aka_tom_w

OK I like it I like it in concept... BUT... If I may (As a Gamey Loophole looking for kind of guy ) I would like to suggest if that system was implimented some form of extra FOW must be used to prevent easy indentification of enemy HQ's. (all kinds of HQ) Playing under those suggestions I would expend EVERY available resource to try to take out all the enemy HQ units thus leaving their remaining squads out of command and under control of the AI. This would be akin to isolating them and letting them starve to death out of control of the enemy player. I like the idea in theory...... but if destroying all the enemy HQ units leaves the enemy player with all his remaining infantry comletely out of his control there may be a problem there. and what about vehicles? they all have radio's so there is no problem really? (I suspect) -tom w [ April 18, 2002, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

Hey Murph!! where is that Wheat Mod anyway?? you previewed it and it looked great and then we never saw it again the Snow looks great too!! where can we all get that new snow and that Wheat Mod you hve been teasing us with??? :confused: -tom w

Sorry I don't know this Does the PC version of this game (CMBO) use DirectX? so is the suggestion that a special "hybrid" CMBB could be coded that would run in Mac OSX and use the DirectX with Open GL translation??? I'm not sure if that question even makes sense.. How can MacOSX supporting the DirectX protocol help us out with either CMBO or CMBB?? Interesting.... but curious I wish I knew more about this stuff... -tom w

THIS is it I found it it: The_Capt Member Member # 4041 posted March 13, 2001 01:58 PM So if you want to recreate a WWII battle down to "cap badges and weapons sights" go ahead. And try and find like minded players who are also willing to play in this frame. BUT you are not better or superior because you do. You have only decided to play the GAME a certain way. The rest of us (and I group myself)look at CM as a game and will use everything we can in the game to win. So if it is a coy of flamethowers and your opponent is OK with it, PLAY ON! Problems and conflict arise when one camp bumps into the other. A die-in-the wool grognard meets a half-liquored Friday night CM goon whose girlfriend/wife wants nothing to do with him (or her...well you know what I mean just switch the gender labels around for you girls...both of you). They fail to establish "ground rules" and charge into a doomed battle. The Grognard, with his AFV posters and manuals is slaving over which Allied doctrine to try and modelling his unit purchases against WWII OOBs. "Now did Capt Johnson have a single or gold plated command rating? Well let's see how he fought at Anzio..." and so on. The Half-Baked Goon; "OK let's see what a map with nothin but Arty FOs and freakin TRPs will do..heh,heh. Oh ya I'll throw in 12 jeeps cause they burn good....man I am hungry....and thirsty. What is taking this guy so f#$4ing long." Now our two warriors meet. The Grognard has a perfect Bn advance as per the "Closing of the Falaise Gap"..."Now which coy actually was forward left..." The Goon sits and giggles "C'mon you pansy assed Brit Sh$t eaters...come to Fritzy....atta boy" Boom! Arty starts dropping like bird crap at a beach wedding. The Grognard "oh my now what was the allied drill...ah yes...very good..oh my he is using it all up at once...I think vonGoosestep tried that in Italy but this is France tsk, tsk." Goon " WOOOO-HOOO!!....(to sleeping boy/girlfriend)...you see that?! Now for the big stuff, 300mm and another beer...belch". BOOM, KA-F$#%ing-BOOM!!! Grognard; "Oh my, well let me see an Axis SS Division has ###long range arty assets...oh my! That doesn't seem right. My opponent will very "red-faced" when he sees his mistake, tee-hee....Oh dear there goes Stanley's Coy.." Goon; "TAKE THAT!! AHHHH-HAHAHAHAHA. I love this freakin game, I swear I saw bodies flyin. Oh sorry dear.....And now for the jeeps." Jeep assault onto hill 130 is carried out. Grognard; "Now I am afraid he has gone too far...time for a stern chat message.." Goon; "I wonder what's on Fox or wait I think that Arts channel has Euro-porn on at 11..." Chat message: GenAllisterMontegue: "Excuse me for saying but your force purchase seems a little excesive in the Artillery and Recon assets." JOhnnyRottAN: "What do yu meen?" GenAllisterMantegue: "Well if you consult "ALL THINGS AXIS" the 1998 edition, you will see that you simply do not have the amounts you are using here." JOhnnyRottAN: "Hey pal! If it works, it anin't broken...you callin me GAMEY?!!!:{" And we can all see hard feelings and anger which will result as the exchange degrades into....a forum thread. So the only rules are ones you mutually decide on and in the long run it is only God you will have to answer to in the end. So happy gaming and let's just be friends. And go our there and kill each other CM style!

Someone once posted something like this along time ago. Does anyone remember the rant about the Grog vs. the Video Game Kid?? it had all that "I rule and U Suck " stuff in it but it was a dialogue and th Grog was a stuffy old brit like and he said things like "Oh Dear looks like Major Blimey's coy is having a rather hard time of if on the left flank" It was Funny I wish I knew how or where to search for it. It must be at least a year or two old but the dialogue WAS PRICELESS! can anyone help me find it? All I recall is it was a ficticious dialogue between a no-nothing NON Grog Video gamer (twitch) KID and a Stuffy know-it-all grog and the grog was commenting about the gamey fashion and ahistorical nature of the video game kids force selection!! its was FUNNY and especially in this thread worth revisiting. anyone remember that one? ... -tom w

just to clarify this would be something specific to Mac users who need to use ResEdit to mod files. There is a 13 meg limit I think that is what this post refers to. -tom w

OK Well if there is anyone who can speak authouritatively on on the issue it would be Moon being that he and Steve WROTE the manual. My appologies, I must have mistaken that "fairly subtle effect" for NO effect at all Oooops ! oh well... Looks like its best to keep your morale level as high as possible and not get your guys killed unnecessarily! (But we knew that didn't we?) -tom w

I agree with this I think Pascal has it correct. What I am about to say may seem like hersey BUT It is my (completely unsubstaniated) opinion (IMHO) that the global moral is NOTHING more than a number that represents (out of 100%) the points of your units that are NOT dead. Look at it this way Play a QB and buy 1000 points worth of infantry. Watch them die. As they die the global moral goes down. There is (in this case) a 10-1 ratio 1000 pts to 100%. It is my opinion there is NO effect on fighting ability it is simply the remainder of your force this is not dead or knocked out. {Insert Retraction here} Moon Says aka_tom_w is mistaken, Oops sorry it works like this: "Moon Administrator Member # 386 posted April 15, 2002 03:49 PM Low global morale does affect all units, and makes them more prone to panic and rout. It's a fairly subtle effect, but the lower your global morale, the more likely that they get pinned or run away." ...... try it with the 1000 point infantry example, and as you loose units watch the GM go down, it goes down portionaltely to your losses. When you loose a tank or two it goes down ALOT because they are worth alot of points, BUT there is no actual "morale" effect on the remainder of the units. This may be disputed by someone who knows more about how the game works than me, but when I play I look at MY GM as the percentage of my over all fighting force that is still battle ready. This could also explain why you do not see your opponents GM until after the game is over which makes sense. And yes of course when your GM gets low enough it will trigger an auto-surrender, that is one great features of the GM if you kill enough of your opponent's units and his GM goes WAY down you can force and auto-surrender, I think that is the only reason the GM is there. If you never let yours go below %30 you should be fine. I'm not sure what the math formula is for auto surrender but something is trigger around %15 - %20 I think? -tom w [ April 15, 2002, 04:04 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

once again the secret here is the "cross over cable" this is a special ethernet cable (does anyone know another name for it? there may be a more technical name?) any two pc's or macs with ethernet ports can connect DIRECTLY to each other with an ethernet cross over cable. I use mine ALL the time to talk to computers I need to fix or transfer files to. no hub or router is required to network two computers with a cross over cable. the Simplest LAN (Local Area Network) you can build is two computers that talk to each other directly over an Ethernet cross over cable. -tom w [ April 15, 2002, 10:04 AM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

this is not a cmbo problem it is a networking issue two Macs can network via a Ethernet cross over cable in tcp/ip this is no problem and I do it all the time can you manually configure your tcp/ip on those two PC's and throw an Ethernet cross over cable between them? if not buy two Macs -tom w [ April 14, 2002, 12:39 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

arty Reset Target key for FO's from: http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=024388 Madmatt Administrator Member # 332 posted April 12, 2002 01:05 PM In CMBB there is now a Reset Target key for FO's that you can press after you have targeted a new position that will do as it claims, reset the target point to what it was when the turn was originally loaded with no penalty tacked on. Madmatt --------------------

"In CMBB there is now a Reset Target key for FO's that you can press after you have targeted a new position that will do as it claims, reset the target point to what it was when the turn was originally loaded with no penalty tacked on." That smells like a BONE to me Great Feature, thanks, it will be much appreciated! -tom w [ April 12, 2002, 01:12 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

its is not alot of strokes if you leave trees off all the time? is it gamey?? I don't think so Why turn trees on in the first place? other than for the sake of eye candy why bother playing with trees on? :confused: I leave trees off all the time as a general rule, so no key strokes are wasted. -tom w

"if Im a n HQ and Ive ordered an airstrike( which I did at troop selection) then surely Im going to give some coordinates to the aircraft. having a trp able to be placed within LOS of HQ would in effect do this. To keep some measure of uncertainty you could get a notification that says something like "AIrcaraft due in approx 3 mintutes" (3 turns) I could then place my trp in the area I want bombed (similar to Arty) then leave it up to the Ai to do the rest" Dave, no you are not an HQ ordering an airstrike you are a bunch of guys on the ground and you are lucky that the air force showed up on time and on target today, and sometimes you are unlucky and they target you. there was virtually no communication between the airforce and the army. the airstrike option is in the available list of things to buy so that scenario designers can build historically accruate scenarios. Any player that "buys" an CAS air strike in a QB or an ME risks two BAD things happening, first the airstrike might not show up (major waste of points), ok secondly the aircraft shows up, and more BAD news this time, they attack your friendly units because they don't know any better. (ok third option, they identify enemy units and actually engage them IF, there is NO AAA flak present) Bottom Line: ANYONE who plays to WIN, (I mean competively) never buys an Air Strike in QB ME -tom w [ April 11, 2002, 07:25 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

If Im a n HQ and Ive ordered an airstrike( which I did at troop selection) then surely Im going to give some coordinates to the aircraft. having a trp able to be placed within LOS of HQ would in effect do this. To keep some measure of uncertainty you could get a notification that says something like "AIrcaraft due in approx 3 mintutes" (3 turns) I could then place my trp in the area I want bombed (similar to Arty) then leave it up to the Ai to do the rest</font>

thats a good point if the Panthers "jumped" them and surprised them it is not unreasonable to wonder if the other sherm crew, (distracted by the near by brew-up), did not actually spot the offending panthers in there hull down posture cresting the ridge. Was it daylight or dusk or dawn or night time? MAYBE no other enemy units spotted the Panthers and they had the element of surprise going for them. on the other side of the coin I have lost tanks to the AI and I had NO IDEA where the shot came from, if you have detailed armour hits on and you see "knocked OUT! upper hull side penetration" and you think you are FACING the enemy you are left wondering (and rightly SO!) HELL! which side did the shot come from?? The ONE shot kill that comes from right out of the blue (no known source, even after you lose 2 or 3 AFVs) is one of the features in this game that is modeled MOST EXCELLENTLY! -tom w [ April 11, 2002, 06:31 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

was the sherm "shocked" maybe it was distracted by a more "killable" target? was the gun on the sherm ko'd? maybe the sherm only had HE left and no AP? Maybe they were busy loading a smoke round and could find one because they were scared silly by the panther -tom w

That damn Gamey Bastard, German AI, once picked 3 THREE JadgTigers (128 mm Main weapon the BIG ONE) in a 3000 pt Armour only ME, to fight against me! I Said CRAP! and got to work trying to flank them. I KO'd one with a flank shot from a M8 with a 37 mm round. Scored a gun hit on another one and immbollized the last one out of the field of action and barely won the scenario. I had Hellcats and Greyhounds and plenty of 'em -tom w

OK that does make sense. So... the order is like "Take Cover" near that tank so some form of modifier is coded to the infantry so long as it is not being fired on from multiple directions and it is so many meters from the tank. I think the idea has merit for sure. I like it. -tom w

Thanks for the update I thought the manual was well written, but I would consider it, (from a functional perspective) just "adequate". As mentioned in this thread I did try to look up things like Bogging and Road blocks and why tanks don't block LOF or LOS. Sure there were things missing. Oh Well The cost of printing IS expensive and the manual from the original CMBO was better than most game manuals. I'm sure the CMBB manual will be better but I don't think it should be all the much more comprehensive than the CMBO manual because I am not interested in paying for the additional cost of a really BIG heavy manual. If you like Manuals and want to read them PLAY ASL, the WHOLE cost of the damn game is manuals, if you want to play CMBB jut stick the CD in your computer and PLAY AS YOU GO! Besides how many folks here actually read the manual? The only REAL reason you need a manual is so that once you have figured out all the intricasies of the game from PLAYING it to death, you can say "RTFM" to all the newbies who ask questions! (just joking) -tom w [ April 10, 2002, 02:58 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

The last time this came up Charles and Steve indicated that it was not an easy thing to fix at all. I don't understand the technicalities behind this one but for CMBO it was a BIG stinking Hairy issue (right from the get go in the DEMO) and, we were told impossible to fix (so live with it), so since CMBB is based largely on the CMBO engine I would not expect any miracles on this front, in CMBB. I think this issue is as big a problem as absolute spotting and I would not expect any improvement on either issue until the FULL rewrite in CMII the NEXT generation. BUT thats only my opinion I would be thrilled to see this issue resolved in some new way in CMBB, but I am not holding my breath -tom w

Maybe thats like a HINT and Steve and Charles and Matt might look into how the works in Steel Beasts?? I'm on a Mac so I have not played the game or looked at its scenario editor. Could you post some screen shots of the interface on the editor from Steel Beasts to see what it looks like. Has anyone else from this thread ever played with the scenario builder from Steel Beasts? just curious -tom w

These all are great ideas. I think the KEY here is the idea of the invisible marker (Attract/Repel Whatever) that the scenario design can set for the AI. Flags do the job now, but for the most part they are always visible and completely obvious to both the AI and the player. Invisible markers would allow scenario designers to design scenarios with some underhanded, diabolical (Mu ha ha) sneaky-ness involved in unit movement and organization tactical and strategic 'thinking'. This sure would help the AI and serve to make better games against the AI when you can't find time to play a REAL person. In fact with this system given a certain specific set of criteria two players could challenge each other to build an AI scenario that would challenge the other. Suppose I say to Rune (All Hale Rune the Great Scenario Designer), hey, lets specify some parameters (Hills, Trees, Date, Combined Arms number of points = 1500 side = Heer etc.) and using the editor build we each will design a scenario that would challenge the other player. Then we both send each other our scenario's and play them to see who could beat the other's design. To make it interesting we could both use the SAME map?? In this fantasy the "other player" might be able to then pick or "buy" his own player controled units. We could do that now (in CMBO with its current limitations) I suppose, but we need more control to help the AI out to actually make it challenging. Its still fun to dream -tom w [ April 09, 2002, 03:07 PM: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]

any comments? -tom w

this sounds sort of like matter and anti-matter just joking it would be VERY nice if a scenario designer could give some hints or clues to the AI in this regard. The idea that these markers be placed by the designer in such a way as to have them invisible to the player makes a GREAT deal of sense. Helping the AI along in this way can also be accomplised already by setting up the AI in a defensive scenario in good well thought out defensive positions and a requesting that the player stict to scenario default positions. Perhaps a similiar arrangement could be made for meeting engagements and attack scenario's with the use of insivible attract and repel markers that the designer could set up ALONG with a time line as to at what turns in the game these invisible attract and repel markers would be effective or "active" for the AI NOW that would be COOL! TOO late for CMBB I guess oh well interesting idea none the less.... -tom w