Jump to content

CarlWAW

Members
  • Content Count

    247
  • Joined

Everything posted by CarlWAW

  1. Its absolutely clear, that its run now by people with no understanding of how to run a business. The original creators probably were bought out with a NDA and are long gone. People running their business usually become better and better. Here they want to make the customers believe they turned into totally incompetent "managers"? It also explains why the current US-government controlled team running this op, is not capable getting the most simple things into the code within two years - because it was written by someone else... During that time the old team had developed a whole new game and game engine...
  2. Aren't you any longer one of the owners of the company? Only a kolkhoz working stiff? I ask because although the development speed of you rproducts is fast as a snail you ignore customer questions but instead prefer to "invest" time in making political statements. Just lLike a kholkoz worker who does not care about business.
  3. 99% of all scenarios are during daylight my friend.
  4. Yeah, it's one of my best tricks for tanks, but also one which shows how flawed the spotting model is: Say you have an enemy tank which must be removed. 1. Make sure that the spotting info is received by your tanks, who are assigned to attack it. 2. Instead of simply moving into hull down and attacking: drop smoke in front of the attacking position. 3. Move the tank(s) into hull down position without the flawed spotting model allowing your tank to be seen immediately because of the movement. 4. Once the smoke disappears, your tank is stationary, but it has the advantage of the spotting info. Whenever a tank moves the spotting system seems to put a huge "HERE I AM!"-sign on it. But the assumption that a moving tank under any cicumstances can be spotted better than a stationary one is unjustified and therefore the model does not work - especially when it comes to the crucial aspects of only partially exposed tanks. I assume the whole spotting system is based on certain basic (not always correct) assumptions, like the one described above. And they seem to play into spotting hidden or camouflaged infantry too easily, too. Sadly, because they decided that everything must be available for realtime play, the spotting calculations must be cheap. So they can't correct the basic spotting model and use a much more sophisticated one. That's probably the reason why, after years, they couldn't solve certain spotting problems but only can tweak nuances. But the foundations of the model are severely interwoven with the realtime contraints of the engine. It seems they developed CMx2 to have an engine that could be expanded and developed - but instead of having a totally flexible engine by now, they bound it on a rock called realtime and therefore need to make all calculations as cheap as possible.
  5. @Amizaur The given example is not about spotting during driving. It is about spotting before moving.
  6. The "experts" here fill page after page discussing unimportant nuissances, but when really big flaws of the sim are discovered and raised, they lose any interest... A car can work perfectly 99% of the time. But if the air-bag system does not activate when needed, then the best car with all the huge design efforts, to improve safety of the passengers, becomes the worst car because it fails in the most important situation. The problem CM still has: Spotting overall works quite well. But then it comes to the most important situations, the model does not work correctly. Probably the most important flaw of the spotting model always becomes obvious when tanks are involved. One example is mentioned above. Another one - and maybe even more severe, because it prevents the player from using realistic tactics with tanks: it's not possible to use the tank commander for spotting witht he tank turret down. What makes it worse: The spotting model seems to weigh movement (of tanks) over anything else: with the following effect: if one tank moves and one stands still, the tank moving into LOS will be spotted first by the stationary tank. Therefore in CM it works better to use smoke to move a tank into position, than to move it without blocking LOS. And in reality if a a battlefield is controlled by enemy tanks/ATGs? The tanks are placed turret down and the TC is spotting - during the attack he is mostly looking for muzzle flashes (which are not modelled at all, btw). In reality once a flash is detected the TC often also gets a sense where the enemy ATG/tank is. He instructs his gunner and the driver moves the tank hull down and the enenmy is engaged immediately. After 2-4 shots the tank drives back into safety and changes its position and DOES NOT sit like a duck! In CM, because of the spotting behaviour, it is better to create pressure by pure firepower and use tanks like sitting ducks because of the flawed spotting system.
  7. "Motherland?" It's fatherland and motherlanguage.
  8. Here's a comparison of ReShade and stock graphics (wintersun in the back). ReShade ( Clarity.fx + SMAA.fx + Curves.fx + MXAO.fx): Without: Pay attention on the right to the snow on the ground into the woods. With Reshade the snow really feels like lying on the ground, while without Reshade is is just white, that could also come from the bushes. And the trunks of the trees. Either to the right of the StuG or to the left into the dark wood. The texture of the trunks create a feeling of depth which the unprocessed graphic does not show. But the important aspect is, that it doesn't only look nice on a screenshot, but it works for gameplay the same way.
  9. Great. I either use Technicolor.fx + Levels.fx (or without Levels.fx, if I want less contrast and brighter blacks). And shaders from @HerrTom's bundle (without the depth of field shaders): Clarity.fx + SMAA.fx + Pirate_Depth.fx + Curves.fx + MXAO.fx I tried them in different settings, too and I think they give a nice analog film touch and make flames stand out nicely.
  10. @Marwek77 aka Red Reporter Aspire V17 VN7-791G, Nvidia driver version: 382.05 here. But I don't have CMBS. Make sure that CM runs fine without reshade: rename opengl.dll and opengl.ini in CM program folder to something else and see if it works.
  11. @HerrTom What is the "UI mask" texture good for? Here the UI is blacked out. Is that its intention?
  12. @HerrTom, thanks for the tip. A personal ReShade-preset didn't get saved, too. Running CM in Admin mode solved the problem.
  13. I repost my comment from the RT screenshot thread, where I adressed this problem. I just installed it and have got it running. I haven't played with the shaders, but with two out of the box preset shaders that come with reshade, I got very good results in replacing the ingame movie mode with better colors and with fully working anti aliasing. System: Win10, Nvidia GTX960m Here's what you do: Download Reshade 3.1 Install When asked during installation download fx-shader presets? YES Running reshade it asks for the executable of the game you want to work with. Choose one. I chose FB. When starting FB it crashed. Go to the CM game data folder (usually in "Documents"). There you should see a "reshade-shaders" folder. Rename "Shaders" and "Textures" in that folder to something else (e.g. Shaders_ Textures_) Create a new "Shaders" folder. Into that folder you only copy those shaders you want to work with. To have an instantly better looking movie-mode with working anti-aliasing, from the renamed "Shaders_" copy to "Shaders" folder: ReShade.fxh Levels.fx Technicolor.fx For fun you can also copy other shaders, like Nighvision.fx or Monochrome.fx Start CM. Press SHIFT + F2 Now you should see the ReShade config menu as an overlay within the game, where the shaders you copied into the folder, should be listed. Choose one, i.e. "Monochrome". The changes take effect immediately. The game becomes b/w. If that works, deselect Monochrome and select "Levels" and "Technicolor". Voila! A good looking movie mode with fully working anti-aliasing. When you are satisfied with your settings, go into ReShade's SETTINGS menu and switch from "Configuration Mode" to "Performance Mode". Which allegedly gives an even better performance. With these two shaders activated I do not recognize a noticeable performance hit (ReShade allows to display the frame rate!). Amazing software!
  14. Look at the chart. The MP44 is performing even slightly worse than machine pistols... Have you played Red Thunder? You don't feel that machine pistols are totally sniping miracles beyond 30 meters, while the assault rifle doesn't deliver a better hit rate? My impression from playing CM is exactly what these charts show. The MP44 is modelled as a (bad) machine pistol, but not as assault rifle.
  15. @DMS I guess thats the reason why today every army uses PPSHs and machine pistols and not assault rifles? Explain to me one thing, if the PPSH (or other machine pistols) was modelled correctly: Battle for Berlin, the Russians: Total operational dominance? Check. Air superiority? Check. Outnumbered the defender operationally and on the tactical level by multitudes? Check. More than enough artillery? Check. All that remains, to prevent a total wipeout of the defender and have a walk in the park, is at the tactical level things could go wrong. And here comes CM's machine pistol model into play: lets assume the model was correct. So the side which has more machine pistols, has a huge advantage. That's what CM shows. Correct? If the machine pistol model in CM was correct, that a squad equipped with them is quite easily capable to wipe out any other infantry within 50 meters without machine pistols, how is it possible, that the Russians suffered MUCH HIGHER LOSSES at the tactical level despite their CM-modelled PPSHs? Were the German Volkssturm and Hitlerjugend superhuman? I don't think so. Let's have a look at the numbers: from roughly 34 million men and women in the Russian Army 84% (eightyfour!) fell, were wounded or captured! 84%! Can anyone imagine Eisenhower, Patton or any other western commander, presenting himself as glorious victor, his army and his doctrine superior to all others, like the Russian commanders did, if an Eisenhower or Patton would have lost more than 80% of their men? Unimaginable. From a military standpoint IMO the numbers reflect a total disaster. While German eastern front fighters reported, that the Russian Army in 1944 was more capable than in 1942, one thing didn't change: the Russians EVEN AT THE END suffered much heavier losses against outnumbered and undersupplied Germans. Even in the battle for Berlin, where the Germans lacked almost everything, the Russians bleeded out like a bucket with holes. How is it possible, to suffer higher losses than the defender under the mentioned circumstances, if the CM machine pistol model was correct? You can't get the real world results in CM, even if you try, as soon as machine pistols are involved. Another argument that shows, that something is off with CM's machine pistol model: If the model was correct, why were machine pistols abandoned all over the world for assault rifles? The simple answer: the PPSH/machine pistol model in CM currently is not reflecting reality. If I would guess, I'd say that machine pistols are WAAAY to deadly. They should be good for supressing only (and quickly running out of ammo, which I think is modelled correctly). But they should be awful for hitting anything further away than a few meters. Shooting more bullets into one direction does not make the bullets hit better! Therefore the HANDLING of automatic weapons is significant. How good are they to get more than one bullet on the target (and also hit with single shots)? THAT's why assault rifles are so much better than machine pistols! CM does not seem to model that. That brings up my third argument: Btw it's also the reason, why the MG42 was such an incredible weapon for that time. Not because of the rounds it fires, which everybody focuses on, but because it gets the rounds on the target! Even more with the great tripod. With the tripod it is almost an insult to compare it to a Maxim! Nobody can aim with a Maxim and get a few bullets on a target - but even rookies can shoot with a MG42! It's like night and day. I guess the difference is as big as machine pistols to assault rifles. Quality of weapons does matter.
  16. Wow, these are excellent tests. They reflect quite well what I always thought does not feel right in the game. A modern assault rifle like the MP44 should be combining the best of machine pistols and rifles, but the model in the game does not reflect that. I think Red Thunder begs for these tests. The PPSH models seem totally off (how can such a machine pistol be more efficient than highly accurate rifles and the german assault rifle?).
  17. @JohnO I changed nothing in Nvidia Control panel.
  18. I just installed it and have got it running. I haven't played with the shaders, but with two out of the box preset shaders that come with reshade, I got very good results in replacing the ingame movie mode with better colors and with fully working anti aliasing. System: Win10, Nvidia GTX960m Here's what you do: Download Reshade 3.1 Install When asked during installation download fx-shader presets? YES Running reshade it asks for the executable of the game you want to work with. Choose one. I chose FB. When starting FB it crashed. Go to the CM game data folder (usually in "Documents"). There you should see a "reshade-shaders" folder. Rename "Shaders" and "Textures" in that folder to something else (e.g. Shaders_ Textures_) Create a new "Shaders" folder. Into that folder you only copy those shaders you want to work with. To have an instantly better looking movie-mode with working anti-aliasing, from the renamed "Shaders_" copy to "Shaders" folder: ReShade.fxh Levels.fx Technicolor.fx For fun you can also copy other shaders, like Nighvision.fx or Monochrome.fx Start CM. Press SHIFT + F2 Now you should see the ReShade config menu as an overlay within the game, where the shaders you copied into the folder, should be listed. Choose one, i.e. "Monochrome". The changes take effect immediately. The game becomes b/w. If that works, deselect Monochrome and select "Levels" and "Technicolor". Voila! A good looking movie mode with fully working anti-aliasing. When you are satisfied with your settings, go into ReShade's SETTINGS menu and switch from "Configuration Mode" to "Performance Mode". Which allegedly gives an even better performance. With these two shaders activated I do not recognize a noticeable performance hit (ReShade allows to display the frame rate!). Amazing software! @HerrTom Now it's up to you to share your stunningly looking shaders! Are they well suited for gaming or is the contrast too high? Levels.fx + Technicolor.fx is well suited for gaming. I think it's a good compromise between a better look with not too much strain on the eyes.
  19. For someone who always boasts about his logical abilities there are quite a few logical errors. Correct. But there are two reasons mentioned. And you chose the wrong one: Wego players appreciate the TIME to think about a situation. They have no problem with restricted information. What they appreciate is, to make the best decision from the available information. Two completely different things. If the big picture was the most important aspect for wego players, contrary to realtime players, they would prefer that spotting information was shared among all units equally. Better big picture! Which obviously is NOTwhat wego players want. Wego players do NOT want or need a big picture. They form the picture from all information that is available. If that information is severely restricted and doesn't allow a big picture, wego players are fine with that. I even believe that wego players CHERISH the challenge to make the best out of PARTIAL, not perfect, or even faulty information. Not big picture but TIME TO THINK is what wego players appreciate in that mode. And therefore the conclusion, that reducing available information to Wego players was per se annoying is completely wrong, based on the wrong assumption, that the big picture was central, while time to think is central for wego players.
  20. Transparent in a technical sense = not visible to the customer!
  21. For a person who is hitting hard, you're quite thin skinned, aren't you. The transaction numbers of your shop are simply a continuos counter of all sales, aren't they. I don't want to go any further into that, but if you don't want that to be able to be analyzed from the outside, I'd recommend to change the numbering nomenclature. Just a nice, free of charge tip, despite your not so nice behaviour. Do you play realtime only?! Now I begin to understand, why you don't really support wishes that could lift WEGO to a new level. Or why you didn't initially understand my criticism of iron-mode. That you as realtime player see an advanced iron-mode with a somewhat "fixed" unit view as 1st person-feature and therefore not as something good, I understand now! But you are correct only for realtime. For many WEGO-only players it would offer a very different mode to play, that would offer them many new features they otherwise could only dream about, while no realtime player would touch that mode. I am somehwat surprised, that you do seem to ignore the big differences there are between those two kinds of playing styles. Realtime players give a f.ck about fine tuning the positions of every tank to the very last meter. Playing H2H and waiting for a PBEM turn? Unacceptable! Not immediately knowing the result? Unbearable! Patience is a virtue? A shameless lie! Maybe forum members should add a signature, how many percent everyone is playing realtime? It could give you a better picture, too. And it could make it visible how the wishes differ between the two playing styles.
  22. No, ofcourse not! They are still there. I am so sorry for calling a half empty glass not a full glass. This is becoming silly. Software development is a TRANSPARENT process to the customer. How many parts of the software can be reused or not, how many parts are new in a new revision of a car is not of interest for the customer. It is of interest for the producer. Do you understand there are inherently different interests of customers and of producers? Example? Price. The producer wants the highest possible price, the customer the lowest possible price. The market is where they meet and creates the equilibrium. I am confident you are clever enough to expand the example on other aspects...
×
×
  • Create New...