Movable supply crates!

[Impavido 0]

I think it would greatly add to the tactics and realism of OFP 2 if weapon and supply crates could be manipulated in real-time. Say, not only can you add and remove things like in the Resistance addon, but you can move the damn things too. Have the ability for a soldier to sling his weapon and carry the thing on his back (This may be unrealistic in iteslf, but needing 2 players to move a box is too much hassle). Needless to say he will be slower and can't defend himself without dropping the box.

What would take this elemet even further would be the ability to cram said boxes into the back of a jeep or truck. The amount of troops the vehicle can carry should drop accordingly. For example I guess that a Humvee should be able to carry 1 box max, and loose the two soldier capacity in back seat. And a large truck like 5T or Ural can carry 4 boxes, but looses 3-4 soldier seating positions per box. And Using helicopters to drop supplies where they are needed would be fantastic for real strategic thinking!

If someone wants to make a simple no-brains required deathmatch or CTF, then they can use an option to "lock" the box positions and they will behave like the boxes we are all familiar with. But allowing features like the ones I suggested above could add a lot situations for problem solving, team work, and scenario-building.

PS: I love you BIS

PSS: I did a search for this suggestion but didnt find any, if Im wrong and someone already suggested this, dont flame me

[Yuzzi 0]

Nice idea

In the name of realism this would also require limiting the amount of weaponry u can stuff into a box. I mean this little box here contains 10000 g36as and 30000 law launchers:

Otherwise we'll see for example AT-soldier carrying practically unlimited rockets.

This locking option u mentioned could be done by having different boxtypes, others for moveable boxes and others for traditional, static and nearly unlimited capacity boxes. Like theres many dif boxtypes now (Ammo Crates (West, Addons), Ammo Crates (West) etc.)

[PainDealer 0]

damn you yuzzi again you stole my words! in fact a rifle or AT launcher wouldn't even fit in one of those crates. if we want realistic boxes there should be a crate for ammo, rifles, heavy weapons, grenades whatever as IRL

[Harnu 0]

Maybe adding two types of boxes? Realistic ones that can only hold x amount of ammo/weapons that can be loaded and moved. Or the unrealstic static ones which carry 243479 of everything that could be used in spawn in MP games?

[Impavido 0]

Sounds like a plan to me!

[Colossus 2]

Great idea !

I was hopeing someone was taking this seriously

[Impavido 0]

I am most interested in movable crates for the tactical strategy that can come of it. I've played games like XCOM, Incubation, Operation flashpoint, Rainbow 6, and countless other games that require varying degrees of micromanagement of character load out.

Say there was a scenario that you were taking a vehicle behind enemy lines and that would be your sole point of supply for a long period of time.

Micro-managers like me will really enjoy trying to fill a limited amount of material into a box of limited capacity. Thinking ahead and covering as many variable or weaponry needs you can think of. But then again thats just me

[Spy17 1]

Good idea!

Maybe we can have it in OFP1 just? Just 1 new animation for 1 type of crate and some scripting for example in the ECP-MOD?

[Joe_1911 0]

Perhaps one player can drag the box, he'll be forced to sling his weapon on to his back. Or two people can carry the box, which will be faster, but players still can't shoot their weapons, and maybe if 4 people organize to carry the box, they could use their pistols with one hand and carry the box with the other?

[Colossus 2]

@Joe_1911

Great idea. But stil they have less accurecy while they carrying the create. And maybe BI can make a script that force 2 AI soldiers to follow the 2 ppl that are carrying the create.

[Baphomet 0]

Quote[/b] ]I think it would greatly add to the tactics and realism of OFP 2 if weapon and supply crates could be manipulated in real-time.

Like trespasser?

The reason why Trespasser "looked" like it should have run on a p166 yet took a P450 to run acceptably is because of the realtime physics and manipulation.

Say goodbye to decent framerates in favor of manipulating boxes if that's the case.

[Harnu 0]

How would moving a box kill framerates?

[Baphomet 0]

Try playing Trespasser on a pentium 200 and ask why the game doesn't run worth a fiddler's. That game although I enjoyed it once I actually found a PC beefy enough to run it at the time might as well be called:

Trespasser: We figured out how to make moving inanimate objects slow your PC to a crawl.

If you're talking about preset animations without realtime physics to accompany the crate movement. Then no. It shouldn't.

However if you're talking about total realtime manipulation of objects (on the fly physics calculation and animation including heavy inverse kinematics). Then you bet it's going to suck up a whole lot of cpu time.

[Harnu 0]

I've never even heard of that game, much less imagine how some crates will take up so much of a CPU

[Baron Hurlothrumbo IIX 0]

Trespasser is a great game!

Not because of the storyline, which was terrible, or the gameplay, which was fairly repetititve, but because of the physics.

How many other games can you run up to a T Rex and batter its head in with a 2 by 4. (well... hit it a couple of times, at least)

[Baphomet 0]

Did I say Trespasser was a bad game?

No.

Were Trespasser's system requirement overshot by almost 300mhz?

Hell yes.

I enjoyed that game too. However the realtime physics severely hampered the playability of the game when it came out. You actually had to wait a year or so to get your hands on a non $4000 450mhz machine to enjoy it.

I'm guessing Harnu that you're having trouble understanding either what level of physics this game had or overall how much CPU devotes to such things.

Try taking a box, a simple four sided box and giving it almost every conceivable real-life trait. Friction coefficient for each surface, mass, volume, it takes all of that into account as well as the friction coefficient, mass, dimension and everything else in the environment. Now imagine rolling that box down a hill and calculating each bump and slide and such as it hits various rocks and slides on grass or goes down varying degrees of incline. The CPU is doing this all as it happens and that's a tremendous amount of data to process at once.

Have you ever seen that halflife 2 video where that manipulator gun starts moving around objects in in immaculate detail.

Trespasser was the grandfather of that kind of object physics.

Halflife 2's graphics aren't going to be what kills the game processor wise. It will be the inverse kinematics of all the objects (including people) in the game. For example.

You have to understand that the cpu would be working overtime to calculate every miniscule detail on the fly, as it's happening and that makes things a lot more complex than if you just did a very limited simulation of it where there were rules and only a certain list of plausible events were coded in.

If you took the realtime physics/manipulation out of it. Then no. It probably wouldn't. You can still move things in our (real time) and not have it be realtime manipulation because the processor isn't calculating everything as it happens because it is instead working from a much more limited instruction set for handling such things.

[Harnu 0]

Ohhh okay, now I see what you mean. As cool as that may sound, I doubt OFP2 will do that. OFP1 didn't have much problem seeing whats going to roll when/how far etc. I.E. Start shooting boxes or barrels down a hill.