aka_tom_w

I think you are refering to SOPs Standard Operating Procedures so you can sort of issue "guide lines" to the Tac AI It is a good idea and it has come up before, Lets wait and see what they do for us in the next BIG THING CMII -tom w

LOL -tom w

what?! how did my favourite thread fall off the first page :confused: -tom w

try this thread: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=8;t=003244;p=2 you can see pics posted there What version of the G4 Tibook do you have? how fast mHz? -tom w

bump

Nice post, tom w! This exact event happened to my Panzer IV in a QB. However, my Panzer IV was lost with a side shot to it's hull! Alas, my "regular" crew did not have the skill or experience to stop and fire and ended up being destroyed by a side hull shot. At least I am glad to hear that some crews (your veteran crew) will stop and fire under these circumstances! [/QB]</font>

My understanding of the issue is that when the hull rotates AND you want to fire, the turret MUST rotate ((unless the hull is rotating and the turret NOT rotating to track a moving vehicle, BUT this is unlikely) BUT in the event of stationary target the IF the hull rotates the turret MUST counter rotate to stay on the target. In Puds case his turret started out in the correct orientation because he had a GOOD cover arc. BUT when the hull was required to reverse and rotate toward the target the turret then became NO longer in the correct orientation and had to rotate back toward the target to compensate. NOW it is my opinion that when the turret and hull are both rotating in opposite directions to acquire the target, (in Pud's Case) NO shot should be possible or taken while the tank and turret are in motion (rotating) THAT said it is my experience in the pic I posted about the Pz Mrk IV that given a target a a rotate order where the hull and turret rotate in opposite directions to maintain the target lock the tank WILL "jig" 3-4 degrees and fire then jig again, meaning a small hull and turret rotation will take place and then BOTH will stop and the tank will fire. This was a Veteran crew and it was a JOY to watch the this brave act. They got off about 3-4 shots while rotating and STOPPING rotating to fire. I believe the issue here is that in the game, when the turret rotates one way and the hull rotates the OTHER way (so hull and turret are both trying to face the threat while rotating in opposite directions) the game will NOT let the tank fire. It is my opinion that this is EXACTLY correct TAC AI behaviour. My reasoning is that the Gunner cannot AIM and Fire while he is trying to rotate the turret BACK to the thread while trying to accomondate for the fact the hull is rotating toward the threat (mean the turret is now wandering AWAY from the thread, in this case NO shot should be possible, until both hull and turret stop rotating which the game WILL do in small increments if you have a more experienced crew!) IMHO -tom w

that is a good graphic to show the situation Can the T34/85 fire while on the FAST move? if so it should have fired while moving WITH the turret facing the target while the turret was not rotating in your grahic if the T34/85 was on the fast move it should have kept going fast and fired on the move until the end of its fast move order ? :confused: no? I do not believe guns should fire while turrets are rotating back in the bad old days of CMBO the Greyhound and the M18 would race all over the battlefield scoring hits EASILY while on the FAST move this was VERY problematic and GAMEY in my opinion and I posted more than a few RANTS about how bad I thought that problem was. NOW in CMBB the chance to hit while on the move has been dramatically reduced and this is a GOOD thing. I'm sure there are folks here who know WAY more than I do about this issue BUT it makes sense to me the turret should only rotate when NOT firing the main weapon. I am guessing you can Reload and rotate AND to can rotate the hull and rotate the turret at the same time but if the turret has to rotate how can the gunner aquire the target. I know this does NOT count here (but I will mention it anyways) you can get a REAL good sense of this playing Panzer Elite, you can make it almost completely realistic (except you can't make it account for the travel time of the round to target) and do all the gunnery aiming your self, if you want you can try to look through the gunnery site and aim and fire while the tank is moving THIS IS VERY HARD. You can can also try to aim and fire while the turret is rotating, but I assure you the chance you can hit a distant tank while aiming and firing from a rotating turret is so close to ZERO you may as well NOT waste the round. BUT that is just my own (NEVER been in tank in my life) opinion FWIW -tom w [ February 27, 2003, 09:40 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Hey NewGuy! Good Point!! I agree completely! "if you have your flank or rear exposed you probably made a wrong tactical decision, wouldn't it be gamey to be able to negate the tactical mistakes you made and be able to fire while getting your front towards the enemy and firing rounds after rounds. you'd never be able to take out a tiger" Absolutley Goddamn Right! -tom w

Good Post BadgerDog BUT this is my interpretation of what I saw the last time this happened to me: "In the Balkovzy Surprise (its on the CMBB disk) I was playing the as the Germans against the Russian AI and I watched in wonder (GOOD Wonder) as my Pz Mk IV excuted a rotate in place order ONLY in between shots!! It had a t34 aquired and was pumping rounds into it fast as possible as the t34 was not firing back because it was targeting another tank. (thats a good thing) The Pz Mk IV should have been VERY concerned because it got caught with its FULL flank aspect toward the t34, it had been on a hunt command with the cover arc toward the t34 so the turret was correctly orientated and it acquired the t34 and stopped to fire the minute it had LOS PERFECT! (good thing!) In the next order phase, I deleted the hunt command and ordered ONLY a rotate in place to bring the frontal aspect toward the t34 (sound tank dueling tactics I figure ) BUT the TAC AI is smarter than that!!!! During the next minute the tank fired before turning (smart I think!) and then it only did a Little small 2-3 degree rotate in place while the loader loaded the next round, THEN it would stop rotating the hull, adjust the turret, AIM, and fire, it did this three more times before the frontal aspect was toward the intended target. (rotating the hull presumably, only while the loader was loading) These guys had NERVES of Steal!! PERFECT tank crew co-ordination! Unt Hiller! Pn IVF Commander Veteran GETS my Hero of the Month award or nerves of steal and bravery! (it helps when you are a Veteran crew and NOT being fired upon)" I think it makes sense. given the tank is ONLY rotating. It would make sense to me that the tank should NOT rotate the hull or the turret AND fire while stationary. Both the hull and turret should rotate incremendallyy inbetween shots (while loading) and BOTH should stop moving to AIM and fire. IMHO I thought I saw this happen and I think it is amazing and correct that the TAC AI works this way. -tom w

once more I really don't think this is a bug, IT is a feature to model historically realistic tank gunnery behaviour. IMHO see my account of it in this thread: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=23&t=004981#000002 -tom w

bump

I have seen this in CMBB I posted a Thread somewhere indicating I was AMAZED at the accuracy of the NOT firing while the hull was rotating. I watched a tank move the turret and rotate the hull simultaneously and not fire while moving. I thought this was Brilliant! The gunner will ONLY fire while the hull and turret are NOT moving. My guess is that the game was designed that way to be realistic. This is not a bug IT is a feature to model historically realistic tank gunnery behaviour. IMHO see my account of it in this thread: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=23&t=004981#000002 -tom w [ February 27, 2003, 10:29 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

try this ONLY play pre-built scenario's against folks you trust. The problem exists you think "buying" forces is a reasonable way to play CMBB. the entire concept of "buying" you own forces is GAMEY and everything that follows thereafter can therefore be considered equally gamey. So what your saying is that it is GAMEY to buy KV1's :confused: ? is that correct? -tom w

I understand water was HARD coded in CMBB to ALWAYS be at the same level so Water falls and rapids are out I guess. That is sort of a shame, but the intention of the idea to keep all water level is a good one. -tom w [ February 26, 2003, 11:06 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

TITLE Mac OS 8 and 9: Compatibility With Macintosh Computers Article ID: Created: Modified: 25114 2/17/00 2/10/03 ------------------------------------------------------------------------ TOPIC Compatibility table of Macintosh computers and the various versions of Mac OS 8 and Mac OS 9. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ DISCUSSION : http://docs.info.apple.com/article.html?artnum=25114&SaveKCWindowURL=http%3A%2F%2Fkbase.info.apple.com%2Fcgi-bin%2FWebObjects%2Fkbase.woa%2Fwa%2FSaveKCToHomePage&searchMode=Assiste d&kbhost=kbase.info.apple.com&showButton=false&randomValue=100&showSurvey=false&sessionID=anonymous|165098170

I'll think you'll find that moving along railway tracks is a very bad idea as the chances to bog increase dramatically. Railroad tracks are definitely best avoided. Regards Jim R. </font>

Great List! I like this one the best: "Toggled Elevation Grid. For me, others will differ; the one big human-to-computer interface problem is the lack of an ability to spot elevation/undulation changes realistically. Using the 1.25m elevation settings there is a greater change in colour for any given change in elevation, but even so, the real life ability to spot elevation change, undulations, is far greater then in CMBB. Computer screens just cannot handle it the way the human eye can in the real world. Thus the ability to toggle a grid on and off in the orders phase of the game so as to better spot undulations, would be a big plus. " -tom w

bump

ok how crazy is this? If a tanks commander has the hatch open can the mortar or arty round drop down the hatch and take out the tank? I have never seen a mortar round KO a close top tank with an open hatch in CMBB, but I am always hopeing to be pleasantly surprised I would think it would be cool if there was a .5% chance (1 shot in 500) that would KO the tank by dropping down an open hatch. Nay Sayers reply: Yeah yeah, but the TC is standing in the open hatch so the round would NEVER go down the hatch. Oh well.... it was only an idea :eek: -tom w IN CMBB mortar round NEVER KO closed top tanks, panic break or route maybe but not KO, at least I have never seen it. -tom w

well it is not a first person shooter thats for sure. I think the game itself is about %10 faster than the demo but that is ONLY a guess there are two slow things in between turns the Computer has to "think" of its move. and then the CPU has to "crunch" the turn (the crunch is the dark blue line going across as the action and combat resolution is computed) the "crunch" is usually the longer phase. the REAL game won't be all that much quicker unless you play someone in TCP/IP and set the timer to 1-3 minutes, if they have a faster computer than you they will do the "crunch" and the turns will be somewhat quicker then... ok? Good luck btw how do you like the game? -tom w [ February 21, 2003, 11:00 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

maybe the gunner got "lucky" on the first shot maybe the ammo charge (gunpowder) is in consistant after the first shot hit the gunner got so excited he pissed him self and missed the second shot :eek: (I don't know Its just a guess) if there is one thing about CMBB that there seems to be a general LACK of bitching about its accuracy in tank gunnery duals. on one hand one might suggest that BFC have completely brainwashed us from in forum posts and from playing the FINAL version of CMBO that we now take what fiction in the gunnery accuracy in CMBB as gospel and like and worship it OR MAYBE Just maybe it is such a GREAT historically accurate tank gunnery model now in CMBB that most everyone here assumes it is correct and does not bitch about shot missed or gunnery stats that your OVER accurate. There have been only about two threads regarding tank gunnery accuracy since CMBB came out and they have not been the HUGE whine and Bitch fests that we saw in CMBO, not at all. Mostly the "chance to hit" equations in CMBB seem to be RIGHT on the money (either that or they have us so asCMilated or brainwashed that we no longer know the difference between a reality and a fantasy video game :confused: ) hows that for a late night rant? that is just the way I see it IMHO -tom w [ February 20, 2003, 11:42 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

I was joking about the upgrade to a PC comment. (I think) :confused: -tom w

this does sound very cool! But as another Mac user I am wondering :confused: How the heck does it work :confused: This whole Mac OSX NO mapping mission NO COMMOS no 2 turn PBEM thing ALMOST makes me want to upgrade to a PC! :eek: (and it HURTS to say that) -tom w

Screw that ! lets get into it right here. Bits and Chips is clearly in violation. (I think :confused: ) -tom w