RO2 The ultimate red orchestra realism destructible environment

[Bunny monster]

Whoever has played games with destructible environment knows what I'm talking about, walls that crush when you go with tanks into them buildings that go down when you use explosives, things like that. I hope red orchestra will somehow do the same in the future or maybe a mod but till then I love playing what we currently have now.

 

[Mr Headshot95]

There are a few walls, roofs, doors, and other objects in-game that are "destructible" with explosives

But if everything was destructible then any map with artillery would look like the moon. I'll pass, thanks.

As cool as it is.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

I'd pass too. Some destructibles are ok, but beyond that you'd just have a mess for gameplay and those rogue players who only wanted to destroy this.

 

[Twrecks]

Someone needs to take up level design. After a few weeks, you'll be asking that tanks, arty and satchels be removed from RO2.

 

[StmRtn]

Someone needs to take up level design. After a few weeks, you'll be asking that tanks, arty and satchels be removed from RO2.

Firts tought in my head about this also.

 

[Bunny monster]

I really don't see the point in not implementing it just add limited artillery support and satchel charges so that you won't be able to destroy everything its just easy I mean why not make it like battlefield. Battlefield has a lot of gizmo for destroying buildings though not everybody abuses it. Why not the same with red orchestra I would love to see newly shaped maps by the destruction of environment.

 

[=GG= Mr Moe]

The Battlefield series kinda sucks IMO, I wouldn't want RO2 to be anything like it.

If you want to add more destruction, it has to add enough to gameplay to make a difference, not be a distraction to gameplay, and it has to be worth all the time, money, resources for creating and bug testing such destruction while not taking away from other things that might add more to the game.

At this point, I'm sure that TWI budget isn't even remotely close to that of EA/DICE and even if they had more money, I could think of many other things that would be nice for the game. Destruction like the Battlefield series wouldn't even be on the list.

 

[titsmcgee852]

Not only that, most importantly it has to be able to not unbalance or break the map when it happens

 

[Finlandiaperkele]

The Battlefield series kinda sucks IMO, I wouldn't want RO2 to be anything like it.

If you want to add more destruction, it has to add enough to gameplay to make a difference, not be a distraction to gameplay, and it has to be worth all the time, money, resources for creating and bug testing such destruction while not taking away from other things that might add more to the game.

At this point, I'm sure that TWI budget isn't even remotely close to that of EA/DICE and even if they had more money, I could think of many other things that would be nice for the game. Destruction like the Battlefield series wouldn't even be on the list.

Yeah...

But I would want Battlefield to be more like RO.

 

[Jpz38 Hetzer]

I would actually like to see some more destructable environments in RO2, nothing like betafield, just blow down some walls. Just imagine blasting open a wall with a T-34 or a anti tank gun (which i would love to see in this game, but thats another thread) and having your friends rush in with PPShs

 

[LugNut]

Agreed. I wouldn't mind seeing more strategically important items being destructible by direct tank fire and pretty much anything on the ground/short walls crushable by a tank.

Nothing silly like BF3 though.

It's more work for modders, I'd rather they spend their time on new content.

 

[Scum82]

Destructible environments could be done, eventually. I'm for the idea in concept but right now most games don't do it very well. If you shoot a shell at a reinforced concrete wall in most games it either magically explodes into dust and a number of preset lumps bounce about or it has the Crysis style "house is made of cardboard" issue. If anything there would be a hole in the wall and the shell would have to react to the metal in the structure, but it would also depend on how many times the wall has been shot and what shells are being used. Also bunkers would have to have wear and chip damage to them as opposed to the old "this target has 7000 health, at zero it explodes" logic.
Even if the tech does improve where such things are doable on a computer smaller than a house you would need one hell of an SDK for map makers to ever adopt the idea.

So maybe in 15 years. Now? No, most certainly not.

 

[Frostedfire]

Someone needs to take up level design. After a few weeks, you'll be asking that tanks, arty and satchels be removed from RO2.

try a few hours. You think it wouldn't be hard setting up a satchel objective compared to a cap point

also, you forgot getting cover removed as well

 

[Marsalkka Mahtimeisseli]

It would be enough for me if most of the props would be destroyable. It's annoying when a wooden barrel or something similiar blocks your way while driving a tank. Trees could also fall or snap in half under heavy bombardment. Maybe even blocking some roads with trees cut by engineers' satchels? Of course that would change gameplay quite a lot...

 

[Jank]

It would be enough for me if most of the props would be destroyable. It's annoying when a wooden barrel or something similiar blocks your way while driving a tank.

Agree with this, big time. Tanks should be able to run over a lot of the indestructible clutter on the maps.

 

[Twrecks]

Agree with this, big time. Tanks should be able to run over a lot of the indestructible clutter on the maps.

Agreed, a drive in the park on Fallen Fighters is any but.

Making destructible more mapping friendly would be a good place to start. For one, the desructible replication actor shouldn't be needed, compiling the map should automatically clear/populate the list.

Destructibles with states and damage types/ammount need to be included straight from the content browser, with the ability to edit the advanced properties once the asset is in the level.

Blowing up roofs allowing arty to penetrate into cover, first hit destroys roof section, next hit lands inside. Currently no destructible roof meshes.

Make Cover nodes that use destructibles assign themeselve to the destrucible during compiling, just as cover nodes populate objectives do currently.

Add stock fractured meshes for simple walls/fences. Crushing parts or blowing them up in sections. Right now, it's all or nothing.

All the above would take a lot of time and coding to implement. Down to return on investment, cost versus revenue. At this point, more vehicles are more likey to generate sales than destructible fluff and streamlining the SDK.

 

[Frostedfire]

All the above would take a lot of time and coding to implement. Down to return on investment, cost versus revenue. At this point, more vehicles are more likely to generate sales than destructible fluff and streamlining the SDK.

if only you could convince them to implement it into kf2 as well, to make demomen more useful than blowing themselves up

 

[Unus Offa Unus Nex]

It would be ok if the maps were the size of those seen in RO:Ost or DH, but on the maps we have now it would not prove very beneficial to gameplay.

 

[Jank]

It's even more important to be able to crush barrels and crates and flimsy walls when the map is small.