Jump to content

poorfish

Members
  • Posts

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Converted

  • Biography
    Ex mil 1966-1970
  • Location
    Wisconsin
  • Interests
    CM
  • Occupation
    Landscape

Recent Profile Visitors

504 profile views

poorfish's Achievements

Member

Member (2/3)

0

Reputation

  1. Tried all that and just does not work for me. Too many license keys, parts, pieces, exceptions, wasted time, repeated failure. Thanks again.
  2. I'm giving up once again - all the advice works, then fails on the next run. and that is just up to the first activation which proclaims the game does not exist; RT just ends up in a black screen. There is just too many varied steps depending on various approaches to various parts. Seamless, it is not. Phil at the help desk years ago, went through all the possibilities he could think of but none worked then as now. If I were to go forward, it would be with new purchases - as the old simply are too involved, complex. and usually prone to failure, leading to frustration and a colossal waste of time to no fruitful end. Thanks for your help guys, Chris
  3. wait there is one other problem Originally I got the CD but no longer have CD player. Surely that version would not fire off under 10.14. What do I do? Would downloading the base version again be usable on 10.14 to upgrade?
  4. Thanks Dave, I assume that "you count NOT install them" means to install them. I believe I have all the original info. Looking back the 3.0 installs did not go well, and I had to open a ticket, but the help did not work either. I remember trying to do all the upgrades in order several times; it was a lot of time consuming work only to fail at the end with the 3.11 upgrade and the activation failure - I think I lost interest about there: 2014. Perhaps there is a list somewhere of the patches and upgrades and the order in which to apply them to both RT and CMBN. This is WAY more complicated than it needs to be.
  5. What is the best way to upgrade from 10.68 (Snow Leopard) to 10.15 Catalina? The original install is on a 2009 Mac Mini; the new install will be on an iMac 2019 5K 3.1 GHz 6 core. I bought both CBMN plus Commonwealth Forces and Market Garden, and then Red Thunder in their 1.0 versions; the subsequent engine upgrades to 3.0 worked, but after that no joy. So I never went beyond that. I sent some of the files via Bluetooth to the iMac but hesitate going further lest I screw something up. Would it be more efficient and less touble to just repurchase the games and the modules? Thanks
  6. FWIW: On my Mac Mini early 2009, the scenario takes a long time to load using scenario test mode, then after hitting start button, then surrendering, the HD grinds and grids before finally returning to main interface. On quitting the app, the HD grinds away again for a few more seconds.; this never happens with other smaller scenarios - I thought it was just my old mac and near nonexistent graphics capability.
  7. "How to make the German AI move west as a single mass. And the Russian AI to move to block them???" If all the German forces are A1 for example, the just make a swath across the map in the AI, they will usually move as one, but sometimes some units will chose the same path to the same point resulting in unit slowdowns. Keep making sucessive swaths until the goal is reached. For the Russians who are trying to stop them, there are any number of tactics that could be used - which is the most likely approch the Germans will use to reach the exit, what forces will be used when and how to achieve that, and so on. The German part of the AI is realitively easy compared to the decisions the Russian AI will have to accomplish to stop them. As the AI author, you have to decide who's going to win in the end or can either side win with each having the correct balance of forces. Else is there a historical battle you can model the forces/outcome and so model the AI? I'm sure others will have a different approach, so the above is not the last word by any streach ...
  8. Right now I can't find the post/page were I saw the above ref to (APS) and (ERA). The first may refer to Active Protetion Systems and the latter to Extended Range Ammunition. One variation was for one service and the other for another, however. All were M1A2 SEP versions. My comment was in ref to the original posted question about M1A3's existance/non-existance. All I know.
  9. M1A3 was the original thought for naming the next iteration of the M1 series but for reaons unfathomabe to mortals it was decided to call it the M1A2 SEPv2 (APS) Abrams for the Army and M1A2 SEPv2 (ERA) Abrams for the Marines - or vice versa. See here for one: http://defense-update.com/products/m/M1A2SEP.htm
  10. Today, we added parameters for both sides. After much heated discussions, it was settled that we would use the same parameters for both sides. We used the value of 25 for all of the first column on the left. These remain arbitrary, in any case. Last night's battle took about an hour to conclude. One poor Russian group misread their map and came out right on top of a German machine gun nest. Had to avert our eyes, so senseless was the slaughter. We still had a problem with troops keeping up and arriving at the front on time to make a difference. One expert suggested we divert the group in question from the northeasterly Crossroads assignment to a direct southern route to the front to solve this perplexing problem. It remains to be seen if the main force tasked with hitting the Crossroads first can take it successfully with minimal losses before proceeding to the front. 2 Company acquitted itself well in their assigned tack of harassing the enemy's rear. We'll run the changes today and see what happens. Note 1: the Russian forces ran against stationary and undirected German forces, since this is basically testing the Russian AI. Note 2: We corrected the German, as suggested. Chris
  11. Well, the first thing we did here was bring in a bunch of people - loggers, road builders, landscapers, as well as hire a few local farmers to scout for routes through the dense woods. Then we set to work on the balance of forces.; too lopsided for the Russians and too many for low powered graphics boxes. We had achieved a good balance at 455 troops per side, but the foot soldiers couldn't keep up with mechanized units, do we had to hire some truck drivers; this put the Russians at a slight numerical advantage, but the drivers are non-combatants anyway. Running the stock AI resulted in a complete rout of the poor Russians, so we had to work on that as well. Our military advisors said the overall plan was sound, but lacked the dedicated resources and refinements needed. Head on attacks are very bloody and do not always work. 2 company was given some mechanized units to complete a rear encirclement, while a part of the main was split to begin an attack in the north. Going over the terrain objectives for both sides, some were added, while others were downsized. The German units and weapons were more properly deployed to suitable positions. The German and Russian artillery and air support were thought superfluous to the engagement and eliminated; those resources are need on other fronts - suck it up. The PAKs and the panzerfausts were degraded as stated in the mission statement. After many iterations, the battle remains bloody with heavy loses on both sides, but the Russians seem to be gaining a slight advantage. At some point, later in testing, we will perhaps be able to snag a few Tigers or Panthers when they become available to replace the inferior Panzers and other mechanized units. We'll see. Would love to send a copy, have no idea how. Chris This resulted in an overall reduction in file size by some 75K.
  12. Yes, but then there is the money issue. What effects me likely effects many others. The work I used to do drove my upgrades, not games. Again not every one has the money, time, or inclination to upgrade. Which makes my point. Smaller, cleaner scenarios will keep and encourage more people to continue to buy and play, than large complex one ever will.
  13. I second poesel71's criticism of the Repository - it sucks. I commented yesterday about the character limit, but thought perhaps I was wrong. There are 3 comments of the scenario I posted a few years back; one is mine which was truncated and so made no sense. Another was a recent comment to which I replied. And clicking the Leave Comment button made the whole thing vanish. Are comments over 1500 character automatically deleted or do they have to wait to be checked by a monitor? Doesn't matter really as there are no comment guidelines on the page - maybe somewhere else, but again that is irrelevant. BF Admin and others need to re-look at the whole Repository concept. There must be more user friendly ones available or just tweak the existing code. We users want to comment, and scenario designers want to be commented to, but the present system seems to actively discourage it. And active discouragement leads to fewer new maps and gives the appearance to some that the game is dying. -- On a Second Front Maps are growing increasingly larger and more complex, perhaps faster than users can upgrade their machines to render the evermore complex scenarios. I have this problem with my macmini 3,1 and must edit scenarios to make render times acceptable, and now with MG the render time is horrendous. To that end, I have edited several of the Master Maps so they now load faster. To scenario authors: I would encourage you to make smaller, tighter, less graphically complex scenarios. For instance: try not to place trees etc in every fence/hedge row square, make sure your roads are complete and properly formed ... not to mention the placing hundreds of Flavor Objects ... I have to contanly keep the numbr of troops and vehicles on screen way below 1000, else machine gun fire is relagated to the occassional pop ... pop ... pop.
×
×
  • Create New...