Jump to content

ww2steel

Members
  • Content Count

    356
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

ww2steel last won the day on April 24 2015

ww2steel had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About ww2steel

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 01/01/1977

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://www.ww2steel.com

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location:
    Richmond, VA

Converted

  • Location
    Richmond, Va
  • Interests
    Flight, WW2 Europe
  • Occupation
    Pilot

Recent Profile Visitors

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

  1. Thanks, after all of the problems with the super long download out here in a rural area (continually failing in Win 10 / Edge), moving strings, mods, etc., from the old computer... I've literally been working on this off and on for days. Then it's broken. Yay. Sorry not to adequately search before posting. Yes, those people are experiencing the same/ similar problems as I. Anything further I will post there.
  2. Similar problem here. QB Mix vs Mix, click suggestions and kaboom- I'm looking at my desktop.
  3. As said, Win 10 on a new PC. As soon as I QB and click "suggestions" for the force it breaks and exits saying that the game exe has stopped working. Very frustrating. I don't know if it's a Win 10 problem, a hardware conflict, or a CMBN 3.11 issue. I am running CMBN 2.? on my laptop just fine but didn't have a spare 10gb to download the 3.0 engine update (I discovered after I paid for it). (No mods, No anti virus) Thanks.
  4. Lt Bull: The AI is coded for the Russians. All you should have to do is a SP game, as Germans, set a 1m arc so your guy won't fire if he sees someone, and relax. In about 2 mins a stream of dudes will run by you mostly unspotted. (I do it with scernario author test on, so I can see the progress.) I will look for the blue line creep you are talking about. I have a few thoughts on it, but will wait until I have tested it specifically. (Edit:) I don't do Dropbox so I didn't download, but I can't duplicate. So far I am only seeing it remain constant. Is this only in the editor for you, or throughout the game? Is it always present or randomly occuring? Yes, illumination would be great. It's already rendered awesomely for visuals in CMx2. Fires, including placable ones such as street lights (more modern, mostly CMSF/ CMBS), fires, and also toggleable building lights. Illumination rounds and flares would be top notch. While I certainly don't want to abandon night/ low light as it is (I have always found it quite enjoyable in CM), I do wish they would fix this current bug. Any improvements they can add I am all for and happy to support monetarily. I just wish they'd find more people to help code these things so we could get them faster. Mike
  5. There, all set for Battlefront to incorporate. Just playing around, Mike
  6. I just tested CMBN v2.12 (with both modules; bought but haven't installed the massive 10gb 3.0 file), and CMBB. Okay, several points: (Yes, I know I'm contradicting myself about not arguing.) 1) Well, duh, the reason people keep "burbling on" about the LOS tool (a terminology hold-over from CMx1) is because it's the ONLY FRIGGIN WAY WE CAN TELL HOW FAR OUR TROOPS CAN SEE! It isn't rendered, it isn't defined, and I can't ask my troops... wait, yes I can! Battlefront gave me this cool little tool that started with CMBO IIRC, 15 years ago, it goes from light blue to dark blue and pink where I can't see anymore. Isn't that cool?!? So nice of them to keep the tradition going all this time. 2) The LOS tool DID tell you that in CM games for over a decade (a reasonable *max* spotting distance). 3) An identical test in CMBN v2.12 done on the same date at both 1900 and 2000 give average spotting distances of a single running soldier out to a reasonable average of 202m, max spot 316, min spot 59m. LOS indicates 390m. I'd say it kinda correlates. 3.5) Why does LOS indicate different in CMBN- 2Sep 1900 CMBN 390m, CMRT 83m. Is Ukrainian fog somehow different? Maybe Chernobyl makes it foggier, no… wait. Line of Sight is how far you can see or spot. This is reduced in low light conditions. Light fog is light for optical clarify whether it’s 1200 or 2300. The game is clearly NOT giving visibility, because that doesn’t change day or night. So the game is clearly, somehow, trying to give you an idea how far away your guys can identify targets of some type. 4) Better soldiers spot better bc of better training and discipline, not bc they don't have cataracts. Well, usually. 5) In aviation (which is pretty much what modern international meteorology is based upon), fog starts at 1/2sm. That's 805m. As CM uses identical terminology as aviation haze, mist, fog, etc, I'd say it also correlates. 6) I think there is a significant difference between "light fog" and once in a lifetime I can't see someone standing in front of my car fog. 7) Just about everyone has seen fog. I have routinely (in real life) landed corporate jets and airliners at 1/2sm / 1800 RVR AKA "light fog", at night (have gone lower when/ where legal). I have routinely taken off in jets down to 500 RVR which is "heavy fog" in anyone's book. Night is actually easier than day. Granted, there are runway lights. Some airlines can go even lower. However, if the visibility at the DA was such that I could run over a T-34 during taxi, without noticing it, we all would have been dead (kidding)... or actually just gone to the alternate. Visibility below 100m / 300' is very rare. Personally, I compare the measurable results of professional experience combined with thousands of airports that report extremely reliable weather over an apparently once in a lifetime experience. Maybe they should make that the title of a setting in the game- Light Fog, Fog, Heavy Fog, and “One Time with my Dad Super-Doom, Zombie Movie Fog”. I think I'll add that to my strings file now. 8) CMBB Sep’44, Dusk, Fog (no light fog) gives ~190m LOS with regular initial spotting of infantry to about 100m, retention of those targets to about 200m (difficult due to Borg spotting). Man, CMBB sure still is fun! 9) The general consensus is that low vis in v3.0 engine is busted. That consensus includes CMBN v2.12 and CMBB. Somebody pass me my friggin cactus, Mike
  7. I thought there was just one "Ring to rule them all": I tried in foxholes "light" fog, the Russians run to within 5m before spotting ever occurs. (Of course, the German in the foxhole gets spotted just as quickly.) Trying out other fog states next.
  8. Hi again. I've done a bunch of testing. Unlimited vis scenarios I'm good with their spotting distances. Try this scenario. 1900, 2Sep (dusk but sky is otherwise light if set to "clear", full Moon- not up yet), LIGHT fog. (Matches my original scenario.) http://ww2steel.com/temp/Spotting%20tests.btt Play as Germans, Scenario Author, don't forget to place a very small arc facing out of the window your guy is looking at, don't hide him or anything. AI will do the rest. 16 dismounted Soviet truck drivers will reach you at a jog in about 3 mins. On average, you will see about 3 of them. The rest will pass about 11m from your guy, completely unseen. That, to me, is NOT light fog. Everyone will have their own definition. Please let me know if you have significantly different results. Mike
  9. Yeah... you don't need to repeat yourself. I'm not a noob, I did read your post, and I'm not here to argue (especially when we seem to mostly agree). I have hit this combination of fog / dusk before in CM games a thousand times before, which is precisely WHY I came here to post the abnormality. I have had this problem several times since using the 3.0 engine. As we have both indicated, it seems to be an engine problem. In my work I deal regularly with visibility. I know what 500 RVR looks like; I know what 1600 RVR looks like. I understand that just because you have LOS to 200m doesn't mean you can detect a person standing in full view at 200m, that it means that a light source would be visible at 200m (as in, how they do RVR readings). I think we also agree that 80m visibility, as previously described, at 7pm in September, would lead to detection of someone walking down the street towards you at ranges exceeding 2-3m. I'm not talking occasionally, I'm talking there were NO detections of troops (not firing) beyond 2-3m. If you think that that range is intended, fine. It seems a bit short to me. Regards, Mike
  10. Approximately 19:35, sunset whatever time for Ukraine in Sep'44, light fog, so yes, clearly reduced vis. But not 2-3m. I have noticed before that with long visibility indicated (200-300m) at night that vehicles can literally pass each-other and not see anything. I guess that means that they would return fire at muzzle flashes to 200m, but that due to the dark they can't see their hands in front of their faces? That was my last frustrating night battle. Line of tanks, several hundred meters vis indicated, German vehicles drove unseen through my line of tanks and assault guns spaced about 20m apart in open grass. I forgot to put this into the previous post, but (CMx2 only) extensively playing CMSF, a lot of time in CMBN (pre-3.0), and only a little time in CMBS- I have ONLY noticed this in CMRT. I wonder if this is a 3.0 problem? I'll manually set up the game same as before and see what happens. It was a QB though, so there will be variables. If it does it again I'll post a savegame. Mike
  11. I actually came on here to ask about exactly this very topic, and saw it already up and running. I just exited the game yesterday with a 3-finger-salute (Ctl-Alt-Del) because I was so incredibly frustrated with exactly this. QB, urban map, 19:10 start, overcast, light fog. At least 80m indicated visibility. Defending as Russians. Germans start to move immediately, I get the "I think they're over there" all over their assembly area. My guys got POUNDED by heavy arty. After all dust had cleared, suppression had stopped I have had no contact. Maybe 20 mins passes. Then I start getting the possible enemy icon, moving through my lines. My guys are unsuppressed, with multiple, fully interlocking fields of view. Enemy Infantry has moved through my lines in full view of my guys. There's a 250/9 struggling to drive around and literally touching my SU-76 (which I've had significant spotting problems from before). Soon it becomes clear that after very light contact that the entire German unit has moved through my lines. Now I have to try to attack a numerically superior force in my own rear area. Every now and then I bump into the Germans, usually with murderous results to my guys at about 2m. Every now and then my T-34 spots someone, but does not fire, possibly due to the extended aiming times at high elevation angles because the enemy is usually spotted about an arm's length of my tank. I get the bow MG to fire a little sometimes. My tank won't shoot so I bring in infantry. 2 teams, 2nd floor of different buildings, maybe 12m from a few Germans laying or kneeling beside a building in the street. Full LOS, (T-34 still won't fire) they can't see them. Period. The Germans start to crawl away so I order area fire fire with the infantry. Sure enough, my T-34 is immobilized. Infantry NEVER spotted the Germans. No supression, 12m, no map objects interfering (trees, grass, smoke, elves) full LOS. Over and over and over I bumped into them at knife range. Why was I getting visibility indicated out to 80m??? (Sorry no savegave because I was mad and exited.) I came in to put it into the support forum as a possible bug report, but not to double post it's here. I understand vehicles can struggle to see things- angles, blind spots, bad armored glass, damage... whatever. But if visibility is 80m I would expect that enemy troops should be able to be spotted by your infanty out to (though certainly not usually at) that range. An occasional extremely close surprise is fine. But to never see beyond a few meters, and then only rarely, and have a fully defended town fully infiltrated with only a few shots being fired- well, it was frustrating. I don't believe that is intentionally coded that way. Mike
  12. I've been thinking and please allow me to revise. I did do a lot of tests in CMSF where I would use buddy aid to allow a truck driver (thus, a single man) to acquire a single weapon, then test how well he did with it at different ranges. I don't know if in game giving a sniper rifle to a truck driver is any less accurate in the game than giving the sniper rifle to a trained marksman... but I was testing differences weapon to weapon. The sniper rifles actually did horribly, as did small arms. Against a suppressed or surprised, prone enemy (aka, not shooting back), laying in sand, it often took 40-50 rounds to cause a casualty against a small group at close-ish ranges, and I don't recall the results but the sniper rifles were inaccurate. A "regular" truck driver, under no indicated stress, at maybe 400m, would fire shot after shot after shot, steadily missing. So accuracy overmodeled across the board, maybe not. What I was basing my earlier response on was that I have been playing almost exclusively dense urban combat for a while now, and just like CMBB (my all time favorite game), squads can get shredded instantly crossing a street... which is probably realistic. The difference I see is at normal combat ranges in trees or grass. My soldiers do seem to get shot up more quickly than before, and my shooters more effective. Don't misunderstand, I am happy with the current system, but I think if I could mod the game I would turn down the accuracy for close quarters engagements or any other stressful confrontation, and I might slightly reduce accuracy throughout the game. Makes me want to do more testing! Mike
  13. I've played this game for thousands of hours since CMBO... but this is only my opinion. Please don’t roast me for it. CMx1- I was regularly incredibly frustrated by how much ammo it took to achieve casualties on infantry. You always had to suppress to breaking and force them to run, hopefully into open ground. Only then could you sort-of reliably eliminate them. Also, I was 10x more frustrated how inaccurate tank guns were. So many times I would work into a flanking position on enemy armor, a StuG 50m away perhaps, my T-70 would stop, fire- miss, fire- miss, the StuG would start to turn, fire- bounce off, start backing away, fire- bounce off, have to turn slightly to back up, BOOM. It's dead. Spending maybe a thousand hours testing ballistics in CMx1 (don't judge me! ) I knew I had to accept SUPER degraded accuracy from what tests showed, combat results indicated, and- for me- anything that was reasonable. Still, not my choice, Battlefront made it the way they felt was most realistic and I appreciate that. All guns would run dry by the end of many battles, and there was no resupply available. CMx2 feels much more realistic to me, but yes, now slightly too quick. Infantry now usually gets slaughtered the moment they are spotted. Battles concerning infantry seem to be over often in seconds with high casualties instantly. In my opinion it is now a bit too quick. Now, you have extra ammo you can go get (sometimes), but rarely need! Though I haven't done more than maybe 100 hours of dedicated ballistics tests for large guns (I've made specific ranges for testing moving while firing, etc)- I am happy with it. I am also happy with RPGs (of all eras) in CMx2- I really think they are perfect. The CMx2 ballistics engine is light years ahead of CMx1, but everyone knows that. (And CMx1 was so good 10 years ago that I’m still playing CM games!) In short, I feel that the while accuracy might be slightly too high now, it is far more playable than before. Few on here (not me) have actual experience on this topic, especially enough experience to give a statistically significant opinion on the matter. I would love to hear from them (if we haven’t already). Mike (Feel free to check out my website link below for a small bit of what I have done with CM!)
  14. Yup, link is working now. I hand code the site and left the filename .wav.doc. Anyway, works now. Mike
  15. Poop. Fixed. (I hand code the html because the GUI versions add in 80% useless crap to the page. Then you start getting conflicting html and nothing works. I'd rather program it manually.) Working now. Mike
×
×
  • Create New...