Pyewacket

I checked this and you're right!! Thanks very much.. I'll include this tip in the instruction in the next version (unfortunately there's nothing what I can code to prevent this, so you have to put the mouse over the map....)

CMBO could be problematic. Let me have a look at the weekend...

new version: Vineyard -> Open Steppe -> Open Railroad fixed Option button on the form for the user to choose a) boccage -> stone wall boccage -> hedge (it seems to me these are the only possibilities which make sense)

map converter 1.0 sorry...

@Desertfox: I put the both files (exe and if exe don't work a setup programm) on this page: web]www.pyes-ct.de/mc.html]web page

yes, that's a mistake..I simply forgot that. Is it better to replace Steppe with Open? and Vineyards with Open? -Factories are replaced with big houses, there's nothing similar in CMAK. - big hedges in CMAK are fences in CMBB. I didn't notice that there are normal hedges in CMBB. A conversion to normal hedges would be better I guess!? That's what I can't get rid off. It is indeed memory related. The only thing I can recommend is save memory by closing all other applications and don't run both CMAK and CMBB at the same time (then there're less error messages..)

Yes. (if it works this is what it should handle)

I wrote a programm and I am curious if it runs on other pc's. Is there anybody interested in testing an app (around 100 KB)? The app should be able to convert CMAK maps in CMBB maps or battle in scenario maps and vice versa. If there's someone interested I would like to email the exe file. Thanks in advance.

I am no computer expert, so forgive me for any stupid answer. But I had the same problem some time ago. The problem was that the fan was damaged. When CMAK or CMBB runs the processor has a lot to do and heats up. And my PIII (900 MHz) turned off because of the overheating.I thing the PIII has a 'turning off' mechanism to avoid damages or so...

Astonishing that Vet's are in a better physical condition than Reg's!! Thanks for the test.

So what are you going to programm, jacobs_ladder2?

I got the book yesterday and couldn't stop to read. It's great!! Many thanks to Tom for his hard and successful work. I searched for a long time to find some information on small unit behaviour. But as the author said on the first pages most of the books look at the strategic level of operation. Sometimes you find some anecdotes but they are rare and not well sorted. So this book gives you tons of stories from a tactical point of view. My advice is: Buy it!!! Jens

@savagegoose if you've some questions or comments/critics just email or post them. thank you in advance. @Pappy113 Great! I've send you a mail. @all btw: If anybody needs a special unit (*.dat) file for the gamemaster.exe (CMAK/CMBB), just drop me a line and tell me the year and month. It takes 3-4 days to create such a file.

thank you. Unfortunately I didn't received any critics or realistic proposals. So I am going to finish the project. Maybe there's someone who likes to use it in a campaign some time later and then I could make some additional /specific changes.... I will add a manual in the coming week/s just to finish the thing for myself. Thanks for your reply Jens

Version 0.2 is ready. new features: - define HQ bonuses - define experience of each unit in a platoon - create battles with groups dug in. This means if the group carries fortifications like TRP, wire, mines etc. with it, such things will be exported to cm only if you say the group is dig in. If the group is not dig in, these fortifications will be not be exported to cm. This way you can define an individual amount of mines , wire etc. for each group used in a defensive situation. These changes lead to a different file structure of group and battle files. So, those files from version 0.1 are not compatible with the version 0.2. Jens

Dschugaschwili, thanks!!

oops Dschugaschwili. You're faster... I have no idea what you're doing there, but the result (if it's right) is great. Is this the prove for: if you miss the center of hull up , there's a chance to hit the tanks outer part. If you miss the center of a hull down you hit nothing. right?

I am not a statistican (not really sure about what you're talking ), so correct me with the following. The initial question was: Due to the fact the turret of a PzIV is the weakpoint, is it better to stay in hull down or hull up? So assume there's a gun which is able to penetrate the PzIVs turret only (no other parts). Assume also the gunner is excellent, means he accurate hits every target with each shot. As somebody said (I think, or not? not sure anymore) the gunner will always aim at the center of what is visible of the the PzIV (is this the case?) . Then, no shot will hit the turret, PzIV alive (hull up)! If in perfect hull down the gunner will shoot at the turret, PzIV dead (hull down)! In reality the gunner would shoot at the turret no matter how much he sees from the tank. But is there an abstraction in CM? Isn't the bell you're talking about a prove that the gunner aims always at the visible center of a tank? can your models give us the final answer what we should do with a PzIV?

LOL, but you're right! I just wanted to know how many hits the PzIV gets in his turret in hull down and how many when fully visible no!

mmmh, what I'd like to know is simple the ratio of hitting the tank and missing it. e.g. let's say in the first test the PzIV was hit with every shot. and in the second every 3rd shot hit, then we would have: 1/6 lower hull * 1,0 = 1/6 1/2 upper hull * 1,0 = 1/2 1/3 turret * 1,0 = 1/3 For a hull-down tank: 1/4 upper hull * 1/3 = 1/12 3/4 turret * 1/3 = 1/4 This would mean that in hull down you get less hits in the turret........

Well, there's no campaign thing included in the CM program. So some guys do it on their own. i.e. they collect some maps, make some rules for a strategic campaign, print a strategic map (like those in Panzer General, or a real map from a certain area) and play it (means they move armies or so over a strategic map and when they meet an enemy the battle is fought in CM). There's usually a game master/manager who is responsable for checking the rules and he's in charge of making the setup for a CM battle. After the battle the gamemaster has to count the losses and to update the armies. It's hard to find such gamemasters because you've to spent a lot of time. So the toppic you're in is a windows tool to support gamemasters to count losses and manage the armies. Just something to save time. It's not really something for a solo play or so...

Ah, so it's the space and the turret difference!! Thanks, good explanation!

Just one question bewteen your discussion: After reading this thread I made some tests/training with tanks vs. tanks (1943) . Pz IV and Pz.III vs T34. So here is my question, why the Pz.III can eat lots of Russian shells before being KO while the Pz. IV blew up mostly after the first hit? Pz.IV armor is 80 and Pz.III 50+20. So who knows the reason?

@Kingofthehill Sorry, I don't know if 'Mapping Mission' is able to transfer cmbb maps to cmak. I am sure this can be coded because in 'Mapping Mission' mouseclicks are generated, so the app knows where to click in cmbb for a special tile. If there were a list where a tile is in cmbb located and a list where the same tile is in cmak located, it would be possible to make a tranfer. You should ask Tankersley if he's working on such a thing. 'Mapping Mission' is not that complicated, just play around with it some time and then you get used to it. The cool thing is that you can copy and paste areas and draw roads just with moving the mouse.... @Hawk done!

Thanks, found it!!