Jump to content
  • Announcements

    • Battlefront.com

      Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips   12/27/2016

      Hi all! Now that Upgrade 4 is out and about in large quantities we have now discovered a few SNAFUs that happen out in the scary, real world that is home computing.  Fortunately the rate of problems is extremely small and so far most are easily worked around.  We've identified a few issues that have similar causes which we have clear instructions for work arounds here they are: 1.  CMRT Windows customers need to re-license their original key.  This is a result of improvements to the licensing system which CMBN, CMBS, and CMFB are already using.  To do this launch CMRT with the Upgrade and the first time enter your Engine 4 key.  Exit and then use the "Activate New Products" shortcut in your CMRT folder, then enter your Engine 3 license key.  That should do the trick. 2.  CMRT and CMBN MacOS customers have a similar situation as #2, however the "Activate New Products" is inside the Documents folder in their respective CM folders.  For CMBN you have to go through the process described above for each of your license keys.  There is no special order to follow. 3.  For CMBS and CMFB customers, you need to use the Activate New Products shortcut and enter your Upgrade 4 key.  If you launch the game and see a screen that says "LICENSE FAILURE: Base Game 4.0 is required." that is an indication you haven't yet gone through that procedure.  Provided you had a properly functioning copy before installing the Upgrade, that should be all you need to do.  If in the future you have to install from scratch on a new system you'll need to do the same procedure for both your original license key and your Upgrade 4.0 key. 4.  There's always a weird one and here it is.  A few Windows users are not getting "Activate New Products" shortcuts created during installation.  Apparently anti-virus software is preventing the installer from doing its job.  This might not be a problem right now, but it will prove to be an issue at some point in the future.  The solution is to create your own shortcut using the following steps: Disable your anti-virus software before you do anything. Go to your Desktop, right click on the Desktop itself, select NEW->SHORTCUT, use BROWSE to locate the CM EXE that you are trying to fix. The location is then written out. After it type in a single space and then paste this:

      -showui

      Click NEXT and give your new Shortcut a name (doesn't matter what). Confirm that and you're done. Double click on the new Shortcut and you should be prompted to license whatever it is you need to license. At this time we have not identified any issues that have not been worked around.  Let's hope it stays that way Steve
    • Battlefront.com

      Forum Reorganization   10/12/2017

      We've reorganized our Combat Mission Forums to reflect the fact that most of you are now running Engine 4 and that means you're all using the same basic code.  Because of that, there's no good reason to have the discussion about Combat Mission spread out over 5 separate sets of Forums.  There is now one General Discussion area with Tech Support and Scenario/Mod Tips sub forums.  The Family specific Tech Support Forums have been moved to a new CM2 Archives area and frozen in place. You might also notice we dropped the "x" from distinguishing between the first generation of CM games and the second.  The "x" was reluctantly adopted back in 2005 or so because at the time we had the original three CM games on European store shelves entitled CM1, CM2, and CM3 (CMBO, CMBB, and CMAK).  We didn't want to cause confusion so we added the "x".  Time has moved on and we have to, so the "x" is now gone from our public vocabulary as it has been from our private vocabulary for quite a while already.  Side note, Charles *NEVER* used the "x" so now we're all speaking the same language as him.  Which is important since he is the one programming them
carcer

Omaha Beach West

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, NPye said:

Curved roads, is it that difficult, as they've semi done it with the rail lines. Would really improve mapping. Cheers

I think it would be possible to do curved roads in CM. Just have the scenario designer put down roads as NURBS curves and then have the game engine map those curves to the underlying grid. The player would see a nicely curved road, and the underlying game engine would see the squiggly, jaggy road.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, NPye said:

Lets get them to do it. LOL We wish?

I sure wish they'd work a bit on something like that. Of course it's always easier for me to sit on the sidelines and shout suggestions than it is to actually do the work:)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's funny roads are brought up as that's the current issue I'm working around for phase one of the map by getting basic placement of everything. Almost finished with it though. Once map is completely done I'll put it out there as a master map for everyone to use and then start working on mission. Thanks Pete for the dropbox link, that definitely seems like that was a lot of work you put into it. I don't doubt that there's a lot of useful info in it for what I'm working on. Just finished reading Omaha Beach Field Guide by Brigadier General Shuey. It's neat and somewhat useful although waiting on a french translated book that should give the best account and design of the strongpoints. I was wondering what JonS meant by the beach is shingle, which turns out the reason it's not very evident now is that all the rocks/gravel were used for road construction into Paris. From a historical perspective this whole thing is a mess to research as it seems most of what I read is contradictory. For dog green Shuey makes it sound like no one made a landing adjustment away from the draw and in another account I remember reading was that Rangers or a Flag team waved other landing craft away; signaling that resistance at the draw was too strong. It's also kind of funny how every MG position is a pillbox and every Grenadier rifleman a sniper. I'm curious if the German units had any scopes in their TOE. What I really can't find is an accurate account of how many tanks from the 743rd tank battalion left their LCT's. The Field Guide book makes it sound like only 6 were engaging from the waterline, other accounts put way more or way less. Critical hit has 18 tanks from 6 LCT mk5's on Dog Red turn two (not sure how long a turn is), 16 tanks from 4 LCT mk6's Dog White turn 1, and 8 tanks from 2 LCT mk6's on Dog Green turn 1. LCT causalities offshore already taken into account in the game (maybe not). So now I'm really confused. For the mission my approach was going to be setting up a mostly historical force pool of combat units and then start cutting down ratio wise until the mission is conservative and playable for most computers. Shueys' book gives me a good idea of how to make the mission fun though; instead of focusing too much on the beach I'll focus on cost benefit objectives beyond the beach so the player will have some hard choices to make. With primary objectives centered around the St. Laurent western town approach (wasn't historically taken from the D-3 draw), Vierville, and exiting designated Ranger units west; then tough choices can be questions such: do I concentrate on St. Laurent, Vierville, or both? Take the time to clear the draws to have tank assistance or bypass the draws due to time restraints? Exit designated Ranger squads or use them to hold objectives against counter attack? Take the time to take secondary objectives such as the strong points? and where to concentrate naval support? Hopefully those kinds of questions could make the mission interesting and challenging.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Balkoski is your best bet regarding the number of tanks that actually landed,  when,  and where. Two books - 'beyond the beachhead' and especially 'omaha'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just looked into the Balkoski stuff- pretty interesting. Turns out the flagging communication away from dog green and onto dog white I was thinking of was done by the 5th rangers in the boats as their commander- Schnieder had enough sense to deviate from the not so intelligent plan of attacking the draws straight on. Confirmed through that Omaha book and also war departments military history http://www.history.army.mil/books/wwii/100-11/ch3.htm that 24 shermans landed on dog white and green followed by 18 (possible minus of 3) on dog red for a total of 42 tanks in the western section. That's a lot of tank. Seems the issue in most narratives is that the focus is on the DD tanks (32 per battalion), leaving out the water proofed shermans (24 per battalion) and because the 741st lost a majority of their DD's; most presented material makes it sound like there wasn't much tank support. The tanks couldn't see in the morning light to provide good support but that's besides the point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, carcer said:

That's funny roads are brought up as that's the current issue I'm working around for phase one of the map by getting basic placement of everything.

We're all struggling with it to make maps realistic looking.. especially when re-creating real places.

There seem to be two "schools" in CM mapmaking: Either you place everything where it was in real life, using the overlay, and then you get zigs in the zaggiest places.. or you choose to interpret the real map and squeeze it into the CM limits, changing the proportions in order to minimise the wriggles. My own Pierrefitte-en-Cinglais is an example of the latter approch, but both have their merits of course.

Anyway, just musing. Didn't mean to go off topic. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/19/2017 at 11:44 AM, DesertFox said:

Dunno if you are a detail fanatic, but this might help about a thing or two:

http://ww2talk.com/index.php?threads/omaha-beach.69555/

 

Sweet thanks DesertFox that info is freaking awesome. Whoever the author is, especially if they've done the same for other beaches, should put all that together in a book and publish lol seriously.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Update: well that sucked; I had to start back over. Lesson learned: don't resize map hoping that your math for re-scaling will check out to be only a few meters off. Attempt two looks a lot better though and I'm starting to get decent at map making. I've cut it down a bit after figuring out what a better frame was for the western half. There's about a days work left on the thing to be considered 'alpha'ish', so I'll throw on some screens then. If anyone's reading this and you're bored, I found this cool French website-

http://vierville.free.fr/index.htm

http://omahabeach.vierville.free.fr/index.htm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Finished phase one; at least to the point all the major place holders are in and I can begin detailing the map and sectors. I went with the non-zigzag map design. Not sure how I feel about it. Might need to mix it up a bit? Also working on a terrain texture pack thing to go along with the map which I've replaced the mud texture with one to represent wet sand hopefully making the beach more interesting. I believe the tide line with sandbars is around the 3/4-1/2 point. All buildings placed have confirmed existence (still more to add and fine tune), but a majority of them along the coast and in Les Moulins will be destroyed.

https://goo.gl/photos/ryafBQisZvt4PMiD6

https://goo.gl/photos/nBRPrcj43f54cbpK6

Curious what thoughts and opinions might be for this tobruk and open top bunker idea. I went with the literal meaning for tobruk: concrete reinforced foxhole.

https://goo.gl/photos/6DyHufsp2xsZV9Lm8

View from the beach:

https://goo.gl/photos/9cCkYB2G3Y6NPpij8

 

comments and suggestions are welcome

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, carcer said:

Correction; I guess I'm in favor of the zigzag and irregular angles. I'll smooth out parts where it makes sense to on the map.

https://goo.gl/photos/yCxYPByrSxBiiRcL8

Looks good. More like the real thing.

Here: http://remonterletemps.ign.fr/telecharger?x=-0.869292&y=49.361606&z=14&layer=GEOGRAPHICALGRIDSYSTEMS.MAPS&demat=DEMAT.PVA$GEOPORTAIL:DEMAT;PHOTOS&missionId=missions.3181183

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/2/2017 at 1:39 AM, carcer said:

I went with the non-zigzag map design. Not sure how I feel about it. Might need to mix it up a bit?

Hooray, and yes - it's not either/or. Some map features might be too far from the 45 degree angle restrictions that you have to do a bit of zigzag.

But in many cases, squiggly roads and walls can be eliminated without deviating too much from the real life terrain, and I believe the finished map will look a bit better for every zig that's been sacked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the tips and the website with the aerials; extremely helpful. I've been trying to tackle the Vierville draw recently to get the basic layout down as I figured that area would be the most difficult. It definitely is especially for WN72 and 73 but for the most part have 72 nailed down to a nice abstraction. Probably a mission spoiler but here's where it's at now:

https://goo.gl/photos/jxwDzqyibrFMFqp48

In the center to represent a tank turret that was on-top of the right side bunker I've added a 75mm infantry gun. This position should prove to be pretty nasty as the gun bunkers have enfilade fire across the entire beach.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, carcer said:

In the center to represent a tank turret that was on-top of the right side bunker I've added a 75mm infantry gun.

Wouldn't it be better to simply add an AT gun bunker?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

High velocity vs low velocity. A-tk vs a-pers.

There's no "right" answer,  and his choice is reasonable,  imo.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read this article a while ago and at one stage thought of making a scenario for the Ranger's effort at Vierville Draw:

http://warfarehistorynetwork.com/daily/wwii/cracking-the-vierville-draw-at-omaha-beach/

I was particularly interested in the action on the westernmost part where they scaled rough cliffs to assault a set of trenches and pillboxes. The article contains some nice photos and map that migh help you in some way shape or form.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×