. I fly with my mouse. http://www.totalwar.org/forum/non-cgi/emoticons/wink.gif

Efrem Da King
05-31-2004, 22:49
I've NEVER played desert combat and I Find them easy. Can't shoot anything mind you. But have almost perfect control over moving my copter.