pakfront_37

Very excited by the prospect of CMC. I had attempted to write a (simpler) MP campaign program for CMBO many years ago but gave up in frustration. I was stumped by the inability to read the map, scenario and save game file formats, which meant OOBs and maps had to be input by hand and AAR had to extracted by hand. Mind numbing. When Mapping mission came out, I had another go - Mapping Mission did it's work well but OOBs and AARs were still brutal. So, again, I gave up. While I'm sure that the map making tools and OOB tools in CMC will be good, please don't forget those of us who like to do a little tinkering on our own. Even if the file format is closed (which is understandable to prevent cheating) please considering having a reasonable way to input and output data. XML or CSV would be fine for OOBs & AARs and even maps. This will allow motivated people to use current tools such as Excel or even write their own tools to help make the CMC experience even better. Interested in your thoughts on this topic. [ November 07, 2005, 11:18 AM: Message edited by: pakfront_37 ]

I realize I can turn the joystick OFF - but I like it for driving, just nothing else.

In the demo. SOmetimes whan I am in the gunner view, my turret drifts slightly to one direction or the other. I'd don't have Dual mode on, and I it happens with both SUO(?) on and off. It also seems like I can't reload when this is happening. I have a joystick (calibrated) connected to the computer, which is nice for driving. I suspect it is conflicting with my mouse inputs for aiming, as it also seems to make the oom flicker sometimes. Is there a known workaround?

PgUp/PgDn - in eyeball your 'optics' are still cracked. In this case cracking happened after the AI decided to throw itself on some Dragon's Teeth. Done it myself at other times though.

As an aside... I was totally impressed when my bad driving cracked my optics, obscuring my views. So I popped the hatch open and put my head out... but then the 'cracked glass' overlay was still drawn over my view.

So... always leave it open?

Besides opening the hatches on the model, what advantage does it have? I can still get all the commander views (pgUp/PgDn) with it closed.

So I;ve found an excellent way to get my rear kicked by the AI in a Quick Battle. Give him ATGs, some trenches and gradual slopes on a medium+ map. I've been doing this mostly as me Allied Brits, N. Africa, 1942. Dang if it isn't almost impossible to take out (and confirm) an entrenched ATG. I've been using 2 and 3 in. mortars, both on and off map. Direct HE from a Matilda doesn't phase him. I've gotten better at supressing them, timing my movements with my arty barrages, but it still takes too long to cross the map. Sooo... anyone got good tactics for taking out entrenched or foxholed ATGS?

What would XML do that plain text couldn't? Can XML be read by most spreadsheet programs?

I can understand Battlefront's reluctance to open up the program itself. Look and Quake et al. and the extent thay have to go to to prevent cheating with PunkBuster. It sucks. That being said, I can see a few places where the ability to read and write OOBs in simple text format would be super useful. Tab delimited text would be sufficent. Most useful for campaigns and meta-campaigns: -Read OOBs into the Scenario Editor. -Write out YOUR OWN OOBs during your turn and at end game. Both of these would be an immense boon for projects like CMMC, or for players trying to track what happened in a game. Maps could be written and read using a text or binary format. -In the map editor, read in Elevation, setup zones, Terrain data from an open map format. Write out would be nice too, but not as vital. This could be minimally supported, just a simple documentation of the format. No fancy API.

All the added scenery & increased density, dust etc look good, as do the new models. But I have one big complaint that carries over from CMBO and CMBB: There is still no shading on the ground! Even the sunny desert looks like a overcast day. Makes eyeballing distances and elevation changes very difficult as the ground munges into a low-contrast blah. I'd call this a play affecting issue, as I often have to use swing the camera around to get some idea of the elevation changes in a map. I'm not talking shadows or anything too fancy, just some basic diffuse shading based on a single light source (the sun) on the ground. Maybe not in the realm of the current engine? Would it be possible to prerender a shading map and slap it onto the terrain? Myth II used to do this and it made a huge difference in play. It also looks much better. Failing that, I'd really like to see more contrast in the CMAK overall. Try taking image 40 into Photoshop or similar and hitting autolevels. Notice how much more punch it has? It looks like a sunny day! Anyway, looking forward to AFAK. Hope MappingMission supports it too.

Ah, yes, both Von Hohen and I have been on the Diet Plan. A good 'un. I think that's where I first became aquainted with the strengths and weaknesses of the old KV-1. Reminds me of some of the slow, tough British tanks from CMBO. Churchill maybe?

Had a fun little TCP/IP QB last night with a friend last night. A Soviet Assault(me) on a German (him) position, October '42. We tried, as much as our limited knowledge allowed, to keep the forces historical. I purchased a '42 Infantry Battalion (w/ organic HMGs), some MG carriers, 4 platoons of t-34's of various models, and 2 platoons of KV-1s. Also, several 80mm offboard mortars and some air support. This was with about 40% casualties; so I ended up with an understrength inf battalion, 3 platoons of t-34s, 1 platoon of KV-1s, and 1 indy KV-1 and zilch for arty or air. Doh. Well, Russian arty is so dang slow anyway. Who needs 'em? Now, I felt a bit naughty for taking the KV-1s rather than t-70s or Valentines... replacing my lights with heavies. But for an assault, I can't imagine going in with the t-70s. so slow, so under armored. Internally, I argued I was in the schwerepunkt of the assault, and would have been allocated some KV-1s from on high (corps? army?) Was this in anyway justifiable historically? My opponent, the inimitable and unspellable Von Hohenhausen, played his Panzer IIIs and IV well, and fought me to a draw (but, oh, so close. Just two more turns!) Says he had quite a fright when he saw the KVs. So, in a friendly way, we are wondering if what I did was cricket. He's brushing up his skills for CMMC2, so the historicity will be relevant in the future. Would it have been more historical to: if not the schwerepunkt, (pardon any mispelling) Have no KVs, just t-34s, light tanks, and maybe some SMG tank riders? if the schwerepunkt, HAve more KVs, fewer inf and t-34s? Maybe pioneers rather than rifles? Or something all together different? Thanks for your time, hope this is an interseting topic.

LAst night in a TCP/IP mechanized QB, I had excellent experinces with both rifle grenades and engineering charges. An American squad and a half on a flank scouting mission took out an AA gun with a rifle grenade. I had a 'zook 10meters behind, but it never got a chance to fire. IIRC the rilfe squad was about 30 -40m from the AA gun. At about the same time I had a veteran platoon of american engineers come upon a platoon of dug in Fallsch-whatevers. THose stinkers were Hidden in some dense woods, so by the time my troops spotted them, they were falling into the foxholes. I cursed myself for not scouting properly (it just seemed so unlikely my opponent would have put anyone so far out. ) and watched the movie play, expecting heavy losses. 3 satchel charges later, the foxholes were cleared, 2 german squads were eliminated and another on the run. The removal of that AA gun on my flank and the success I had with the engineers pretty much assured my victory. Though it was in doubt 2 turns later as I watched two bazooka teams expend 18 rounds on a Puma without even denting it. Nothing a nice shot from a greyhound didn;t clear up though. I intend to run a few tests to see if this is behavior I can depended on, or if I was just damned lucky.

Is this possible? CMBO freezes when I try it. I can see why this would not be allowed, as it would be easy to cheat. However, I would like to retry a few QBs (Maps and OBs, and just Maps) for learning purposes. Is there another mechanism for doing so? If not, is it possible to load a scenario map, but have random or modifiable OBs?