Webwing

Great. What about a tread that you would update the first post with the suggestions that follow on the other posts, most common ones at least. I'll start taking notes. --

Dirtweasle, If you are planing Human x Human then no AI needed. If you can settle for an attacking player against a deffending AI minimal or no AI neede either. As for contour lines they can be a bit of a pain if you want to get too detailed which I gether is not what you want. For a CMx1 style map should not take more than 2 minutes to do. I will try to make a video tutorial on those two topics as soon as I find the time. People seem to have liked them. Did it for TOW editor and the last time I checked more 3.000 downloads. Mind you TOW's editor is A LOTmore complex than CMSF's. --

The editor in the previous CM games was very simple indeed. This one is very powerful. But you see, if you are satisfied with just a very rustic scenario, ala CMx1, it can be done in no time. The beauty of this game in my opinion is that you can just throw in a few walls, some trees and a few flat houses and have a memorable battle if you know what you are doing. Think of the new editor as Word for Windows( bad comparison sorry, I hate it ). There is a lot of stuff you can do with it but if you want to just type a fast text, its up to you. Maybe I'll do a video tutorial for that... I can't believe people will start criticizing the editor. I have been messing with this stuff from MODers or from the developers themselves for loads of games. This software is the best compromise between ease of use and powerful features I've seen. - [ November 27, 2007, 02:06 PM: Message edited by: Webwing ]

- Why do you betas do this? No wonder you get a bad name around here!!!! Now seriously, can't you guys save it in 1.04 format and upload it again? Don't you save a previous installation of the game? -

I'm not a beta tester. I read about the game and what people thought about it before I bought it. I like the concept of CMSF. Would have done it differently though. I paid for the game. I see bugs and problems. 1.05 is not going to solve them all. I enjoy the game as is and I'm having fun with it. Why do I feel like I have to justify myself? People take all this discussion so personaly because for instance: When some say that the game is unplayable, flawed beyond repair, etc. it somehow implies that if you do like it you must be a blind fool with very low standards. I'm sure that's not what people that are criticizing the game meant. I think this forum is the right place to complain and express your disappointment if that is the case. Most people make legitimate complains of some things that make the game horrible for them. Fine. But I imagine that unfortunately this sort of posts scare off the people that like the game. -- [ November 27, 2007, 12:42 PM: Message edited by: Webwing ]

- It won't show in the list of battles! Neither can I open it in the editor... Are you a beta tester using 1.05? It happened before... --

-- Thanks!!!!! Sounds very promissing! Downloading... --

Well, that part must be a bug. Like I said I was lucky and it happened to me just twice but I read other people talk about it so I guess is common. I hope they have that on the list for the next patches.

In CMSF they still do overlap in a quite sexual way... getting inside each other! :eek: -

That's a good one. I have used it a lot. But then there is the restarting of the game to capture another snapshot of the action...

And it shows! For me the editor IS the game, since I spend 90% of the time in the editor. Tweaking the forces, finding the right balance, adding a building here to block LOS, etc. All that is very enjoyable. Apparently you have been a lot more successful than me with the 'active' AI. In the defence it is quite convincing and does some clever stuff. But I have the feeling that no matter what you do, when the AI is attacking it always feels a bit fake. It's like that in all games, it's not only with CMSF. It's just extremely complex stuff going on I guess. There are a few simple features that if added to the editor would make a huge difference though. Turning off the fog of war is just one of them. I can't imagine it would be hard to implement but it would be a big help.

Good Idea! I love this scenario. Beautiful terrain, layout, details and the battle itself is fantastic. I'm curious to see your plan JohnO! I'm not posting mine. Unless you are having a hard time achieving a Total Defeat.

Thanks MarkEzra, Basic training might help a bit. Testing in all modes is extremely tedious. To be thorough you would have to test also RealTime WEGO... Very hard to have a balenced battle that would play the same in all modes. It might be better just to specify in your scenario: to be played as Blue, RT, Veteran. I don't know...

It happened to me twice. I'm not sure I understand what you mean. You want to order all three squads of a platoon to dismount at the same time? Once dismounted you would have to shift-select the squads. Double clicking will include the vehicles as well. -- [ November 27, 2007, 03:22 AM: Message edited by: Webwing ]

This is a feature that exists in the TOW editor and is fantastic for debbuging your mission. In CMSF the only way to see if the AI is doing what it's supposed to do is to place a spy on a high building or something. But that's far from ideal since even a spy can't see everything all the time. Does anybody know of a better way to do this? Am I missing something? Thanks. ---

- One of the trickiest things for me so far is to put roads that go across hills or even small elevation. I've yet to find a more effective and less time consuming way to do that. --

Sneaksie, Thanks a lot. That is amazing! Best news I hear in a long time. I'm back to TOW!!! --

sgtgoody, I don't think there are random changes. From what I've seen what happens is if you change the elevation in one point it adapts the elevation around it. Depending how you 'lock' your elevation the points that are 'free' will try to adjust to keep the general look smoth. You have to experiment a bit since depending which and how you lock some points you might create wrinkles or other undesired effects. You are right in that if you put less points between diferent hights it will look smother and probably better. But it depends a lot. It Takes some trying to find out which points to lock and which to be left untouched. Not sure if this helps you. Just my experience so far. I like this elevation system a lot. Once you get used to it, it works wonders.

SlapHappy, Here I am!! Man, this is like a dream came true. Can't wait to put my hands on it!!!! --

- A map builder for TOW where you can edit the elevation of the terrain??? When??? --

- CODIVMW? -

Great News!!!!

When TOW was release the forum was a nightmare of complains. Most of them legitimate. Much as I was anticipating this release I waited. And waited. After around 3 months and having read all the criticism, bugs and problems and specially the prospects of improvement in the areas that I thought were important for me I finally bought the game. I enjoyed it immensely. I had a fantastic time specially with the powerful editor. Now CMSF. I only bought it 10 days ago, or less, can’t remember. Same thing. Needs adjustments, bug fixes and all but very enjoyable as it is now. I’m having a great time with the editor as well. The major topic here is not about fixing bugs but about not agreeing with the underlying design options made by BF. Although this makes for some stimulating discussion, there is not much that can be done about it. Besides a lot of it is just personal opinion/preferences. Personally I just want the bugs fixed. ---- SlapHappy, I'm busy now with this RED campaign for CMSF but as soon as I finish that I'm planning on going back to TOW to see how it is maturing. Thanks. - [ November 24, 2007, 04:55 PM: Message edited by: Webwing ]

- This reminds me so much of when TOW was released.... -

MarkEzra, Very good!!! Only now I had the time to play it and study it a bit. I have to say though that the merit for the attack plan is all yours and not the TacAI's. You told them exactly where you wanted them to go and what to do every step of the way. In this light you did a great job indeed. I'm also putting together a few missions with RED Player X BLUE AI. The editor is very robust but the Orders system is nothing more than assigning waypoints to groups and specifying the area they should occupy. So far I see three main limitations in this if you are planning an attack. For the deffender this is more than enough. One is that the troops tend to not leave the area painted which is good if that is what you intended them to do. But with a simple way point (a point not a painted area) you would have had a general location and the AI would position the troops as it saw fit. The second is that since this is only a variation of the waypoint system to have only 8 groups does not seem enough for you to have a detailed urban combat attack plan. And the last is that you don’t have a trigger to say when the troops will go to the next order. There is only a timer. You can’t tell them: Go there only if you see enemy troops, for instance. Having said all that, I am fully aware that any design decision is a trade off. This editor is slick and extremely user friendly as opposed to a more script driven editor (TOW for instance). And even with the intrinsic limitations there is loads of possibilities to be explored. And you took advantage of them very well in this scenario.