Kwazydog

Ah I see what you mean Peter. Hmm, to be honest I suspect that the issue remains similar to what I meantioned above as we still need buildings to be able to be placed on more angles than is currently available. Also there is an added level of complexity in that we need to work out a way to allow designers to join these buildinds into a single solid row. It is certainly something I would like to see in game myself and it is something we will look into, but its too early at this stage to know what we may be able to do there.

Maybe, but I guess that depends on how effective it actually is vs cost. As far as Im aware no export units have been shipped with it thus far, even though the T-90SA has had other improvements.

As can be seen in the patch notes, this was not something that has changed in 1.06. It is something that we will be looking into as we move towards WW2 however, as has already been mentioned I beleive. Dan

Ruhr, I love the report Is there any chance you would have a save of this issue so we can look at it directly? If so Ill pass it onto Charles and Im sure it will be a minor fix. Thanks! Dan

Runyan, Other Means was actually suggesting they routed. Currently when a unit does this they have a marker indicating such, which when dissappears (this is something we will likely expand on in the future). If you hadnt looked at them in several minutes it sounds like this was at the least a possibility. If this didnt happen, youve found a problem that hasnt been reported to us. If you happen to have a save please feel free to forward it to us. Dan

I beleive a new demo is in the works though, and wont be too far away Dan

Duck, make sure you have the ATI Compatability option turned on, too, that removes this problem on my system. Dan

Hehe, take a look through it and see what you think Hannibal . One thing to note is that the info is a little dated now as it was written in around 99 with an update in 2001 iirc, but the amount of data it covers would likely fill 3 regular books.

Below is one of the most comprehensive resources I have found, thoroughly recommended. It covers tanks, APCs, artillery and ATGMs including mutions. Soviet/Russian Armor and Artillery Design Practices: 1945 to Present http://www.amazon.com/Soviet-Russian-Artillery-Design-Practices/dp/1892848015

Its worth noting that the North Korean equipment list is very similar to that of the Syrians, too. The main differences would be that Syria has newer gear that the NKs likely dont, such as modern ATGMs.

And on that note, I think its a good time to lock this one up And if you do have any further questions for cool breeze the place to post would be the general forum as to be honest this is rather off topic in here.

Heya M1! Okay this one is a little tough as it opens fine for me, and as another artist did the origionals I cant comment on if they were saved using any different settings. Any chance you could try it on a different system, or is there anyone else here that could try and open one for us to see if they have any luck ? One though...if you can open under a different program and resave, I suspect all should be fine. Can you view them in any other applications? Dan

Hi Guys, I checked with Chalres and this is currently intentional. The reason being that the BMP ammo can only penetrate the Strykers armor at close range. As such they will tend to use HE against them at longer ranges in order to damage items such as optics, suspension, etc. Dan

Webwing, I suspect that the problem is actually your texture setting being set on best. Try setting and the model quality to medium for a start and see what results you get in the same location/same scenario. Also turn of Antialias/Multisample as well so as to remove any potential issues related to video card settings. If thats okay, increase your model setting a notch and check out the results. Dan [ November 21, 2007, 04:56 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Hi Guys, At this point I would suggest waiting for 1.05 before running any tests or comparisons. Whilst I am not sure of any specifics relating to cover, the list of new features, improvements, enhancements and bug fixes is so extensive that I think it would be best wait it out, particually as changes in one area can affect others. Not much longer now! After 1.05 such comparisons and testing would be very interesting indeed I beleive, and Steve should have time to answer some of the more spevific questions (which I unfortuantely dont know the answers too). Dan [ November 17, 2007, 04:41 PM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

Hi guys, As Johno mentioned above the major focus of our efforts are currently bug squashing and improvements for 1.05. That being said I have started preliminary work on my end as there is a lot I can do without interupting that process. No ETA on screen shots just yet Dan

Hi Guys, Locking this as its off topic. Dan

Hi Guys, Firstly thanks for taking the time to pass on your thoughts. As Ive mentioned in a couple of other similar threads, we are very busy at the moment trying to finalise 1.05 and get it out to you guys. We are getting closer now guys, and I am happy to say that personally I am very happy with the way its shaping up thus far. Until that point we will probably be a little more scarce than usual in the forums. After 1.05 hoping time will allow us to be more active here. With that said Im going to lock this one up as its heading off topic fast. Dan

Tankist, thanks for your thoughts. As has been mentioend this one is pretty much off topic and only going to cause unnecessary back and forth, so Im locking it up.

Hehe, guys all is fine, we are just all very busy working on various items at the moment, the main of which is of course 1.05 for CMSF which is getting much closer and shaping up very well. Going to lock this one now as its off topic and the question have been answered

Im not sure what you are referring too Mazex, but there certainly remains an 8800 issue that we will continue to investigate. Its great news that there are overall improvements though, that is what we were hoping for. [ October 03, 2007, 04:30 AM: Message edited by: KwazyDog ]

This is quite possibly due to the lip around the edge of the building, which the guy is below, whereas area fire is targetting the general area. Does the problem still exist if the guy isnt prone? If it does, please provide us with a download link so we can take a look.

Try the link above Hantarr, I added a more direct link for Rune to save confusion