Kwazydog

Thanks for you comments. If you are interested in learning more about modern combat and the types of warfare you may see in CMSF, please read the AAR and cehck out some of the reading material above. From our point of view CMSF is a tactical wargame based on a reasonably possible near future conflict, not a political simulator. There are other games on that subject though if that is what interests you. Dan

Yup, I think its time to lock this one up...

Martin, Im sure Steve will have a better answer (other than user interace problems, which is a very real concern), but above everything else Im pretty sure that individual soldier ammo availability is not something someone at the company commander level wouldnt know or even really care about Dan

Cavscout/Hellfish, Ill pass the info onto Steve. As it stands we also have the M4 with 203 if needed (I made it accidently before we thought we didnt) Dan [ October 15, 2005, 01:51 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Yup, it is, I actually thought you were suggesting that it was an integrated part of the weapon whereas it is interchangable. At the top right of the image above you can see the carry handle/sight attachment, which is what I was referring too Above you suggested that this was only used on the A2 whereas I have many photos of it in use on the M230/A4 combo as below and thus why we had a model representing it. As I said we also have one with the scope as well though, and will probably use both. Dan [ October 15, 2005, 01:31 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Thanks, thats actually quite a compliment . Dan

Actually nope, its not integrated, its all interchangable From what Ive seen in photos most of the guys in Iraq with a 203 actually use the carry handle/sight as opposed to the scope, but photos of it areant all that commen so we will see what our beta testers suggest with regards to this. We do have both built anyways. Check out the below for an idea of the different configurations. Note how the front bottom rail comes off, which is where the 203 attaches (and thus no heat shield is used)... Dan [ October 14, 2005, 11:59 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Zemke thanks for the support and as Ive recently said elsewhere I apologise if my comments were out of line also. It been a long week on the forums, hehe, but I think that things are starting to get back on track. Hopefully in time we may see some of the others whom were dead against a modern setting at least give it a chance and see if they can find it as interesting and challanging as we feel it will be . Dan

Yup, was just going to mention this, you can actually somewhat see this in the photo Steve posted above, too I also found many where the 230 sight wasnt attached either but we can certainly add this if its use is the norm. The weapon dimensions are all made off of a blueprint and to the correct scale (we can measure to the mm in the new engine) but I will double check to be sure. Dan

Okay guys, this one looks like it should be put to rest. Michael/Warmonger, maybe it would be best to take this conversation to email? Dan

Tagwyn, Iran was a close second but there were many reasons why Syria was a better choice. For instnace when we compared the geography, military forces and equipment available between the two nations we found that Syria posed considerably more challanges for the player. On top of that Syria has been taking some steps towards modernizing their forces which should also provide some interesting challanges such as tank upgrades, ATGM purchases and even night vision gear. Dan [ October 14, 2005, 01:56 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Falco, last warning, please stop the irrelevant threads... Dan [ October 14, 2005, 02:01 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

With all the practice Ive been getting lately I was thinking something more along the lines of locksmith Dan

Ozi/John...I think its time to put this one to bed before someone pokes an eye out Dan

No worries Rob, it wasnt anything essential...just checking that my email is actually working, hehe. Dan

Guys we hope PBEM will be in and nothing suggests it wont at this point but time will tell. Please do a search for more info on the subject. Dan

Not sure what that means, hehe, but guys, its time we try to cut back on the noise here. Lets try and keep topics on subject thanks. Dan

Hehe sorry but no, you totally overrate yourself there my friend. I think of you more as another spoiled child in the playground whom didnt get to play with the right color marbles. Anyone who wishes to review your comments and my responses on this forum can and thus can judge for themselves...they are there for all to see, so lets leave it at that. Oh and I think it was I whom mentioned the Fallujah scenario? There is a lot that could be said here but Ill just pose one thought...do you seriously feel that the military could spend 6 weeks clearing each minor urban centre they come upon in a major campaign...I guess so if you feel that Syrian forces would be a walk in the park compared to the second gulf war. You also seem to be overlooking the fact that well over one hundred soldiers lost their lives in the relatively small battle in Fallujah and many hundreds more were wounded out of what was a reasonably small force that went into action. All this against a bunch of poorly organized, trained and equipped 'thugs' (using a Fox news term to keep you happy) that were in the town. Personally I find it very uncomfortable that you brush over this so lightly, but each to their own. So it seems that little more can be said on the matter...you think your right and we shouldnt disagree with you. As such, lets lock this thread and move on...not much more can come of it. Dan [ October 13, 2005, 05:12 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Hehe, okay...I havnt read the original post in detail but I can tell from the last couple of posts that its time to lock this one up Falco, if your not interested in CMSF we do apologise, and we hope your interested in our future products. Dan [ October 13, 2005, 12:55 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Good to catch up with you too Rob, and thanks again for a fascinating day...hehe, its amazing to see weapons and equipment like that on display in such a way ! Next time your up this way we will certainly have to work out a time to sit down and have a chat over a couple of beers. Dan PS: just to double check, you did get my email okay a couple of days ago? Had a couple of ISP problems in the last week is all

Oh of course, I was pretty much thinking form the point of view of when I came onboard! Yes, I would guess what, 90% of CMBO models were made by you Steve in the Mac problem? I came onboard in between CMBO and CMBB but we certainly reused as much as we could from CMBO! Dan PS : Hehe, now that I think about it I think I did a couple of the CMBO models Steve...I remember you being, err, confused by a certain Sherman model I sent through and after that I remember having a nightmare making the Humber and Priest [ October 13, 2005, 04:48 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

And you know what...in its own way its actually a hell of a compliment considering its a very early CMSF screen shot and we have considerably less staff and budget than your after FPS developer Dan

Interesting find Rob! Actually Ive mentioned this in another thread and it inspired me to do a bit of searching through the books I have here for a document I remember reading, which I found. It seemed the Germans werent against improvising with timed explosive devices, either For those interested, check out this link below German use of Explosive Devices Dan [ October 12, 2005, 07:36 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Hi Wicky! Actually the Mac program was only used for texture mapping the models in the previous versions, and that was only becuase the engine was written to support is. The models for CMSF will be made and texture mapped all with a software package called 3D Max (we will be using version 8 once it arrives). Actually I am even texturing them in Max as part of the process so that when I put the models in game they will be pretty much finalised. Bump mapping may or may not make it into the very first version, we need to see how time goes. This isnt so important for modern vehicles but we really want to get it in there for the zimmerit in German WW2 vehicles. The thing to remember about bump mapping though is that it does also takes up VRAM, so we do need to carefull balance between this and the detail we would like to get onto the texture itself (for instance we could have a texture and bump map on a vehicle or one texture with twice the resolution and detail...sometimes the later will look much better). As for the tyres turning we certainly hope so...not sure yet though Dan [ October 12, 2005, 06:51 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Hehe, thanks Mike. You know we honestly excpect some people to be dissapointed, and we are truely sorry that they are. All we have asked is that they understand we wanted do make something different for the first game in the new engine...myself, Ive been making models of WW2 vehicles for 5 years now and I can tell you its a hugh bunch of fun making a BMP with opening hatches, interior, etc instead That being said we also expected some of the nuts we have had tp deal with as well, calling us every name under the sun. Why people cant just be a little respectful when putting forward their opinions I have never understood, but after moderating the political forum for a while you do kinda get used to it. Dan