aka_tom_w

3 1)2 2)6 3)6 4)0 5)0 6)0

still looking for v1.12 every morning Maybe by this weekend??? just curious -tom w

Talk about eye candy and great graphics! The RUNE demo is 82 megs BIG and requires at least 190 megs of RAM! I got it from: http://www.runegame.com/downloads.php download from here: http://www.macgamefiles.com/download.taf?item=14800 The read me says: Starting Up the First Time Rune will attempt to detect your machine's speed and graphics hardware, and set itself up the first time it runs to play best on your computer. You can change the graphics, sound, and input device options at any time using the "Settings" menus in the game. You can further refine these options by changing settings in the Rune.ini file located in the game folder. However, be aware that changing these options can affect how much memory is needed. You may have to increase the Rune application's memory partition size. Rune requires 3D video hardware, and supports cards that use the Glide and RAVE API's. Software rendering still works, but is not supported for Rune. This means you can run Rune in software mode, but there may be rendering problems. Rune does not use OpenGL for rendering. ••• VERY IMPORTANT ••• Rune has its application memory size set to 185000K. You must make sure to set your computer's Virtual Memory size so that you have MORE than that amount available to run the game. Before running Rune, choose the "About This Computer" option from the Apple Menu and look at the "Largest Unused Block" amount. It must be at least 190 MB, or Rune will not run properly. AND this is JUST the DEMO!!!! Talk about targeting HIGH end graphics capable computers ONLY! WOW -tom w

its a small sample still all the German only players have not waken yet OR are too busy playing CMBO as the Germans to comment. Maybe German only players don't like participating in survey's just thinking out loud -tom w

I believe Jeff is correct. I am hosting his Massive Mod downloads at my FTP site and he has never really officially commented one way or the other that I am hosting and sharing his mods for download. I think he freely admitted to just being "fickle" and stays busy with MANY many different projects and he did his thing with CMBO then moved on to something else new and exciting. I think it would be best to just consider him a transient mod artist, and leave it at that. I'm sure he did not leave with bad feelings in any way, he is probably happy and busy working on something new and now more interesting to him, I thank him for his great toned down mods and wish him ALL the best! -tom w

1) 1 2) 0 3) 7 4) 3 5) 3 Edited to include my 5 and the 3 in the post above [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-06-2001).]

re: "Otherwise it is Alice-in-Wonderland time." AKA (also known as) Fog of War! -tom w

I'm sorry Where EXACTLY are these beauties available for download? Thanks -tom w

YES But.... as has been posted " Regards the original question about the PSW, this is from the 1.1 readme: * Vehicles, especially those with only a few crewmen, have greater difficulty spotting enemies when moving. The difficulty is proportional to speed and ruggedness of terrain." yes the "magical radio" of absolute spotting and telepathic communication amongst units is an issue BUT BTS has tried to "kludge" (Kloodge) their way around this by coding in a pause or delay period, for buttoned vehicle's that are moving so while they can "pretend" not to see what we might expect them to "know" about via telepathy (absolute spotting). I think this is a VERY creative work around. It would seem the "instant" telepathy of absolute spotting is not as instant or absolute as we might think. I think that the PSW in the incident in question that got ko'd reacted realistically and just simply did not see the AT team because it was modeling a real life behaviour of moving while buttoned and and the delay in the spotting agorythm told the PSW to "pretend" you don't see that AT team and "carry on". I don't think this a problem actually. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-06-2001).]

NICE job Very nice detail, good camo colours! Why not CMHQ? IF not with Mad Matt e-mail them to me and I'll host them tomorrow on the same server as Gunslingers old mods. ok? -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-04-2001).]

Hi Rexford I agree with you completely. Slighty before you arrived here there were several HUGE threads about the "the long 88 lacking punch" and the Long ragne gunnery and things like superior Ziess gunnery optics. Many of us here tried with many lengthy postes to increase the long range accuracy of the long 88 in particular. the ranting and the replies from BTS went on and on. I agree with everything you have posted with regard to accuracy. When you post about accuracy remember BTS does model 6 different levels of accuracy depending on crew experience. we have shown conclusively that there is AT LEAST a 10% accuracy difference (and do this it is higher) between the conscript crew and the Elite crew. so when posting about accuracy for a given weapon in a given set of circumstances remember they are modeling 6 different degree of first shot accuracy depending on crew experience. Other factors to determine accuracy are also size shape and orientation of the target, Is the target moving, is the tank firing the shot moving? is it raining (ie. weather conditions) and is the tank firing being fired upon (shocked or non-shocked) So it can be very frustrating to look at one isolated expample like your 63% hit probability at 550 m and draw any clear conclusions. I comment on this because some of us have be down this road and back again several times prior to your arrival here. Be patient, in my opinion there is ONE last chance to see this issue addressed. MadMatt has posted this list of the tweaks we can expect in the upcoming final v1.12 patch check this out I post this with specific attention to point number 2!! "Here is the list for v1.12 improvements and fixes: * Tanks use better hull-rotation logic. * Gun accuracy is somewhat higher at long range. * Firing ordnance while moving is less accurate than before. * Quick Battles have a new "unrestricted" force type. * Pillboxes have slightly better 'reaction time' and are slightly less easier to spot at long range. It is also somewhat harder to hit their firing slits from longer ranges. * Smoke usage logic tweaked. * 20mm gun in Lynx cannot fire on aircraft. * If both sides have global morale below 25%, a battle will end immediately with an enforced cease-fire. * Fixed a bug (introduced in v1.1) where simultaneous cease-fire requests by both players in play by email could lead to a crash. * Fixed a bug so that the computer will never place antitank mines in woods. * Fixed a bug that made hotseat mutual cease-fires activate one turn later than they should. * Fixed a bug that could cause a game previously (partly) played as PBEM, but subsequently reloaded as TCP/IP to "lose" minefields and barbed wire. * Fixed a bug that made the TacAI hesitant to give targeting orders to the rearward-firing Archer. * Fixed a bug that allowed tungsten rounds to be overly effective against highly-sloped armor. * Data changes: - Sherman Jumbo speed, turret rotation, and some armor values lowered. Sounds good to me!! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-03-2001).]

I was hoping we might have seen the v1.12 patch yesterday (friday feb 2) oh Well I'm still looking forward to it because I think we all know it will be the final kick at the can to get all those final tweaks and bug fixes in. After which time I have every expectation that they (BTS) will tell us all to go jump in a lake if we do not like some particular aspect of the game because it is now OFFICIALLY finished. Done out the door, on to CM2! So yes I am looking forward to the finished product! I hope it is being tested right now, for final approval sometime this coming week. Can anyone tell us officially if v1.12 is being tested by the BTS testers? (those lucky folks outside of the core of the Steve, Charles, MadMatt and Kwazydog who get to play with the latest version and test it before it is released) Still waiting and wondering? -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-03-2001).]

Note to Self: "Don't engage Pawbroon in PBEM" Has he figured out how to cheat at TCP/IP yet? -tom w

two threads similar thoughts for those that don't know there is another thread about this game with more comments in it. -tom w

I agree completely here "I think this is great news. Not because I want CM to get beat, but because it is indicative that people out their are convcinced that their is money to be made in the wargaming market." Competition should be a good thing, looks like CM2 and that new Combat Squad GI "game" should be released very close to each other, if not right on top of each other. CM2 SHOULD (because BTS is about 2-3 years ahead of these guys and they learned ALOT in making CMBO) , should BLOW the doors off Combat Squad! And yes it does look like a rip off. With respect to theri choice of name ... Combat Mission + Squad Leader = Combat Squad GI ? Looks and smells like a rip off clone to me, BUT I bet it will be pretty and look flashy with lots of EYE candy. It is my hope and dream that all the hard core grogs here will give them EVERY bit as much of a hard time for all their ommisions and inaccuracies that BTS received over really little trivial details. I wonder if Fionn has begun to post on their forum. In fact I would LOVE to See Fionn evaluate and criticique their game once it is available in as a demo. I figure all the Grogs will rip some RTS Combat Mission wanna -be game to shreads for inaccuracy. I can't wait to see it really. I'll NEVER buy if it it does not run on a Mac, I'm VERY happy with Combat Mission it is the ONLY game I spend any of me "spare" time playing. (Ok a few games of Age of Empires here and there, sorry for the infidelity) any way.... I say with reagard to the news about Combat Squad, BRING on the GROGS! and let them eat talon soft ALIVE.... how the HELL are they going to have an RTS look good in Real Time AND in 3D and calculate historically accurate armour penetration and combat results from all the shooting going on? I can't wait to see how they can pull that off? sure 32 player internet co-opertaive and head to head play? RIGHT! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-02-2001).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-02-2001).]

from Gone Gold: "Press Release BALTIMORE - February 1, 2001—TalonSoft Inc, a Take-Two Interactive Software,Inc. (NASDAQ:TTWO) subsidiary today announced today it will develop and publish GI Combat. The title is expected to ship in Fall 2001. GI Combat, available initially in PC CD ROM format, is a continuous real-time strategy game, engulfing the player in the dynamic conflicts of the Second World War. The full three-dimensional environment provides unsurpassed detail for terrain, armor penetration, vehicle movement, and weapon-fire. "Immerse yourself in an exciting struggle to hold back blistering offensives, lead elite squads to capture key strategic targets, or desperately assault a vital crossroad leading to victory!" said TalonSoft President Jim Rose. "The player has the chance to live in that moment, and rewrite history." GI Combat and our new Proprietary 3D World Builder, ASCENSION, will help Talonsoft redefine mainstream wargaming again! Technology has finally allowed us to implement our vision of wargaming in the 21st Century. Players campaign American or German troops through tactical excursions of enemy artillery barrages, beach landings, snipers, bridge crossings, and loads of heavy tank fire! Whether it is commanding a group of squads to infiltrate an enemy outpost, or jumping into the trenches with a single steadfast dogface, GI Combat excels at delivering the complete combat experience. GI Combat will feature campaigns with dozen of historical and hypothetical scenarios beginning at D-Day, and carrying through Patton's lightening breakout from the Normandy Beachead. In addition, multiplayer mode is planned for up to 32 players via LAN or over the Internet allowing players to choose sides and fight together. Vivid 3D landscaping provides the backdrop for beautifully rendered armored vehicles such as the German Panther or swift U.S Sherman. Full 3D Sound support will complete the ultra realistic environment and make you swear those bullets sound like they are flying over your head! In related news, Talonsoft also announces the official website for GI Combat has gone live. For more information, visit this website at http://www.gicombat.com/ well still no Mac version so SCREW 'em! However they are claiming REAL life historically accurate armour penetration AND they can do in Real time yes it is an RTS 3D WWII combat sim. It will be interesting to see the demo, but it won't run on a Mac. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 02-02-2001).]

yeah OK.... BUT Will it run on a MAC???? VERY interesting developement. -tom w

I guess I'm addicted and I admit I need another FIX! Every time I log on to this board I hope I will find the NEXT BIG thing posted. BUT no! I'm still looking for v1.12 to be posted and ready EVERY time I log on here now. Still waiting -tom w

and this one high detail very pretty there are more all kinds of them listed in this directory: http://www.3d-modelmother.com/images/

If you can find it .... "HELL HAS NO HEROES, by Wayne Robinson Now don't bite my head off here, but this is about an American Sherman crew in NW Europe. It has some good stuff on Shermans. End of story. " is a GREAT book abut a DD tanks that lands on D-Day and fights on day after day until the war is over. Here's a good web page with LOTS of books referenced: http://www.mapleleafup.org/biblio.html scroll down for all the books -tom w

You aren't being serious are you? Are you? -tom w

We MAC resistence forces just naturally FLOCK enmasse to any thread that has the word "graphics" in its title. We can't help our selves. Now where's all that Eye Candy?????? -tom w

Yes Rune, I'm chuckling -tom w

OH, you mean her T & A?? Yeah, what Talent and Ability there! -tom w

I can't think of amore progresive and user friendly monopoly than Apple to feed. I have NO beef with Steve Jobs. While he was at Pixar he brought us Toy Story! GREAT movie! Now we are feeding a monoploy that is bringing to us the Titanium G4 Powerbook which a work of Industrial design friggin' ART!! Sorry but I have no problem making Apple and Steve Jobs richer and more profitable. Thanks for the rant! -tom w