aka_tom_w

WOW Congrats Moon!! It must be like a DREAM job Good luck with all your new Challenges!! -tom w

"When the CM engine is rewritten we will build in the functionality to simulate variable thickness/quality into each major armored surface." And that will MOST certianly open a BIG can of worms! I can just hear the critics/trolls/naysayers/syncophants screaming about this now. It would certainly introduce ANOTHER key variable of LUCK to armour combat, makeing the "science" of WWII armour penetration wildly unpredicatable.... (unless of course you the player (either player) can KNOW the tank in question is of defective armour quality and in reality I highly doubt the crew of said tank (or the crew of the targeting tank) would know that so the player in the game should theoretically not know that until perhaps after it is KO'd or after the game is over, should that tank be foruntate enough to survive the battle.... " variable thickness/quality into each major armored surface" !!! :mad: I am in NO WAY critical of this initiative for the engine rewrite (After CMBB if I understand correctly) but it will take ALOT more explaining to the naysayers than the current model. (Lucy LUCY! You got some splanin' to do!) (Bad joke from American TV Sitcom Golden era) It is something to look forward to for sure! Keep up the good work! -tom W [ 01-24-2002: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]</p>

Has anyone in the first thread pointed out that a cleverly hidden Flame thrower team hidden in a building "can" flame an opposing tank and knock it out in one burst?? Seriously I did it once, it was a BIG ugly German Tiger I and it was not supported (dumb AI) and I the FT boys popped up and SMOKED it!! Are FT's vulnerable ? sure they are they are very vulernable BUT they can be used at AT weapons at the right time and the right place. Other than that little "gem" I really couldn't care less if they change the FT teams in anyway. -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Madmatt: Answer B. They will use smallarms assuming their main weapon is not applicable. ..... Seems Charles has got this one pretty well pegged. I have also just heard from the GREAT CODE WIZARD that he is intending to add this small arms defense capability to MG teams which have jammed weapons. It just keeps getting better. Madmatt [ 01-23-2002: Message edited by: Madmatt ]<hr></blockquote> "It just keeps getting better." Yeah Baby!!!!! "he is intending to add this small arms defense capability to MG teams which have jammed weapons. " Nice touch!!! Great work Thanks for the updates Please Keep them coming you have a very faithful audience! -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gyrene: Immobilized. A burst of .50's has enough juice to cut tank tracks, I guess. Losing the TC is actually quite a bit of bad luck as they have reaction times faster than hummingbirds on crack. Gyrene<hr></blockquote> I would say the ALLIES got Very lucky with the Tiger immbolization as well. I know that .50 cal HMG has armour piercing rounds and in this game it is VERY deadly, but I have NEVER witnessed a .50 cal HMG immobolize a Tiger :confused: never seen it I've been playing since the Beta Demo and that one is news to me but it doesn't really surprise me. Nothing that .50 cal HMG does surprises me anymore the damn thing has AWESOME firepower. Its REALLY to bad we never got that Quad .50 cal Half Track the Allies had. Can you imagine the fire power coming out of 4 .50 cals all blazing away at the same time!!! :cool: -tom w

" TYPE 2 Errors are also related to memory use. The Mac tried to store a chunk of data in an address that couldn't hold it. " Maybe just restart? Have you installed any new RAM lately Could be bad RAM or a RAM memory error? try this: http://www.appleerrorcodes.com/ http://members.aol.com/rustleware/Type_11_Errors.html hope that helps -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Madmatt: Why no we haven't. Perhaps we should though eh? Would you like that? Huh? Would ya? Okay. YES Crews now have a (minimal) small-arms short-range self-defense capability! The TACAI will take care of this for you, so you can't give them your own small arms targeting orders and as we say above it's a MINIMAL self defense ability but it's better than nothing. This capability has been extended to ALL crewed units and teams (note: MG teams don't get secondary small arms they got that nice big MG to keep them warm afterall). That's PaK crews, Mortar crews, FO's, Vlad and his Holy Avenger Flamethrower (although he would probably be more prone to zap the boogies with his FT), Dieter and his trusty 'Shreck, the works! Bailed vehicle crews still have their pistols, as before, of course. This self defense range is pretty limited (maximum of 100 meters or so) and the firepower rating is very small, probably less than the FP rating of single rifle per man and their ROF is much much slower than a dedicated rifleman. It's a purely self defense mechanism, don't expect miracles, but it does give them a little bite. Madmatt [ 01-22-2002: Message edited by: Madmatt ]<hr></blockquote> OK! That sounds helpful and realistic AND not open to "gamey" exploitation! Thanks for the update.... sounds like a VERY reasonable solution -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gyrene: Interestingly enough many RAVE games do work in under Classic mode, Unreal Tournament is one of them. (Yes, in Rave) There is a new UT launcher that is OS X native and runs in OpenGL, but the Rave version works fine. CM and OS X might not be as unattainable as we think. After a shaky start I now really really like OS X, and I am more than ready not to use 9 anymore. Gyrene<hr></blockquote> interesting I am a professional mac Tech geek and it pains me to admit I do not know what a UT launcher is. Someone here once spoke of a "shim" between RAVE and Open GL any news on that? CMBO and CMBB in OSX would be great of there was a way to translate the RAVE API to Open GL, I have unfortunately not heard much about this as most games have abandoned RAVE long ago. BUT CMBB will be/is being written in RAVE so that will continue to be an issue with Open GL on OSX I think what we really need here is to bring this to the attention of someone at Apple (preferably through a personal connection) and ask Apple if they would care to help out.... (or is that just plain silly :confused: ) Is it even possible to actually program a "shim" or write some code to make RAVE talk to Open GL so it will translate on the fly or something like that? Sorry if that did not sound technical enough? -tom w [ 01-22-2002: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]</p>

bump interesting thread Great posts by Steve and MadMatt Thanks for the updates -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gyrene: CMBO is the only program that keeps me from using OS X full time, I use it as often as I can otherwise. *Maybe* a revision of RAVE for OS X will come around. Gyrene<hr></blockquote> ME too in a BIG way I will NEED MAC OSX on my laptop when Photoshop arrives, until then I sort of have one "somewhat" lame excuse for not going to OSX but come this June I will need a dual boot laptop to play CMBO and well, that is sort of inconvient. -tom w [ 01-22-2002: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]</p>

still an issue In late June 2002 Photoshop will be available on OSX that will be the defining moment for MOST Mac users and still there will be NO CMBO or CMBB on OSX how long will will wait for a BTS product CM?? on Mac OSX??? at least 24 months from NOW I would be willing to bet. -tom w

good question -tom w

worthy of a bump good point and great post -tom w

yes I have done it its easy on a MAC to MAC and its Fast! -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by gibsonm: Hi, Has anyone on the list got one of these yet? I'm wondering if the 16Mb of VRAM improves the "visual experience"? I'm thinking about gutting my original Ti PB as the combo drive (CD-RW, DVD) needs a new motherboard (with the VRAM increased from 8 to 16) and a major factor is whether the new setup runs better. I'm also thinking of the upgrade to position myself for CMBB. (Its scary when a game becomes a deciding factor in whether your work tools are still good enough).<hr></blockquote> anything further on this? -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Lord General MB: Soldiers, ...which I do hardly enough. Anyway: Who actaully preffers winter games to summer/fall games? I try to avoide playing winter games, as they are simply to harsh on the eyes, or too bland. Now then, Tom's mod will change all this. Once more we get some more green on the awfull fields of white!<hr></blockquote> ROGER THAT! I am eagerly awating the Bulge winter mod so that the winter sceanrios are not TOO UGLY to play. I avoid winter and snow at all costs because it is virtually impossible to determine elevation. OK I must have bad winter sceanary, but I have yet to see GOOD winter terrain sceanary. -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Boo_Radley: I've begun skipping around. Playing the smaller scenarios first. I played Wiltz this afternoon, as Allied and it was a blast. I think I lucked into my deployment, because within the first 5 turns, the road was littered with dead German vehicles. After that it was a turkey shoot for the most part. I also played a small game this evening...some kind of attack on a ridge (I'm lousy with names)and an odd thing happened. The last obstacle facing me was a panzer and before I could get my mortars within range, it was hit by an air strike. I didn't call in any air strikes. Are they sometimes random?<hr></blockquote> They are always at random, you cannot call in an airstrike. Sometimes they come sometimes they get lost and don't show up. They are part of the scenario as designated by the scenario designer. Sometimes they take out the enemy Sometimes they miss and sometimes they take out your tanks you just never know if the skies are clear keep your eyes open for air strikes from either side. -tom w [ 01-20-2002: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Boo_Radley: No. I played the Allied, not out of any latent jingoistic feelings, but...well, maybe a little. lol. Do most players go right down the list in choosing games or do you skip around?<hr></blockquote> Skip around play smaller ones first Play a Quick Battle or two and choose your own units go to the scenario depot and download some custom designed scenario from other players OR and this one is FUN Design your own scenario. Make your own map, pick the units and set up or both sides and then TRY not to let the AI BEAT you the scenario you just designed. And for advice I would NOT just play the scenario's that came with the game CD in alphabetical order, that makes no sense. -tom w

what side did you play? I take it you chose the German's? I played it for the first time just recently double blind via TCP/IP I played the allies and "just " managed a draw against a relatively inexperienced German commander. -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Yaphank: If not a building then how about a wall? I think that would be a feasable requirement for a tank? You guys talk like these things were made out of egg shells. <hr></blockquote> What?? NO ever told you that in fact that is EXACTLY what tanks are "Egg Shells with Hammers" thats why sometimes it only takes ONE round and BOOM! Scrambled eggs! -tom w [ 01-19-2002: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]</p>

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by GreenGriffon: Hey that's really cool....maybe I'll give that a try too. By the way, which Jagdpanzer and Jagdtiger mods are you using? The Jagdtiger looks like the KwazyDog one, but somehow the color looks lighter or something. I'd love to get my hands on both of those. Nice work!<hr></blockquote> Glad you liked it It was ALOT of work! I'm really not sure whose mods I'm using there are all kinds of mods in there for all kinds of artists, if you look closely you might see that I have two kinds of mods on the same light 2 story building,a different mod on each surface -tom w

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Gyrene: I had seen that site before a while back and I really liked the map of Mogadishu they have there. Many Green Berets reported that Task Force Ranger's dealings with the locals was less than "diplomatic" making a tough situation even tougher. The whole episode didn't need to happen. Gyrene<hr></blockquote> Hi Gyrene Thanks for the info. I have not read the book or seen the movie, but I wonder if anyone here who knows what happened over there (hint, Gyrene), can comment on what seems to be an underground, whispered, rumour about how an American (Ranger, Marine, Delta Force ?) commander who was SO frustrated with the UN command structure, and NEEDED some other nations APC's ASAP, to conduct the rescue mission to get to the downed crews and pinned down soldiers that he (allegedly) took out his side arm pistol and put it to the head of the commander of the "other" nation's APC's (because there were no America APCs available) because the other commmander (A Pakastani I think?) did not have "official" clearance, and was refusing to release "his" UN APC's for an ad hoc US rescue mission. Can anyone comment on the real story about this?? I'm pretty sure some "version" of this is true but I don't know the source or the entire truth about this story. -tom w P.S. Gryene, have you seen this yet, its my latest CMBO Pano- http://142.55.231.199/demo/cmbo-pano.mov [ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ] [ 01-17-2002: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]</p>

It is not without GREAT hesitation that I weigh the option of replying to one of Jason C's posts.... BUT to be succinct... Jason, is it not possible that your laser like focus on unit pricing is the result of your addiction to ladder matches where opponents pit thier wits in the pre-game selection of units ? (the Buy Phase I will call it). Should we not only consider that the pricing scheme in CMBO ALSO serves as a loose or flexible GUIDELINE to help scenario designers design maps and populate their maps and battles with roughly equal and fairly distributed opposing units (if in fact a fair fight is what the scenario designer intended?) The SOLE focus on the pricing scale as the be all and end all of bidding for strategic advantage in the Buy Phase of a, usually ahistoric, Ladder Match Meeting engagement should be considered nothing more that an optional extra of the CMOB pricing scale and, NOT the main purpose of the point system. I must agree with Steve when he suggests: "You think the ENTIRE game is based on pricing. I strongly disagree. Pricing need only be ballpark correct. Why? First of all, there is NO SUCH THING as perfect pricing. " -tom w [ 01-16-2002: Message edited by: aka_tom_w ]</p>

Some one say Web page design? This site for a company that Designs Websites recently came to my attention. I was SO BLOWN away by this design that I thought I would share it here with you folks.... http://monoedge.com/entrance_net.htm Check it out! -tom w

http://142.55.231.199/demo/cmbo-pano.mov is anyone having any trouble viewing this? -tom w