TrueCombat: Elite Revival

(Soup Nazi) #21

well xD then i just get no server list xDD
and … if you remember 2008 and its playercount, it IS dead actually ^^ :tongue:

:stroggtapir:

($omator) #22

at a day peak (so evnings cet) it is around 90 players online =) but shh coroner has spoken again:

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=25894#25893

Q:@Coroner: Referring to your latest video, i was pointed to a potential issue with the hitboxes. ( possibly just bot issue ) Your first few shots didnt register on the bot that you shot. I’m wondering if that is an issue with the hitboxes, or a bot issue. Knowing bots from tce, I know they are messed up in certain situations and that you cannot shoot them while they crouch down. In your video the bot didnt crouch down and your first few shots were right on the target, but the bot didnt go down. You had to try again after turning away thinking it was dead.

A:When the video was recorded, there was still a hit box issue which is fixed meanwhile.
Quote:

Q:Also referring to the new feet view, when you looked down just before you were about to jump off that roof your feet looked really really flabby. Sensitivity?

A:The jerky foot movements are a consequence of ETs animations, which currently use a different pose for the standing animations and have been around for the other players from the beginning. It becomes more obvious for the own feet and it can be easily changed by using another standing pose for all players. However, low priority ATM.

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=25897#25897

Q:Now coroner dont you fear to create a newb friendly game (crosshair, radar, etc …) ?
Because the active community is more competition based, maybe some “promod” could be interesting (built in tweaks aka r_filmtweaks, increased damage, no crosshair, etc …).
And finally what do you plan for leagues and official matches ?

A:Why should I fear to make the game attractive to new players?

Moreover, whether the crosshair stays or not is not even decided. The unaimed fire position will also have a varying vector applied to the gun which moves the fire direction somewhere off the center, similar to freeaim applied to the gun axis. So, in any case crosshair would only provide information about the center screen. Of course you could switch it off.

I currently have a g_hardcore setting (could also be referred to as promode or tactical or whatever fits best) which increases the damage. Let it be subject to play testing which other things should be coupled to it … radar is for sure a good candidate and crosshair if available.

http://www.truecombatelite.com/index.php?action=fullnews&showcomments=1&id=92

Q:Posted By Jussi on 07.20.10
Will it be possible to lean?

A:Posted By coroner on 07.20.10
Yes, lean will be possible, maybe even adjustable lean (if I have time) as an option.

($omator) #23

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=25966#25964

Hi there,

just wanted to drop in and show my interest in this thread. I agree with what Diane and others said and very much enjoy a structured discussion and sharing opinions.
I would want to ask everyone for a constructive discussion. From my point of view, this thread should be about potential features of a realism/tactical/hardcore option and not about the pros and cons of such an option in general.

Features that I had in mind:

*Jumping only in sprint mode, otherwise only mantling
*Slower transition from prone to crouch to stand, also involving stamina
*No hud
*Consistent weapon metrics using the same physical behaviour model for all weapons including sniper rifles (integral part of CQB anyway)
*No more than 4x scope optics (integral part of CQB anyway)
*More limited and stamina based leaning, adjustable
*No radar
*No kill messages
*No crosshair (of course)
*Vector aim based un-sighted firing (e.g., RedOrchestra, integral part of CQB anyway)
*Slower and arc-limited turning in prone position
*Arc-dependent realistic turning speeds (integral part of CQB anyway)

Based on my movement speed research comparing Arma2, AmArmy2/3, Cod4, MW2, TCE, and my own stop-watched movements:

*No changes to sprint speed (1:1 with AmArmy2/3, Arma2 is 15% slower)
*5-15% speed reduction for run (10% faster than Arma2, 25% slower than COd4/MW2)
*0-10% speed reduction to aimed run (30% slower than Arma2, 1:1 with Cod4)
*20% speed increment to crouch (20% less than AmArmy3, on par with AmArmy2)
*20% speed reduction to aimed crouch (Just like AmArmy2, Arma2, Cod4, MW2)
*20% speed reduction to prone movement (Like Cod4, MW2, 20% slower than AmArmy3)

[QUOTE]I hope you’re open to more discussion and evaluation of player movement speed as the comparisons made to ArmA and AA seem a little off… Even if spot on, both games by their developers admission have faster then realistic sprint speed due to large maps size that must be covered, and both incorporate stamina features to counter this.

The comparison to Arma2 is actually very accurate (as it has a meter indicator which can be directly used to determine ranges). The comparison to AmArmy2/3 involves scale determination based on the size of containers and doorframes. Particularly AmArmy2 is quite odd when it comes to scale, so, nevertheless, the estimates are as good as it gets. You are highly wellcome to cross compare but I honestly doubt you will get much different results. Additionaly speed estimates of SWAT 4 would be interesting.

Back to game design, maybe I should also redefine here what my design goals for CQB (g_realism 0) are. As mentioned earlier, I see the movement speeds pretty much along the ones used in TCE probably toned down a bit for some stances (according to my upper table). I would like to disable exploits of mad jump-move actions. I pretty much see QCB as a combination of rich variety of weapon loadout (partly with a movie style touch) like in MW2 combined with a movement system that is more restrictive somewhere between AmArmy3 and Arma2. In combination with the ability system it should still offer dynamic sprints and moves that are, lets say, just possible in real life.

For a g_realism 1 setting, I could imagine that the movement system is toned down to a conservative assumption of what is possible in real life, while, with choice of the appropriate abilities, regular QCB offers action that still seems just believable. With regard to toning down, the question remains how much? My own conservative stop-watching of tactical combat moves in different stances suggest that run, walk, and crouch, and particlularly aimed stances should get a speed reduction to 50% of what they are now. Again, sprint, maybe mixed with some acceleration and inertia, requires no change. However, it should be majorly perceived as a kind of escape action causing a longer duration of the transition to stable sighted firing afterwards.
Probably these massively reduced run and walk speeds are in line with SWAT 4.[/quote]

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2138&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=30

[quote]I’d certainly appreciate a clarification from Coroner as to whether this will be a g_realism var as requested and discussed for many years now for more realism, or some Modern Warfare arcade deravitive g_hardcore var that has virtually nothing to do with functional tactical realism?

One thing is the naming and I agree that g_realism is more appropriate. Otherwise the answer to this question pretty much depends on the definition of functional tactical realism.

My own perception of CQBs game style (g_realism 0), with the changes implemented in CQB with regard to TCE, wouldn’t either be that of an arcade game:
The current movement system settles somewhere between AmArmy3 and Arma2 and is more restrictive than that of TCE, including:
*Stance dependent angle movement limitations
*Hip firing replaced by shoulder position and slong with
*Running speed reduced by 15%
*Physical correct gravity along with halfed jump height and mantling
*More falling damage
*Sprint acceleration (todo)
*Much slower realistic prone turning (todo)

I also agree with nyc_paramedic and earlier posts that the maps have to be reworked to remove movements on fences, railings, and small ledges. I also want to eliminate all wild jump-move actions. Hate them.

When it comes to a g_realism 1 setting, I agree with the majority of changes that were suggested here, if they are doable in a reasonable amount of time. The critical point is the adjustment of speeds. I can clearly see that g_realism 1 would have jump completely disabled, no hud, etc. . Whether a further change or even dramatic change to all movement speeds would be a good idea, I don’t know. I also think that functional tactical realism does not solely depent on slower movement speeds, at least, I am still missing the convincing argument. Probably only play testing can tell.[/quote]

In the end everything is subject to play testing.
If it turns out that the speed reduction is horrible (BTW, I only reduced ‘run’ and neither ‘sprint’ nor ‘walk’ is reduced as would be as a consequence of g_speed reduction)
it will be changed.
I suggest to do wait for an alpha at least, before final judgements are down.

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2077&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=585

[quote]but i figured that the gravity was too low instead of twice as high.

If you want to test this for yourself on your own private server simply do this: (Im hoping this is as close as possible to CQB physics according to coroners blog post even though he didnt give any specifics.)

Start game open console and type:

*/seta sv_official 0
*/devmap obj_northport ( or any map that u might want to test )
*join a team
*the warmup duration is probably at 60 so just /g_warmup 10
*in console again, type /developer 2
*now type /g_Gravity 1000
*now type /g_Speed 272

Unfortunately, the gravity should be changed to 400 if you want to test like this. The two variables are in old game units (0.0254 meters) and converting the gravity of 9.81 m/s^2 yields about 390 units/s^2. You can’t really test the new behaviour nevertheless, since you cannot change the jump velocity via console. Furthermore, I currently adjusted only the ‘run’ speed while all other speeds are the same, a behaviour which cannot be accounted for by changing console variables.

I very much agree that this, by no means, would be a turtle game. I do not agree that current TCE or CQB is very slow compared to the videos of RS cited above. These old games have totally off-scale environments which require apparently faster movement to compensate for the environment. Its a similar issue with AmArmy2.[/quote]

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=26444#26444

Thanks John Carmack!

That’s (expected) good news. For CQB this will mainly mean that there is at least the perspective of a future update path for the engine. It also ultimately means that technology wise CQB can exist for many more years on ET engine.
At the very moment, it doesn’t mean much and everything continuous according to the old goals. For hacking reasons, I will keep CQB closed source and, as such as a mod of the free game ET under the ET EULA. Of course, it is possible to run that free game with a patched or modified engine based on GNU GPL ET engine, like UrT does with ioUrbanTerror.
Standalone is not possible at the moment because the ET player models are used or derivative work of those models. I could speculate, however, that it might be possible to find some deal to use them for free in a standalone but non-commercial game.

That’s great news and I think it could mean something for CQB.
To get rid of any WET assets is not to far fetched as a goal. That’s one step in the direction of standalone. The other main issue would be cheating and hacking.

I guess our common goal here would be to enjoy CQB on public servers without hackers and cheaters. This is something that seems impossible with available man power on the basis of a GPL game.
There is one thought I had years ago when I was toying around with an unfinished shooter project based on Xreal facing the very same problem. Here in a few words without any implication that something along these lines is planned atm:

Some ppl of the core game community and the developer found an non-legal, non-profit organization, lets call it the Trusted Player Club (TPC) for the time being.

The TCP has its own TCP game based on a GPL game which is developed inside the TPC. The game is not released to the public. The game is only shared inside the entity of the organization were it can be distributed without sharing the source and along with a non-disclosure agreement without violating the GPL.

Ppl are free to become a member of the TCP by agreeing to test TCPs game without cheating and hacking for the sake of fun and by paying a fee of 5 bucks to retrieve their individual member ID.

The organization’s board can withdraw IDs if the servers tracking of the player behaviour indicates cheating.

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2084&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15

Heaven and hell.
It’s been some time, real life kicked in on me heavily again. As a consequence there was hardly any progress during the last weeks. The last feature I worked on was the portal scope system. I can promise that if you see the first video of it you will sh* your pants. Basically, the portal scopes were merged with the new weapon mechanics code and they now move full 3D like all the other sights even in free look. CQB will feature a 1.5x ACOG (yes, the magnification is only in the scope) and 4x Leupold and PSO scopes with full realistic eye relief, field of view and exit pupil simulation.
That was heaven.

Heaven and hell is the release of ET Gnu GPL. This was expected and only a matter of time. It was also something I had in the back of my mind when I came back to work on CQB with the idea to develop it for fun for LAN parties. I was thinking that ET would be GPLed at some point when CQB game would have been finished and running for stock ET and I could then toy around with the engine, merging some features of my Q3 engine improvements. Additionally, cheating doesn’t matter for my own LAN parties.
Now we have a new situation, CQB will go public, I guess PB will stop supporting ET in the near future and CQB is not finished, so I’ll better not start to look at the engine. Of course I couldn’t stop myself from downloading ET engine and from running CQB on my own engine compile. Moreover, I tried some small changes, mainly tried to understand some of the engine bugs and so on.
Nevertheless, I will again focus on developing CQB and will not touch the engine. In addition, I want to motivate interested and skilled coders to think about a future cheat protection. Even if CQB will be played with the stock ET engine officially, I guess nobody will be able stop hackers from using their own engine compile in the near future.

($omator) #24

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=26794#26794

Well, blog time again. Sorry for the long waiting time, but real life limited my attention to CQB. So, what happened in the dev department?
I’ve finished the weapon selection for the first version including all first-person and third-person models. Although I am not fully satisfied, I will stop working on weapons now since all future changes require more in-depth code changes. As mentioned in my last blog entry, one new optics in CQB will be the ACOG 1.5x CQC scope. Taken together, CQB will feature three reflex optics (Osprey, Aimpoint, and Eotech) and three lens optics, being Acog (1.5x) and PSO and Leupold (4x). The current weapon system allows to select a certain optic for a specific weapon and/or a suppressor. Two new weapons I added are short-barreled 5.56mm ones, namely the SCAR mod 16 CQC (Specops) and SG-552 SWAT (Terrorists). I decided for the SCAR in favor of the M4 to avoid another AR-15 based weapon. These two weapons can be equipped with the Eotech red-dot sight. The longer barreled assault rifles (Rec7 and AK-47) offer the ACOG scope.
I am currently working on sounds and the next step is to finish the unaimed weapon mechanics, i.e., I have to finish the free-aim code for the unsighted weapon position and I will most likely remove the xhair again.
After some recombination of the player skins (terror will also look like a military force), a first test version could be released but will then use the old maps and old gametypes. First thoughts about gametype changes are 3-minute rounds for Demolition and re-rounds (switching the role of teams, like in RtCW and MW2). Another step would be removal of rounds for respawn modes since there is no round-dependent weapon availability anymore. Besides Bodycount, I currently favor Capture-and-hold as additional respawn mode.

($omator) #25

Brand new Work In Progress video (dont ask me why not recorded in fraps)

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=26812#26812

Hi, just wanted to say that the blood screen is already damage dependent. It has 2 layers which depend on damage and it fades depending on damage. Of course, it can be further tweaked after the initial release.

The video doesn’t show leaning. Nevertheless, it is in the code. Next I will implement the abilities and then decide in which way leaning will be effected by the leaning ability.

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=26817#26816

Actually, it would be very doable to publish an alpha soon (please don’t ask for a date, and only Win and Linux ATM, sorry Mac users) which would require ppl to copy the existing TCE 049b paks in the new cqbtest folder.
This alpha would then use old maps and old gametypes and menu assets.
I dunno whether it would be smart or not to go public that early without a decent TCE independent installation … I also see the risk that admins would just patch TCE, although I can make sure that the game only runs as cqbtest and the server browser would only recognize those servers.

(Dragnadh) #26

Look’s hot, wonder how much modification of the ET engine was nessecary.

($omator) #27

Coroner is not moding ET engine, maybe in future but for now BASE is ET 2.60b

That’s (expected) good news. For CQB this will mainly mean that there is at least the perspective of a future update path for the engine. It also ultimately means that technology wise CQB can exist for many more years on ET engine.

Source: http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=26444#26444

(Dragnadh) #28

You think that they may make use of the xreal ET-Engine(when it’s finished)?

($omator) #29

I do not have such information.

(dutchmeat) #30

They will certainly not.
One reason is the lack of PB support on ET-XReal.

($omator) #31

Only Coroner knows if he wants to use this new code in the future and ofc it depends on EvenBalance also (extending support for Xreal ET and/or others). Btw CQB can use alternative AC software like SpeedLinkAC or ESL Wire Anti-Cheat… who knows… best way is to ask Coroner himself on True Combat: Elite FORUMS

(dutchmeat) #32

Or you can read this specific topic and confirm what I just have said;

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2174

($omator) #33

[QUOTE=dutchmeat;241897]Or you can read this specific topic and confirm what I just have said;

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=2174[/QUOTE]

i must be blind, can you quote the the proper post? :cool:

(dutchmeat) #34

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=26444#26444

Some other topics discuss this matter aswell, perhaps you can search them for yourself.
However his posts contradict himself, I think he will not use XReal because it will take too much work to get it all working, plus they have to wait for ET:Xreal to be finished.

($omator) #35

thank you for putting proper link =) tho i posted above quote few posts earlier here mate :wink:

($omator) #36

no more infomations from Coroner anyways on the topic.

And as True Combat celebrates 10 Years anniversary i would like to wish at least 10 more years :wink:

($omator) #37

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=26868#26868

Hi again. Although my plan was to stop working on weapons, I nevertheless finished all weapons that I had in mind for the final release. Some models and animations are not optimal yet, but at least the very first version would ship with a decent selection already and balancing can already be based on the final range of weapons.
As a reminder, CQBs weapon selection is based on the idea to offer weapons with unique behaviour (calibre, rate of fire, barrel length) and addons instead of a huge arsenal with many functionally similar models. As such CQB offers six team dependent choices for the primary weapon (to keep TC(E)s flavor of unique teams) and six common choices for the secondary weapon. The last weapons I’ve added are the M3 Super 90 and SPAS-12 shotguns with suppressor and choke disperser as attachments, and the double-barreled sawn-off shotgun with akimbo addon, as well as the Desert Eagle (still old model) and the Glock 21 with suppressor as addon (current placeholder for the 1911 Para Ordnance).

Here’s the weapon list ( specops [terror] (addons) )

Primary

MP9 [MiniUzi] (Red-dot and/or Suppressor)
UMP45 [MP5/40] (Aimpoint and/or Suppressor)

SCAR Mod16 CQC [SG-552 SWAT] (Eotech and/or suppressor)
REC7 [AK-47] (Acog 1.5x and/or suppressor)

M3S90 [SPAS-12] (suppressor or choke disperser)
M110 [M76] (backup iron sight and/or suppressor)

Secondary

Beretta 93R (akimbo)
Glock 21 (suppressor)*
Glock 20 (suppressor)
Desert Eagle (-)
Sawed-off (akimbo)
Mossberg 590c (-)

*going to be replaced by Para Ordnance 1911

Overall, there are about 200 unique weapon loadouts per team.

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=26915#26915

[QUOTE]also isnt rapid fire pistol script a bit useless now since we have beretta 93r ? and doesnt glock have also auto fire ? or is it only some glocks.

Coroner:
The Beretta 93R has only three-round burst and the Glocks are semi auto. Rapid fire scripts will become useless due to code changes.[/QUOTE]

($omator) #38

http://www.truecombatelite.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=27049#27049

If you jump and turn in air in QCB, only your head will turn and the body will turn delayed at very limited arc speed. Also the intended movement and turns have absolutely no effect on the trajectory in air anymore (unlike Q3 and WET/TCE where a minor correction was still possible). If it is not possible IRL, it will also be not possible in QCB.
Did I mention that I hate unrealistic jump action moves?

(Nail) #39

some full auto pistols
* APS Stechkin
* Beretta 93R (3 round burst)
* CZ-75 (Select Fire Variant)
* Delacre machine pistol
* Glock 18
* Heckler & Koch VP70
* Heckler & Koch MP5K
* Heckler & Koch MP7
* KG-99
* Steyr M1912
* Lercker
* Tuma MTE 224 VA
* MAC-10
* MAC-11
* Mauser M712 Schnellfeuer
* OTs-23 DROTIK
* OTs-33 Pernach
* ST Kinetics CPW
* Steyr TMP
* VEB Maschinenpistole

($omator) #40

impressive list:D is it for (hopefully) upcomming QCB alpha test version?