alwaysfish

Careful, very graphic https://twitter.com/666_mancer/status/1499637858658881537?s=21

Thank you guys for all your input.

Well, i see several things. First, the Russian tank was hull down, only turret visible. Second, the Panther was buttoned, so I suppose visibility was somewhat limited. Plus, there were trees in the middle of the LOS (only trunks are visible in the video), so that could have hindered the visibility. And, like Michael said, shock maybe?

I am playing a pbem match, and on several occasions i observed that it is really hard for Russian T-34-85s to penetrate Panther armor. In the video you will see how T-34-85 hits Panther four times at a range of 400m, but never penetrates Panther's hull. I don't know much about armor penetration, so i thought maybe somebody will provide good insight, if Panther is really that hard to penetrate at such short range.

You can mod demo by adding custom textures and sounds. However, you cannot add scenarios.

i have zipped files that i found in the skybox/mountain folder within "Version 100.brz" file of CMSF installation. Here is the link. https://www.dropbox.com/s/ikfvzarahsjeoht/CMSF skybox mountains.zip?dl=0 If you were looking for some other files, please let me know.

delete (or rename) intro.wmv file in the folder <CM Game Install Dir>/Data

dragonwynn, add me to the recipient list too. thank you in advance

Sorry, Steve, my intentions were not to insult you. You guys are doing a great job, no question. I enjoy your products immensely. I just wanted to say that optimizations could be done, but i also admit that it's time consuming.

Fantastic example. Just remove motion blur effect. The difference in fps is very noticeable.

In the provided example you might not notice big difference, however if the bouncing was much much faster, you would definitely notice a difference. Another example, if you tried to record a fast motion (in example, the motion of legs while moving on a running trainer) with your GoPro @ 30 fps and @120fps, and then would like to see clips in slow motion, you would see, that the recording @30 fps is very choppy, missing smoothness.

I think this saying, that eye can not notice anything over about 30fps, came from movies industry. However, computer animation can not be compared to the way movies work (at least old ones), which had a collection of static images and you had to change them at around 30fps so that human eye does not notice the change in frame (the "blinking" effect is gone). In the computer animation, the higher the fps, the more fluid the animation is. Just a simple example. Imagine, that in a game a camera (an imaginary camera, through which the scene is rendered) is turning right. In one second (world time) it will turn 60 degrees. Now, question. How many frames will we see during that "camera turning" animation, if the engine is running at 1 FPS? The obvious answer is one, which will be a scene, rendered when the camera is at 60 degrees from its starting angle. Now just imagine how would this look like in-game. We press the button to turn the camera right, and then after one second (which will feel a very long second) will be turned right by 60 degress. No frames will be showed in between the starting angle and ending angle. I already can imagine that many of us will think that the game is crawling. Oh, and even though the engine will be rendering scenes at 1 fps, we will not see the "blinking" effect, because a monitor refreshes at 60 fps (or 120, depending on the monitor you have). Now, let's imagine the engine runs at 30 fps. Obviously we will see 30 different frames while the camera is turning right (the frame will be rendered every 2 angles). compared to my previous example, the animation will be much more fluid. If the engine ran at 60 fps, we would be seeing 60 different frames while the camera is turning (at every 1 degree angle change), which would make the animation even more fluid. In other words, the more frames per second the engine could render, the more fluid all animations will be. As for DirectX and Opengl, i think there is no much difference. Both are just APIs, and it is up for a developer to use an API in a smart way. I already wrote in some other messages that i was curious to know why the game struggles with the rendering. I used some developer tools to get a log of opengl API calls that CM is doing. From the log i concluded that CM is using a "brute-force" approach when rendering a scene. Several simple optimizations could be done to increase rendering performance. One of those, which every graphics programmer knows, is sorting geometry (before rendering a scene) by material (textures). I just wonder, what would be performance change, if CM engine actually did that. In any case, i perfectly understand that optimizations require time, smart programming, digging through recommendations from nvidia and amd, etc.

I like a lot this idea. The export/import could be done to/from simple XML file.

The kills that the unit/vehicle incurred to the enemy could be seen a the end of any scenario. When you see AAR screen, press the button Review Map (or something like that) and then select any of your units. at the bottom left you will see a transparent window, which will list all kills for the selected unit.

Dude, you sound like Wiggum. Wouldn't be surprised he is back, only under different name