aka_tom_w

is that it?? Where are all those "Diesel Grogs" that should be posting and bitching and whinning in this thread. I can't believe I am the only Diesel Grog in a commmunity of WWII armour enthusiasts??!! :confused: oh well..... I tried -tom w

GREAT! thanks for the update Matt! -tom w

MadMatt says Charles will look into this: "* Smoke from burning vehicles blocks LOS a bit more." Thanks! -tom w [ November 10, 2002, 05:46 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Those are good questions.. How about this for #2: Your Squad that was 12 and is now 1 may have some dead soldiers left behind but may have 7-8 wounded guys still "with" the unit (sort of) making it more than a team so all those wounded guys won't fit "fit" on the vehicle? OK its a stretch but maybe that one man means only one combat effective soldier, along with a whole bunch of wounded that should not be moving anywhere anyway. (maybe?) #1 is a good question "Do tired passengers recover from being tired while riding?" Should they recover and rest while riding? I have no idea? :confused: -tom w

Hi Alex funny you should mention that: "Is this not going some way to resolve borg spotting? Code something to a limited view of one level while moving around the battlefield with + and - ?" That suggestion appears somewhere in this Monumental 8 page thread: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=024461;p= http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=024461;p=4 from this page: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=024461;p=5 if you are REALLY interested you should probably read all the posts in the entire 8 page thread " aka_tom_w Member Member # 1515 posted April 23, 2002 07:00 AM quote: Originally posted by Captain Wacky: quote: Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B: It could be argued that doing so would be more realistic but who cares about realism if the game is a bore to play? Grogs. They'll suffer through a crappy but realistic game sheerly out of some mysteriously deep sense of "duty" towards realism, but not necessarily the game itself Good Point and I agree with it. Since this "Grog Factor" is a very narrowly defined (and SMALL ok, tiny) market segement would it be possible to call this Fog of War setting "Extreme Groginess" FOW.? And make it the most DEMANDING on the player FOW setting? How will it work: (I'm glad you Asked ) The player must lose some control of units out of C&C. More than in CMBO but NOT complete loss of control. Units out of C&C cannot give the player any spotting info that would positively ID any enemy units they have spotted or are in contact with. (only nationality markers are revealed to the player by units out of C&C) (the newer enhanced TAC AI and SOP's will allow that friendly unit out of C&C to engage in fire fights with that unidentified nationality marker, or hide or run away) and you the Player "may" (or May not) see the casualities and unit strength go down and you would NOT know what that unit ( that was not in C&C ) was fighting with.) (Hence, KILL all the opponent's HQ units and you have effectively blinded your opponent ) Units out of C&C are controled by the player somewhat but are extremely compromised by command delays. (Tac AI can perhaps Spawn some NCO HQ units after the loss of the HQ ??) All units, and Units out of C&C, could benefit from NEW enhanced command tools like Standing Orders or SOPs, and the addtion of enhanced TAC AI. The enemy units can ONLY be viewed by the player while the player has the friendly unit selected (only in view level 1, (?) that one may be a sticky point, maybe from any view level to make the game actually FUN and playable) that originally spotted the unit. Of course every friendly unit must make its own spotting check to ID enemy units. (Given that you can only see the enemy unit FROM the perspective of the unit that spotted it, it is possible for two friendly units to positively ID an enemy unit and both be WRONG). One friendly unit may see an opposing tank and positively ID's it as a StuG (from their perspective when you the Player Selects that unit and therefore see only their perspective) and another different friendly unit, across the map, sees the same (or another near-by tank maybe there are two tanks and you the Player at this point cannot know the whole story) tank and Positively ID's it as a Hetzer (the tank in question may in fact be a well hidden StuH they think they see or a Mark IV LANG?) From the Allied perspective friendly Inf can ALWAYS ID Pz Mark IV's as Tigers, but CMBO already does that NOW thats Fog Of WAR! The player should ONLY see the enemy unit from the perspective of the friendly unit that ID'd the enemy in the first place. This will allow for completely realistic conflicting reports in the early stages of a battle. Hows that so far? -tom w" Don't worry this suggestion is not the only Relative Spotting idea. That thread goes ON and ON and many other folks (much wiser than myself) have posted their opinions and suggestions. Steve also posts his views about what is ACTUALLY do-able and shares his vision of the future here . (Scroll down to the last 3-4 posts of the page, in order to ignore all the drivel in my other posts on that page ) More on Iron Man rules here . "found here: http://home.arcor.de/tcmhq/Nifranko.htm FRANKO'S TRUE COMBAT RULES 1. INTRODUCTION. The following rules are designed to maximize the realism and immersion of single-player play. Generally speaking, as the human player, you are not allowed to do use the tools of the game interface for the purpose of doing anything your troops could not do in real life. All rules set forth below must be construed according to that principle. 2. SELECTING UNITS. Only use the "+" or "-" keys to move from friendly unit to friendly unit. Then, use the "tab" key. You can then only rotate in place to scan the surrounding terrain (imagine you are where the unit is, and that you can only see what THAT unit can see..its pretty simple). If there is friendly unit within the line of sight (LOS) of the unit you have currently selected, you do not have to use the + and - keys. Instead, you can simply point and click on that target unit, THEN hit the tab key. Any other way of accessing an enemy unit is forbidden. 3. VIEWING YOUR SURROUNDINGS. A. PANNING. After accessing the unit and hitting the tab key(which orients the view of the unit forward), you can only "look around" by using the pivot keys (1,3,7,9) on the keypad. In other words, you can pan 360 (your guys can turn around and look where they are). B. BUILDINGS: If your units are in a building or he unit icon (such as vehicle), blocks your view, you can use the "8" key to click ahead only such distance which is necessary to clear the sprite. C. ELEVATED VIEWS. Once turns begin (after setup), you may use only the lowest-level view ("1" on the keyboard), unless the following apply: 1. If your unit occupies are a two-level building, you may use View 2 ("2" on the keyboard") from the units location; and 2. If you are on the top floor of a church, you can use View 2 or View 3, whichever you prefer Note: The Setup procedure may offer you further viewing options. See Rule __, Below. 4. ENEMY UNITS. You may not, under any circumstances, "click on" or "select" an enemy unit. Use the "N" key to select targets. 5. ZOOM KEYS. You may not use the "zoon key" (the brackets), unless the following exceptions apply: A. You may use up to Zoom 2x if you're unit you are "looking from" is platoon leader or above. B. Your unit may use up to Zoom 4x if it has optics (e.g, an artillery observer, an AT gun, a tank). If you really want to be anal, buttoned up tanks or tanks that suffered casualties can only use up to zoom 4x in the direction of their turret facing, because, that's where the gunners optics are facing! American tanks may not be able to zoom at all..we can debate that one later. C. During Setup, under specified conditions (see below) 6. WEATHER. You must always have weather and fog set to "full" 7. SPECIAL SETUP RULES. The following setup rules apply depending on whether you are the attacker, defender, or if the battle is a meeting engagement. A. Attacker: During setup you may use View Level 7 ("7" on the keyboard)to aid in setup, in addition to the views you are permitted in Rules 1, 2, or 3, above. This "attacker's map" rule represents the "map" your troop commander would use to help prepare your troops for the assault. Whether such a map is available should be specified in your briefing by the designer. B. Defender: During setup you can use the map rule, above, if your signal corps has its act together. In addition, you can freely move about the map in level 1, or view level 2 (or 3, if a church) if that part of the map your viewing from is a multi-level building C. Meeting Engagements. Both sides may only view using the Attacker's map rule, or from any spot in their setup zone (only). Again, if a spot in their setup zonehas a church or building, adjust accordingly. D. OPTIONAL RULE: During setup you may print out a map (by taking a screen shot and printing the .bmp file) for use during the battle. This map should be at the minimum View Level 7. 8. GAME SETTINGS. Use only "Realistic" Sized units. Always have "full terrain" on. Turn unit bases and detailed armored hits "off". Generally speaking, use only those feature that the troops could use. Needless to say, Fog of War is ALWAYS set to FULL! Always interested in your input. Frank M. Radoslovich" All the best -tom w [ November 10, 2002, 08:09 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

any indication of When? or how long before it is released? I know the standard answer is "when its done" but aside from that.... will we see it by, oh say....the end of November maybe? just curious thanks the update -tom w [ November 09, 2002, 12:30 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Francko's True Combat Rules Previously known as the Iron Man Rule set. It means ONLY look at the battle from the view that your units can actualy see! You must (voluntarily) hop from unit it to unit and look around only using View level ONE! If you have a guy in the second floor of a building you can use view level 2. Something also about view level 3 if you are in the highest level of a church??? the rules are laid out somewhere on a web page in the forum. the idea is GREAT if you have the self discpline to ONLY move around the battlefield by using + and - to hop from unit to unit and only use view level one..... Do that and try and tell us the AI is easy to beat! he he -tom w [ November 09, 2002, 12:05 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

That is an interesting idea but my focus is not really replayability. Once to have played a new blind scenario against the AI you know the map and playing it again with the expectation that it will provide a new challenge does yourself and the game a dis-service (?). The original point was to suggest that BFC in CMII provide some more tools and functions and commands in the editor so that any scenario designer could help out the AI or "hint" it this way or that way, in order to provide the solo player (against the AI) with an interesting and challegeing game the first time they play the scenario blind, any subsquent attempts at that scenario should ideally "just" be considered for practice only as the human player (haveing played the scenario once) now has a an overwhelming advantage over the AI because of their memory of the battle. This goes double for scenarios as they are now,... IMHO they are really only challengeing or FUN when you play them against the AI blind for the first time, there after they always loose some of their charm (Chance Encounter not withstanding because almost everyone has played it so many times in CMBO and now in its CMBB format ) -tom w [ November 09, 2002, 12:00 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Now I know Matt did a GREAT job on the sounds and all the sound files in this game are his personal joy They Sound GREAT BUT.... I would like to hear a REAL diesel engine and it should be LOUD and it should be distinctive. I am not a gun fire sound Grog and I cannot understand ANYTHING any of the men are saying on the battlefield (english only speaker here, appologies to the international community) BUT but I can easily hear the difference between a gas engine and a diesel engine because the bass note in that low revving engine (any diesel) is unmistakeable. I have been trying to listen for that Diesel sound file in the game and IMHO ALL engine sounds in the the game are the same. I could be wrong ( I hope I am wrong) BUT just maybe in Patch 1.12 (the next one after this first one) there could be a code line for different sounding engines and they could have different .wav files associated with them. I would like to be wrong on this one, If anyone can tell me they can tell the difference (by listening to their computer speakers) between any of the sounds the different engines in the game make I would LOVE to hear about it. Which engines? Which country? Which tanks? can you tell them apart if you just get a sound contact. This is not such a stretch....really, it was well known (at least to my father), that the distinct sounds of different German bombers that few over London could be easily identified (by the sound of thier engines) in the black of night without ever seeing the aircraft. There were "listeners" that sat on roof tops all night long and listened to detect the different kinds of German bombers (just by the sound of their engines) that flew over England in the nighttime. I have no similiar reference to sound identification on the battlefield, but it would be my guess that tankers and expecially tank drivers could tell from the sound of an engine what kind of tank they could hear even when they could not see it. I would like to be able to listen to the sound contact of a tank and (in the game) train myself to identify different sounds of engines from differing sound contacts. anyone else???? I would settle for a Diesel engine sound clearly distinguishable from a Gas engine sound. your comments? -tom w [ November 10, 2002, 05:55 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Thats serious! My first copy went "missing" as well and I waited about 4 weeks to have another one shipped and it took about a week to arrive. Good luck tadpole I feel for ya! -tom w

Well war is a full contact sport and don't the Russian's usually get the "Home Field Advantage"? -tom w

That is a good (interesting :confused: ) observation. anyone else notice this. I have not looked for it, but I have not noticed that behaviour. Is BFC looking at it or testing it? is it reproducable? Does it have to do with something that was stated previously that larger caliber rounds are assumed by the tank crew to lead to k-kills if they "see" them penetrate EVEN if the death clock is counting on the tank?? Somewhere I read something the German crews that fired the 88 mm and the 75 mm on the Panther somehow "know" that if they get a penetration they can switch targets because of the energy delivered by the high velocity large round?? which they somehow know is a KILL...(maybe?) This means that it may affect the hunt command. This also suggests that the low caliber rounds that penetrate with no result may have a different affect on the hunt command as well, implying that even after a penetration the hunting tank "may" stay and not move on and keep pumping in the smaller rounds until they are sure the tank is really dead?? :confused: GOOD observation! -tom w [ November 08, 2002, 10:25 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

this is an interesting observation to be sure :confused: !! -tom w

Thanks Dan! That's what I (we ) meant: "The scripting should not augment but rather complement the current AI." If some of these "complementary" tools were available in the editor the scenario designer could "hint" the AI in one direction or another perhaps, with scripts and SOP's and things like flags that are not in fact flags but short term battlefield goals or objectives, to help the AI along during the battle. Thanks -tom w [ November 06, 2002, 11:21 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Hi Many Thanks to Gunslinger. I'm sure the Mod will look GREAT! But I am wondering if any other Mac folks here have figured out how to make those ACE .exe files available to Mac users? Any Mac guys figured this one out yet? -tom w

If you don't have the "retail version" of the game just what version of CMBB are you using now??? enquiring minds want to know?? -tom w

this "Costello" guy you refer to???? :confused: is that Abbott?? If you think you can take him in CMBB I would bet you are mistaken. I have played him and he is a VERY GOOD tactician! -tom w

"sadfully only) a scripted AI" is that a good thing? I mean I really don't know -tom w</font>

"sadfully only) a scripted AI" is that a good thing? I mean I really don't know -tom w

Zarquon posted P.S. : it's been said before : what we really need is the possibility to add scripting to scenarios. It would not help QB gaming vs. the Artificial Incompetence, but imagine pre-made scenarios where the designer could mark different paths for an AI attacker, set movement modes (cautious, overwatch yes/no, sneak, rush...), designate reserves and their trigger conditions etc.). Even simple scripting options would vastly improve solo gaming. If anyone is interested, please open a new thread." Jörg OK that sounds good to me..... That would happen in the editor and not be "open source" code. I think this suggestion is (perhaps :confused: ) a workable way (in CMII) for scenario designers to get the most out of the AI by scripting some opening moves. Maybe SOP's could be added. I have heard alot about SOP's in Aiborne Assault (I have not played this game but other's here have raved about the SOP's in that game) maybe SOP's plus scripting in the editor could provide tools (in CMII) that would give scenario designers what they need to enhance the AI and the Single Player experience so it could be more fun and more challengeing?? Just a thought. -tom w [ November 06, 2002, 12:07 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Thanks for the reply futureman, I wondered if I was the ONLY one that noticed this??? Am surprised other folks have not mentioned this or been "put off" by this new behaviour. :confused: It was a Surprise for me :eek: In CMBO I could count on the smoke from a burning AFV to block LOS so I could "hide" behind it with another AFV. It would seem that the burning AFV's in CMBB do not block LOS anymore. Shooting directly through live and dead vehicles has been explained a technical game engine/computer hardware limitation. OK But in the first version of the game engine in CMBO Smoke from burning AFV's did block LOS, and so I am wondering if the same behaviour holds true in CMBB. It is my experience this has now changed for the worse in CMBB? Any further comments on this one? -tom w [ November 05, 2002, 01:22 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

IN CMBO and CMBB there is usually 3 squads per Platoon. Platoons usually have platoon leaders with special modifiers Morale Stealth Combat Leadership commad radius (whatever). The suggestion above is therefore a request to differntiate ONE man in the squad (of between 7-12 I assume) as the Squad Leader and give that man special modifiers (Command Stealth combat and so on). This is an interesting suggestion but it would appear to change the scale of the game yet again. A specific Squad leader then would likely be the among the last to get hit and would presumably ALWAYS be in command radius of his squad (unless it spilt up I guess?) It is an interesting concept this one person Singel Squad Leader Ability modifier. GREAT thread very interesting to read I Hope Steve and Charles find it equally interesting -tom w

well he has no name but it is a reasonable suggestion None the less.... -tom w [ November 05, 2002, 10:23 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

this behaviour does not surprise anyone? :confused: -tom w

nice work! Thanks! -tom w