Jump to content

Aquila-SmartWargames

Members
  • Content Count

    313
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Everything posted by Aquila-SmartWargames

  1. Thanks but I´m fine as I already have it with the same timestamp as you guys
  2. I´m into CMBN since release but sailed along with V4 right from the bat to this very day across all titles and never payed that much attention to the difference in this regard. I forgot how things were back then. To most extent I´m happy with it even when playing hedgerow warfare and older campaigns. Is the retreat mechanic for low morale/quality troops very different between v3/v4? Playing some of the very huge campaigns with troops that waver quick the sometimes erratic retreat mechanic can make it quite work intensive at times for me.
  3. Good idea, same here. So I guess the recent CMBN install files ship with the updated campaign as the thread about the update was created in 2015
  4. The only thing that I incorporated into considerations is vehicle hulls or at least the turret facing should point into the direction of presumed enemy contact, despite the obivous reasons my experience indicates to me that they spot less good on flanks and rear, especially in the distance and also close-by when the cmdr is not opened up which would naturally make sense aswell. But I never payed attention to arc sizes and also perceived them to do no/little difference in spotting and often use circular ones and just the arcs when facing is needed but with @Bulletpoint´s and @Erwin´s additions taken into account it makes me wonder. About this "target arcing" enemy contacts, I also sometimes had this impression but dismissed them as being coincidental. If true this could mean you could "focus beam" attention on tentative contacts or suspected enemy positions in order to quicker get results or get them at all. At lot of scenario styles like ones emphasizing reconnaissance would get a complete different meaning for me. Although to some extent I do hope it practically makes little difference as I am not sure if I would welcome the additional micromanagement of always keeping target arcs in shape. Nevertheless you never done learning in CM and I will pay more attention to this. This reminds me somewhat of the testing I did with the BMP-3 radar in order to locate concealed infantry units. I´ve made a video about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=unTyMNPIGLc
  5. It was mentioned here that the size of target arcs is impacting on spotting checks but if I recall it right in another thread it was stated they do not impact spotting. What is true?
  6. If I recall correct then to this date I never encountered a campaign in any of the CM2 games that wasn´t playable with current versions. The experience might be somewhat different as gameplay elements might have received changes meanwhile (more lethal MGs) and there might be minor issues that I do not notice. For example when asking about your Bloody Ride campaign it was reported that there might be a Panther missing but if so I´ll take it as sudden mechanical problem and further challenge. I am pretty sure I will enjoy it. Looking forward for the next one aswell.
  7. Is there a way to tell if I´m using the updated KG Engel campaign mentioned in the sticky thread? Alternatively can someone please provide it to me as the link in mentioned thread isn´t working anymore.
  8. Despite the already stated reasons that put gunners and leaders into greater danger of getting harmed first/with priority from my experience I can´t agree with the %, "all the time", and "AI vs non-AI" claims. In the moment this looks more like a case of strong selective perception to me.
  9. I didn´t know about Bloody Ride for a long time. Already have playlists of Zawiya and Sicily, Bloody Ride will come soon
  10. Is what year of the H&E timeline the 2nd Battle of Ikke campaign plays out?
  11. It theoretically can be fixed by switching LOD files
  12. @zmoney I get your point and pretty sure understand what you´re up to as I mentioned I myself think its a good idea to have something added with mine-clearing ability. However again if if this thread is read thoroughly there are several ways to get past this minefield unharmed with your vehicles either with artillery our discovering the true mine-free spots (not talking about this funneling along mines method, never used that.) Only players unaware of these ways usually will get their tanks blown up. Despite this it is the only CMSF1/2 scenario I ever encountered this challenge and don´t think that it really requires these typical somewhat melodramatic "I am investing into CM since Pong but now I am so disappointed/shocked that I already regret my expense" parade speeches. If a mission with this knowledge demand should be the first mission in general design terms is a different question. I think it is perfectly fine but the briefing with the incorrect mine handling guidance is definitely not helping new players. As mentioned in the previous post if it would include a good explanation with artillery usage or providing a tip that the Syrians might left a spot unmined for their own traffic, or at least include information in the manual about detailed mine handling we wouldn´t see these threads here. Mark Mines only helps the infantryman Dark times for my vehicles oh damn Thats it
  13. I can´t recall the mission background but I assumed these mines aren´t simply placed on the highway but may be partially or fully dug into it. On patrols in crisis areas even on paved roads or highways you´re advised to be always on the lookout for (new) grooves, surface changes, or other strange looking pavement as even little groups of uncons managed to dig up the pavement, place IED/Mines, and restore it in the matter of a night, sometimes they do a really good job. An army that has a lot of more time in order to prepare for a likely invasion might even do a more thorough job. If this is the case it is not always easily removable at least in the timeframes of CM scenarios not mentioning complicated anti-tampering mechanisms. EOD can be a really challenging and time consuming process other than what is potrayed in most games or what gamers perceive to be true. Although having a mine clearance machine of some sort or a way to blow the heck out of mines in the modern CM titles, that would be definitely welcome.
  14. Sure everything can be mathematically "averaged" out but for grenades under combat cirumstances there is no real written-in-stone kill/injury-radius as it depends heavily on the circumstances such as terrain, vegetation, enclosement of the detonation area (small room vs open area), personal protection, other objects that could become shrapnel, and very important: position/posture of the receiver. There are accounts where individuals survived grenade detonations more or less unharmed at close range but same is true for vice versa. The 200m is more a security range especially for grenade ranges and practice but yes for some models it is theoretically possible that ordnance could reach out to you that far and cause more or less significant effect. That is also the reason why explosive ordnance such as artillery sometimes injures far away personell in CM while others nearby are left unharmed. It is a matter of luck or bad luck. I think CM does a good job in modelling grenades without overestimating their capabilities although I never had grenades dropped close-by me in RL. I also think they can be quite deadly and grenades at least for me do the job of often neutralizing or at least surpressing the enemy. I´ve noticed differences between the grenade models but all of them managed to get the mission done. However if a grenade lands right between the legs of an enemy, sure it would be safe to assume that this guy would have a bad time. Most times I witnessed this it ended badly for the receiver. Also an interesting question would be if terrain ground or vegetation indeed has an impact on the game. At least for the enclosement it is sure to assume that there is no effect modeled as I can´t recall any game/simulation that ever went this far with ballistics.
  15. The single line mine coverage at the opening is somewhat randomized every time the scenario is played. Not sure if there is a version with a full coverage but for me there were always 1 or 2 uncovered spots that can be discovered when marking with the engineers, give them enough time. I am glad that this mission is in the campaign and don´t see a reason for it to be removed. The only thing that could see a change is the briefing that gives incorrect instructions for the the handling of mines and might cause confusion especially among new CM players. It should be replaced by the information that heavy calibre artillery such as the from the start available 120mm mortars can clear the mines aswell. Same is by the way the case for the 2nd mission briefing of the Monte Cassino campaign.
  16. Offtopic but as it is discussed here currently, some time ago I´ve came across the most "hardcore" complex ruleset document/ruleset I´ve seen so far with something like an Excel tool or spreadsheet. I wanted to take a look at it but forgot the name and can´t find the source anymore. Does somebody know where I can find this?
  17. This review covers the included campaigns and scenarios with briefings and first impressions.
  18. Was an updated version released in the meantime? If not, @Falaise is there a way to get your Polish Commando Mod? I would like to use it for the campaign playthrough.
  19. There is definitely something wrong with the ATGM vehicle variants. Very noticeable on low-vis or night scenarios.
  20. Makes more sense, I guess the spotted vehicle is triggering the targeting process of the AT gun which then causes model glitches. This indeed indicates that something got botched in the modding process. My rough guess would be either missed import/export metadata checks or something screwed up by loading multiple times the same model into Blender like tackled in the "Prominent Issues..." tut video. However without being the author and no inspection of the model it is naturally hard to pinpoint the exact cause. Yes existing CM models (parts) can be combined and if required resized afterwards. There is a "Combining Existing ..." tut video available for that aswell featuring the Stuart Flak idea. I generally recommend to at least skim once all the available documentation and tutorials here. It will save time and effort. Video Playlist for CM 3D Model Editing with Showcases, Workflows, and Tutorials (latter with commentary) https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLlUX4ALH7zTNgpWGBYSFUCnZK-Sf7SCcl
  21. So this happens once any another AT gun is present on the map. This is new to me and might indicate that there are some sort of dependecies between them in context how the internal engine handles things but for now I don´t have a proper explanation for why and what. Is there something different with the other AT guns or is just the custom one affected? Before discovering the zeroing solution I managed complex scaling/rotation modifications by doing it one by one. However it can be a frustrating process that might require multiple exports/imports of the custom model until "everything stays in place". Do you still have the bugged 6pdr model that didn´t receive zeroing to check if this is indeed tied to the 6pdr´s zeroing/transforming or not.
  22. I do not have currently access to my gaming machine and to this date didn´t work on towed models but it seems to me that the zeroing fix might be the cause of this. There might be model parts or model markers that are providing coordinates for correct towing positioning, which either shouldn´t be zeroed or require the coordinates to be corrected again after zeroing. What you figured out by yourself is correct. If multiple models are loaded into blender, the software attaches numbers to model parts that were already present which can cause bugs. There might be other solutions but for now I recommend to start a new Blender instance and always load the model that is planned to be eventually exported first. I´ve tackled this issue and methods to prevent it in this tutorial:
  23. A lot of models are in .max format which can´t be directly imported into Blender but require conversion first. 3ds Max could handle this conversion but I never received the free version for academics which I guess is because of using an obvious incognito name in the registration process. For now I try to stick to the formats that are allowed to be imported directly into Blender. Did you try this
  24. I am currently still busy with the Year of the Rat campaign but excited to see that the upcoming campaign is going along well. H&E is an amazing experience.
×
×
  • Create New...