Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Posts posted by Aquila-SmartWargames

  1. 14 hours ago, Erwin said:
    22 hours ago, Erwin said:

      My suggestion is to maybe provide the alternative lo res bmp's for distant terrain in case players want a more realistic look to the game.

    It is an observation that images look more like RL when distant objects are faded with haze and a bit blurry as that is how the eye/brain perceives the information and provides us with a sense of distance. 

    A problem with computer graphics is that designers have always aimed to get the sharpest images no matter the distance from the observer - and that breaks the immersion as it's not realistic.  It has been a problem in movies as well.  These days they put in grain and distortion to make digital images look more realistic.

    Thats not really how distance vision and visual acuity is working. I´ve had contact with real military simulators and shortcomings are described on exactly the opposite. Due to limitations of most in-use displays - thus videogames and recordings - may have a limitation of proper farsight and distant stimulus aquisition in a visual busy environment when compared to the capabilities of the human eye. This is the reason why games like Arma provide the player with an artifical zoom in order to try simulate proper eye capabilities.

    Its the eye feature called accomodation that is shifting the lens in order to adapt the focal point on the retina/fovea centralis in context to distance. Thats how we manage to accomodate close and distant focus. A healthy eye without lens, bulbus, retina, muscle anomalies is able to accomodate into the infinite. What you´re describing sounds more like what shortsighted individuals may experience who can´t accomodate their focal point to distance properly. Also there is often haze which becomes more noticeable on distance.

    Low resolution textures don´t make it more realistic. Grain doesn´t make it more realistic, (radial) blur and field of depth are resembling this but are nowhere realistic as this effect appearance and strength is tied to the videogame POV and not player eyes´ fixation and accomodation.

    Nevertheless the screenshots you´r e mentioned look good. It looks like the Tilt Shift effect in Reshade. I would like to use some sort of depth of field effect alongside @37mmScreenshots profile. Problem is that it is tied to screen position and not ingame distance. Not sure if there is a way for Reshade to "read" CM´s ingame distance... would be definitely great.

  2. 23 hours ago, wgbn1968 said:

    Units in the basement can see one floor up and can fire. I checked it three times. But for some reason, not all of them. The reason why the platoon commander can't fire and watch is not clear to me

    If you upload your test scenario and your modification of the cover mod I can check it with my own eyes.

  3. 1 hour ago, wgbn1968 said:

    The mod has one obstacle - the inability to see and fire between floors separated by a shelter. In the video, this moment is clearly visible. I couldn't assign shooting on the floor from the "basement". I don't know how to solve this problem.

    With "shelter" you mean the custom model floor of the mod? I can see it in your video but can you re-run the test without the cover mod to make 100% sure that this LOS block is indeed caused by the mod. If it is true that the LOS block is surprisingly caused by the mod it would enable alot of new opportunities which I didn´t know could be possible

    For example (AI) enemies hiding in LOS-blocked/concealed basements, holes, tunnels that emerge for ambushes and clearing those underground positions with grenades or flamethrowers




    And if this is really the result of the mod (which would be exciting) but not what you wished for you could try to fix it by placing the underground covers in a way that will leave the centers of big buildings "uncovered" so that there is no LOS-block between the floors i. e. place multiple covers "around" the building. A more complex solution would be to cut a center "window" into the cover mod in Blender. I have some written/video tutorials on cutting/sculpting models in this thread.

    You mentioned you couldn´t assign target, do you mean the target command that allows units to fire into higher/lower floors?



    - It seems the bug is limited to tanks with infantry ride capability

    - while you can bring in soldiers/other crews into the tank in the scenario editor aswell, they reset once you leave the editor deployment mode.

    - this bug works for all scenarios involving these tanks when done in the setup phase. So if for some reason you ever wished to operate your tanks with infantry this might be your opportunity before it will be fixed. Once the scenario commences it is not possible anymore.

    - trees are destructible


  5. 1 hour ago, ishfar94 said:

    Nope.i had a save right before the engagement. Tried absolutely everything. Target arcs, target armour arcs, target light same deal as before. And that's a really bad reason to give.

    We´ll see if it is really nope and a bad reason to give:

    1st Test Run: BMP-2 is not given any orders. TacAI decides to use ATGM and takes out Bradley

    2nd Test Run BMP-2 is given a Light Target Command (which is claimed to be not working). The BMP-2 engages the Bradley (No ERA) with the AC. In contrast to the screenshot situation the Bradley turned away from the BMP is in the utmost worst situation, still the Bradley is not penetrated by the 30mm and manages to turn and takes out the BMP-2. The BMP-2 wether was able to pen the flank nor the front of the Bradley (which is claimed to get shredded) It would be the better option to use the ATGM.

    As I said penetration is possible to achieve and sometimes I even prefer the gunner not to use the ATGM for example when trying to "blind" with fire and because the gunner loves to immediately reload under fire but again its a "tough call" and at least the screenshot incident is far from the description "ingame issue". But I guess some ask questions while solely interested in approval of what they assume to be exclusively true, so I leave it to be as it is.

  6. Now you´re just missing a "bmp-1 weapon choice" thread to complete your collection.

    - In the screenshot you´re using a "target" command. Give the BMP-2 a "light target" one and it will use its AC

    - I don´t think this has something to do with LOS.

    - It is true that the BMP-2 TacAI might use the ATGM even at closer ranges against a frontal Bradley. The ingame A2 Bradley comes with upgraded frontal armor with the goal to make it resistant to 30mm APDS and it is definitely not easily "shredded" as I have seen in numerous encounters. The ERA ones are even worse. You can definitely take them out with the 30mm in this circumstances but for me it is rather a tough call for the TacAI and not a strange one. However again by issuing a target command instead of a light one you´re enforcing it to use its ATGM.

  7. On 4/10/2020 at 1:25 PM, Bil Hardenberger said:

    I believe you are thinking about my Command Friction rules 

    Thanks, the linked thread and the manual it contains (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YZ39BeorPrMA5TM9V1DeQIIsHaMS9qIdFMLFQTbTea4/edit) was exactly what I was looking for.


    The idea to give players the choice to go either for a more historical or a more exotic/diverse OOB is  very welcome.  

    Looking forward  to play Alarmeinheiten and maintain 2nd Bn’s CP.

  8. 10 hours ago, Ettles said:

    There are, I think, quite a few sites where you can upload files of that size. I think Mediafire and WetTransfer are two popular ones right now. Not sure if they're the best option as I haven't had the need to upload stuff like that recently.

    If you provide me a link directly to a upload page, I can uplink the files and share it to you  

  9. 4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

    From watching the full video, I'm thinking it's not about weak spots... it's more that each flame "blob" has some small but non-zero chance of causing a catastrophic explosion.

    That is possible.

    I can´t remember exactly how the testing played out in the video but if I recall correctly the skirted Pz4 was very hard to damage/knock out while the Panther at some point showed result which then brought up the idea that it might have something to do with individual differences, weaknesses, or what spot on the tank the liquid manages to make contact with. However with such a small sample size all of this could be coincidental.

  10. 2 hours ago, benpark said:

    That sounds like an animation adjustment needs to be made somewhere in the mod. I really don't believe it isn't anything that the game is doing between AT guns and target in terms of model adjustments - besides the facing.

    These botched models where for example metadata was missed to be imported or exported bug out as soon as they "move" in some sort this can be start driving or when a AT gun starts to turn/adjust its gun. I think that is the reason why it was perceived here by some that the gun bugs out when an enemy vehicle or unit is present on the map: because it then targets something.

    2 hours ago, Ettles said:

    Yep, am I missing something?

    It here however it is 800mb big and my dropbox is full so if you want it you need to organize something where I can upload it

  11. 2 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:

    I've seen some other flamethrower test that showed absolutely no damage on tanks.

    It could depend on the tank model, I just did  testing on a limited sample of attempts and vehicles but some seemed to be almost impenetrable for flamethrowers

    When I did the full testing video I remember that I did some research out of curiosity on this topic. I recall that I´ve read an article that prior the war there was some testing done on using flamethrowers in a primary AT fashion and results were achieved with the burning liquid penetrating into the inner compartment through niches. However it seems that this method never developed into something serious compared to the wide-spread use of launchers and (DIY) throwables which might utilize on the flame/flare effect aswell in order to stun, immobilize, or entirely disable tanks.

    In short: possible but likely not viable. Concluding upon this limited and short research it seems that the CM simulation nailed it pretty authentic again.

  12. Yes the flamethrower vs tank, an interesting situation.

    4 hours ago, Canada Guy said:

    Or was it hit by a shell at the same time

    In the video situation it was indeed hit by a Stummel HEAT round the same time. It deemed me when I checked the casualty statistics afterwards.

    4 hours ago, Canada Guy said:

    I had thought that flamethrowers were useless against tanks)

    Depends, if for you "useless against tanks" equals there is no way to harm a tank with flamethrowers in CM than no this is not the case. If you define it by being absolutely not reliable when dealing with tanks than yes as achieving an effect on a tank with a flamethrower might be a matter of luck with low chance.

    4 hours ago, Xorg_Xalargsky said:

     I think the flamethrower opened fire because the vehicle was destroyed and it was aiming at the crew.

    The flamethrower fired at the tank.


    I did an experiment video ago and possible effects on a Panther tank can be seen condensed here. The chance to achieve such effects in this specific Panther case was low. The chance might depend on factors like vehicle model, engagement angle etc. 


  13. 47 minutes ago, Warts 'n' all said:

    I'm hoping that not everything will be a strange shade of pink in Fire and Rubble.

    There is no need for you to fear anything as CM will look exactly like how the individual players pleases to setup their graphics.

    Look I know that you follow me around with your banter because I can imagine that you´ve by now noticed that you got banned from commenting on my Youtube channel for multiple rude and almost identical spam-like comments and now look for a way to air your steam. Perhaps it helps to settle this when I let you know that I am absolutely not interested in your opinion about my things, won´t change my decision, and whatsoever want the least have to do with you. Furthermore it would be also utmost pleasing if you stop stalking my place and simply spent your time elsewhere with something that suits your preference. Despite this I have nothing to discuss with you and do not wish you derail that thread for this further.

    44 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:

    +1.  Cool.  Nice action.  I like the forensic hit decals. 

    Thanks, they´re by Mord and they are a must-have for me.


    Looking forward for Fire & Rubble

  • Create New...