Jump to content

Macisle

Members
  • Content Count

    1,579
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    8

Macisle last won the day on March 7

Macisle had the most liked content!

About Macisle

  • Rank
    Senior Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Macisle

    Kharkov Map Sneak Peak

    I just found some screenies I forgot I took. I may as well post them, as they show some cool close quarters fighting and don't give away any secrets. Here they are: A scout team discovers a full squad of Germans and is taken out. Several teams are then sent in to attack from different sides. Bodies start dropping and some Germans begin moving outside. The schreck man makes a run for it. He doesn't make it. More men drop as the Germans continue to filter outside. One German surrenders. However, a winner is unclear and both sides are sweating the encounter. Until... My final team in lets go with its last jet of fuel. That does it for the Germans and the few remaining men start to bug out across the street. But...only to discover that the Soviets now have it well covered.
  2. Macisle

    Kharkov Map Sneak Peak

    Oh, wow. That's gonna' be a major upgrade! I just went from a GTX 550 Ti 2GB to a 1060 6GB and that made a massive difference in map size usage. Once I upgrade my MB, I should get even more juice out of the card, as right now, it's having to slum it in a PCIe2 slot instead of the 3 it wants. Yeah, I'm also more interested in the 41/42 period. I would LOVE to have units from that period to play on my map. I've done some fun playtesting using Sicherung troops to simulate earlier German units by adding an LMG34 team for each squad. That gives the right weapon mix, except for the occasional PF. Soviets are harder as all the formations and teams in CMRT are pretty light on the number of Mosin Nagants. I sure wish we could fully customize -- or had access to earlier formations and teams. One playtest I did was trying to dig fanatic green Soviets out of a factory area using simulated early period German veterans supported by PIIs (used the Stalingrad mod textures for the PIIs). Big fun.
  3. Macisle

    Kharkov Map Sneak Peak

    Thanks! CMRT has a certain magic for me. I was always a Western Front guy, but somehow, CMRT got me in a way that CMBB didn't and it hasn't let me go yet. Since the title came out, my WWII interest area has shifted a lot more to the EF as well. I'll probably be upgrading my CPU, MB and RAM before the map gets finished. That will determine if I think the whole map can be used at once. Probably not. However, even if it can, the 4-hour limit might be too prohibitive to make it across the map without having to resort to suicidal advance speeds. Either that, or I go way light on unit density -- which I don't want to do. So, 4 very long battles will likely still be the format. I sure would like to be able to do a CMx1 style operation with this. From what I remember, that would allow for permanent damage (and wrecks? It's been so long...I think they stayed, didn't they?).
  4. Macisle

    Kharkov Map Sneak Peak

    Thanks! I was sorely tempted to show more, but I don't want to give too much away. There were lots of image and video-worthy moments in the fight. After two separate medium howitzer attacks on the factory, a heavy howitzer attack very near, and the collapse of multiple sections, there were still defenders putting out strong fire when I tried to advance. So, I brought up a tank, took out the defenders I could see and dropped the last section in the south-facing row of sections. Then, exactly what I thought might happen did. As the section collapsed, a schreck man in the section still standing behind it appeared out of the smoke and burned my tank. Classic, and exactly what I'm trying to do with these constructions. At the end of the fight, the remnants of quite a few defending units had all piled into the two-story building extension on the north-facing side (you can see it in the picture of the real building). That was the last part of the building that was totally safe from fire. Honesty, I'm pretty impressed with how the TacAI is handling this kind of terrain. It seems to use it significantly better than it does stock urban maps -- both in setup location choice and routing paths. I'm very pleased with the combat and building path bugs/oopsies are no worse than on a stock map.
  5. Macisle

    Kharkov Map Sneak Peak

    Okay, last picture post before I go into my cave for a few months. I've made some good progress over the last few weeks and just finished kicking the tires on a fresh-out-of-the-oven block section near the NE bridge. Screenies: Soviet MG team moving forward (the wall on the right has no windows in real life either). German defenders engaging while they still have fire parity. They lose it once the MG team gets into place. Aftermath on the south side of large factory overlooking the NE bridge. This building will be the scene of epic contests and/or frequent flattening, as it provides superb overwatch of the NE bridge for infantry. Not much will get across as long as the defender has at least one form of MG and a panzerschreck in there. The factory in real life from the north side facing south. The on map building has the same view of the bridge. You can also just make out the apartment building at the far right. That will need to be neutralized for safe bridge crossings, too. Of course, the attacker will have to think about what he wants to keep for his own future overwatch positions as well. Spend the resources to take, or flatten? That's it for now. Over-n'out!
  6. That's very true on the designer's view vs. the player's. Switching to Scenario Author Test mode from regular full FOW play modes can be like going from trembling before the mighty WOZ to snickering at the funny little man behind the curtain. Then again, having full view of every move a human opponent is making might leave you less than impressed -- even if it's a good player. After all, in real war, great effort is made to keep the enemy guessing for a reason. Many a successful historical attack or defense would have failed if the enemy had had just a bit more intel. On the Point Neutral Exits, there is so much scenario design potential there for what looks like a very light coding job. Basically, one more option is added to the Terrain Objective type drop down menu. Just below Exit, Point Neutral Exit (or maybe "Logistical Exit") would be added. The on-map functionality of the exit would use the exact same code as now. It would just be divorced from awarding Unit Objective points. In other words, it would work like this: Standard Exit: Unit Objective points are awarded to the opposing player for any friendly units designated as Unit Objectives that do not exit during the scenario. Point Neutral Exit: Player can exit his units on a friendly Point Neutral Exit at any time and no Unit Objective points are awarded to the opposing player for the exited units, whether they are designated as Unit Objectives or not. So, I would assume you couldn't combine the two, as long as you were keeping the coding job simple. It would be one type of exit per map (though you could have multiple instances of the same type on one map). You could, of course, make it a bigger coding job by offering the ability to mix, but I don't think that is needed. Trying to do that would put it into the thread title category.
  7. Would have still had the problem of what to do with the now ammo-depleted AGs when fresh troops would be arriving soon to use their Group number. Also, I think most players would choose getting casualty points for kills over what was essentially neat eye candy for a few minutes early in the scenario. Oh, well. Maybe one day...
  8. Macisle

    Broken tacAI

    I can't imagine playing the game now without extensive use of target arcs (mainly circular to limit engagement range). It hurts when I see a video where players have their HQs running around without arcs to limit their exposure. Sometimes, I even see experienced players leave their ATGs unhidden at start. In a fairly recent video series (WWII title), the presenter made use of Target Armor arcs for his ATGs but left them unhidden at start, thinking that low bocage in winter would be enough cover. They were spotted and knocked out, causing comments about regretting their purchase and "ATGs in CM." If he had hidden them and waited a bit to unhide, he probably would have scored at least one kill per gun. These days, I tend to start with all infantry having 50 m TA (ArTA and different ranges for AT teams) and then let them off the leash as needed. HQs seldom come off the leash unless something dramatic is called for. ATGs nearly always start hidden with ArTA (I play WWII titles almost exclusively).
  9. Yeah. Getting Group recycling to work was very satisfying. On the other hand, that made not having point-neutral exits that much more frustrating. I spent a whole day perfecting the orchestration of a platoon of heavy assault guns to come in, burn up their ammo in AI Area Fire, then exit, to be replaced in their Group by fresh troops that would stay on the map. It all worked beautifully. Then, I found out that it was a choice between ditching casualty points or ditching my orchestration. I made the obvious, if painful choice of ditching the orchestration. Aargh.🙁 Originally, I was planning to do a German AI attack version of Radzy, too. After messing around with unloading APC troops and such, I decided that the lack of PN exits and maximum number of groups made it too much work to pull of my vision. So, I gave up on it.
  10. Yeah, same here. I'm sticking with it, even if it doesn't actually do anything. It makes me feel better and heightens the immersion for me.
  11. I haven't done systematic testing, but when my vehicles bog, a trick I do that seems to help is to issue a timed pause followed by slow forward or reverse.
  12. Oh, I do make use of order stances. In Radzy, most Soviets are on Active most of the time.
  13. Lack of feedback just seems to be the nature of the beast these days. I think it will only get worse, as people spread their limited free time across ever more entertainment options. I've been guilty of it myself, so perhaps this is my karma.🙂 You've definitely been a hero on the forums with advice, suggestions, and analysis. I've picked up a number of things from your posts over the years. Thanks for taking the time to write them! That's interesting on intel settings. I've literally never touched them and had no idea. -Always have them on no intel. At some point, I'll have to tinker with them. Thanks!
  14. Yeah, you're right on the topic relevance. When I started typing, I wasn't intending to get into as much detail as I did in that area. That's a very good idea on the "AI Plan Solution Center" thread. As you say, let's let the patch hit, kick the tires and then have at it. Another thread topic that might be useful is "QB Map Design: Best Practices" or some such. I haven't taken the time to search yet, but I'd like to gather info on that topic for my big CMRT map project. The master can produce a fair number of slices. I'd like to include some QB maps when I release the scenarios (will be awhile--after the CMRT module is released) and need to study up on QB design techniques. I know a few tricks like using higher floor assignments in setup painting to put infantry in buildings and ATGs outside when they are in a mixed group. However, there may be other good ideas that I'm unaware of. I'd really like to be able to isolate unit types for certain Groups. Yeah, that's the one. Of course, lots of time spent doesn't guarantee quality. I did put quite a lot of effort into it though, and learned a lot along the way. Last time I checked, there were still no comments or ratings for it. A fair number of downloads, however. I'd love to get your feedback on it down the line when you are set up for it and have the time. I'll be sure to give yours a run when I have time (wasn't aware of that one -- I'm excited!). Right now, I'm spending pretty much all of my game time working on my Kharkiveskya map for CMRT. It's a huge project for one person. I knew it was big going in, but had no idea what I was really getting myself in for. I didn't with Radzy, either. Quite a lot of the time spent was determining what the AI could do, honing it, and tailoring the player's forces and the timing of everything to add the needed traction for the AI. It's meant to be a meaty endeavor for veteran CM players who will hang in there for the whole battle. One trick I picked up there for use with T-34/76s: AI Area Fire will cause the TC to keep his head down safe, even though his hatch is open. So, if you want to keep him safe from small arms fire when the AI is too stupid to button up, you can just paint a red tile he has no LOS to and that will do it. I did a lot of testing and frankly, the only Soviet AFV that has decent situational awareness under AI command is the T-34/85. And that is still not as good as the German tanks. In one test, a single Veteran Jgdpz IV took out an entire company of T-34/76s in a frontal on frontal engagement with the German in stationary ambush as the Soviets rolled in. The AI just couldn't see anything. A human player would have done something like area fire the company onto the Jgdpz IVs position, but of course, the AI can't do that. Thus the great number of hours of testing, testing, testing. And, of course, a big chunk of time was spent trying to make what I wanted to do work with only 16 groups. That wasn't easy.
  15. Another worth-the-cost AI Plan functionality enhancement that I forgot to add: Group type selection for Quick Battle AI Plans. This would give the ability for the designer to, if desired, select which type of unit goes into a particular Group (ATG, AFV, FO, HMG, etc.). I think this would go a long way to alleviate current SP QB issues. Maybe allow the designer a percentage parameter so that some units could be randomly assigned if desired (like 80% AFVs assigned, 20% unassigned).
×