Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Offshoot last won the day on December 29 2018

Offshoot had the most liked content!

About Offshoot

  • Rank
    Senior Member


  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

625 profile views
  1. Thanks for the responses to my post. Reading them and seeing the descriptions of different types of customers, I do think there is a disjunct between those who see a CM family as a holistic entity and those who see it as a succession of separate purchases. But I'm not going to relitigate the points here. Although I am not sure their post was necessarily made in good will, I think Ales Dvorak was essentially correct - I bought FI too soon. I pretty much run about 3 years behind with all game releases, so if I have a real hankering for new (to me) CM I might instead get FB than RtoV. It would be only $10 dollars more than what I would have to pay to get the RtoV module to install, probably has more content, and comes with engine 4 in the box
  2. I am living testament to that very possibility. Perhaps I was more serious in the past (I do have three of their titles with modules and way back when even posted up a bug report that resulted in a change to the game). Perhaps I could be more serious again in the future. CM games are not the only games I play though, so I have to choose where and on what I spend my disposable income. In light of choosing what I spend my money on, the "it's only $15" argument holds no water for me. If it is just $15, then why doesn't BF provide brand new customers with the engine 2 base game and require them to buy the engine upgrades? These new customers actually do "get the later version of the game for free. With the purchase of the material". Of course the optics would be bad, just as they are bad for me, a not-so-serious but perhaps interested customer returning from a furlough. So I thought I would leave some feedback from a market segment (am I the only one?) that, as you say, is not very vocal on the forums. It's up to BF if they listen or not, just as it is up to me if I buy or not. Seriously not salty at all.
  3. OK, so let's use the module as the baseline for "new". $95 - the price for the base game (engine 4) + module if you buy both now. $110 - the total price I will have to pay to have the base game (engine 4) + module. Why am I paying more for the new? Before we go full circle, remember that I did not buy the upgrades when they came out so have derived no value from those two historical newnesses.
  4. From the module page: " A licensed version of Combat Mission Fortress Italy Base Game with Game Engine 4 v2.10 is required for Rome to Victory." I assumed that meant you had to upgrade the base game first but I am open to recant if that is wrong.
  5. That was kind of my point. I didn't stay current and new and yet I still have to pay the price tag.
  6. I have to admit that I am disinclined to buy the new FI module because of the engine upgrade issue. As an early buyer of FI who hasn't kept up to date, getting the module will cost me $50 including the engine upgrades. As I also own RT and BN, it would perhaps be more sensible to buy the upgrade 4 big bundle, so my upfront outlay to get the module would be $65. At this point I'm thinking nah. I assume that if I were to buy the base game now it would be game engine 4, which means that only early buyers end up paying for the dev costs of the engine upgrades. I understand from other software I use that the argument for this is that you have derived value from the upgrade by using it, though this is not the case for me because I never bought it. I guess I just find it strange that BF would put people off buying modules by not including engine upgrades in the price of the module.
  7. Back in the day using a "Target brief/briefly" command was a good way to get infantry units to chuck lots of grenades. I haven't played for a long time so have no idea if this is still the case. Other arms could also be fired as well of course so it might not be just grenades.
  8. This is an interesting question in the context of range because to achieve the maximum range you'd have to arc the stream pretty heavily. How much fuel would you burn trying to get on target, or do you overshoot and hope the dribble hits? Lots of talk about maximum range, but I wonder what range they were generally used at?
  9. Haha, I'm afraid I am not up-to-date with the innies and outies of the photography world, but I think that particular article is safe to read as it essentially says the same things as the other three you linked, albeit in an uglier design. Anyway, the take home message is the same: if you are preparing files that will only be seen on a monitor, save yourself some hassle and just use sRGB.
  10. On this topic I just found this, which is quite interesting - https://kenrockwell.com/tech/adobe-rgb.htm
  11. If you want to figure this one out you're going to have to dive into the deep and dark well of colour management. My knowledge of it is rudimentary at best and I don't use PS, but what is the source file? Adobe 1998 has a wider gamut than sRGB, so moving from one to the other could shift the colour space. Maybe if you are changing the bit-depth that is also having an effect? The option being greyed out would indicate that in PS you can't embed an ICC profile in a BMP (unless there are other options somewhere that will allow you to do so). In the end though I have to ask, without being rude, does it really matter, especially for something as variable in hue as a stone building? The best you can do is adjust the colours until you have what you want in-game. Beyond that you have no control over the way others will see them on their hardware. I have two monitors side by side, one standard gamut and one wide gamut, and even the whites on both monitors look different. Without spending hundreds of dollars on calibration hardware and software, there is no way to correct that in a meaningful way.
  12. Strange. I also bank with Barclays and when in the UK in the 90s would send money back to New Zealand with no issues. Nowadays I can even do it online from NZ using a PINsentry that generates a code using my card.
  13. Thanks for your replies. This thread is a timely reminder that after a long time with no issues I think I have become complacent. Time for some spring cleaning.
  14. It seems that if you create a new temporary filter from the top left menu you can then apply column filters. I have filters working for all sheets. Just a note, but for the Red Thunder and Black Sea sheets the "Path" for the v100a BRZ files includes the BRZ name, which doesn't seem to be your convention for the rest of the files. This means that the "Bulk" column has this name duplicated, e.g. "red thunder v100a\red thunder v100a". For Red Thunder this is also repeated in the WW2 sheet. Not a biggie but it could mess with filtering.
  15. I'd be happy to give them to you but looking more at your spreadsheets I think there is not much point. My files are just tables that look identical to what you have presented but without the filtering functionality, so I'm sure there is no inspiration to be found there. The only difference was I included a "file type" column but this was mostly to make splitting the files into separate tables easier - and with the filtering function it is redundant. I split the tables into the following categories (again redundant with the filtering): shaders (tga), sounds (wav), text (txt), soldiers (bmp), vehicles (bmp), weapons (bmp), buildings (bmp), special effects (bmp), terrain (bmp), interface_editor (bmp), interface_in game (bmp). My lists are also old and were prepared before any of the engine upgrades, so given the last couple of posts might be misleading in parts. And I stripped out at-the-time unmoddable files, but now with sbobovyc's modding tools this is probably not a good thing. So I don't want to put links in your thread to out-of-date info but have PMed you a link to an example file if really interested.
  • Create New...