aka_tom_w

Sorry for the new thread. and I should imagine this has been covered before, BUT is any one out there running CMBO on a DVD G3 400mhz Powerbook running Mac OS 9.1? Are there any conflicts? IS there a thread already where we were chatting about 9.1? I was thinking about upgrading this afternoon. Thanks. -tom w

YES Bruno's post was VERY entertaining and almost accurate in some respects. I too would be very interested to know who exactly is on the private beta tester list. One thing is for Sure, I'm not on the list, but I have asked to be included in the past, based on my Mac Tech experience and propensity and passion to find gamey loopholes that other gamey players might like to exploit, but I was sadly told my skills were not needed (Posted in GOOD humour of course) -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-26-2001).]

I would like to suggest that there is a mutually suportive communnity here. Germanboy once told us a story that his grandmother told about the forest and how the forest echoes back if it is right (or somthing to that effect) I know those few words did not do his Grandmother's story justice, but what I'm trying to say is that while there may be alot of flaming and bickering around here there is a sense of community and some of us are actually working to try to be supportive and answer questions that BTS has answered in the past. I personally try to answer all new questions about LOS through live and dead non-burning vehicles because it was one of my pet peeves right from the days of the beta Demo. I have a bookmark of the thread with Steve's quote in it answering that concern and I post his words in the thread he answered the question in, so that BTS does not have to deal with that question over and over again. There are many of us here who know where the answer to your question may already be if it has been answered on the forum before so we all pitch in (like any good community) to help BTS by posting any previous quotes "officially" from Steve and Charles and Matt and Kwazy so they don't have to waste more time away from actual game developement to deal with old issues that they have already posted "policy" statements about. And no I'm not speaking for BTS I'm speaking for myeslf about how I try to help out and re-post relevant quotes from BTS that many be news to some newer members but were posted some time ago. If every new member like yourself requested a special and specific answer from BTS regarding an issue or question that had already been answered they would never have ANY time to work on CM2 Again I'm NOT speaking for BTS I'm just making an observation about how the community here in this forum can be helpful and mutually supportive to both BTS and new members here. Hope that helps. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-26-2001).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-26-2001).]

OK! I must step in here Some of you need to get your heads out of the sand. Some of us here have pointed out to BTS on the forum what other up coming games will look like. and they look Good!! Stunning actually!!! These game designers that are producing games RIGHT now in developement are NOT complaining about hardware limitations. NO! they are posting sreen shots of what the the NEXT BIG thing will look like when it is released And it looks like this: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/015515.html http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/013878.html http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/015525.html Check out these links BattleField 1942 is one of them Allied Assualt has STUNNGING graphics that looks like they employed ex-Disney background artists and what about Operation Flash Point!? if you have not viewed the QT movie at this site: http://www.flashpoint1985.com/ you should not be posting about the future of CM graphics in this thread. Check out the links and those other threads, those are screen shot of what is in production and what looks like the future of CM competition. I highly encourage BTS to look at what their competition is planning with there upcoming graphics and eye candy. And as wrong as this may sound to some of you, I strongle believe that on top of GREAT historical accuracy and the tradition of BTS attention to historical detail, GREAT graphics and LOADS of NEW eyecandy will lead to higher sales and MORE profits because there are more gamey "video game" gamers out there with more money than all the grogs and "strictly" wargame fans put together. So the next CM2 should look GREAT as well as be historically accurate like CMBO! Just encouraging more eye candy, BUT never at the expense of historical accuracy, but indeed to compliment it!! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-26-2001).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-26-2001).]

Thanks for the update Matt that's good news Keep plugging away on v1.12, its good to have something to look forward to -tom w

I would really enjoy playing from ONLY view 1 and/or 2 IF I knew that the game restricted both myself and my opponent to only view 1 or 2 and there was no way to over ride it. For CM2 a lock to view 1 and/2 option should be available, that combined with a new Extreme FOW setting would be VERY very COOL! I'm afraid I know I don't have the self discpline to stay at view 1 and locked only to the units in my command. But it would be fun if it was an option. -tom w

this is so FUNNY it should stay near the TOP -tom w

Didn't offend me at all, I'm chuckling to myself that all three games are still in developement and all three made it to the top at the same time, I find it rather entertaining. I guess locking the threads was the right thing to do But they aren't really competition yet and I'll bet they all be LONG gone, out of print or out of business or bought up by some one else all before CM2 is released. Thats my guess anyway. -tom w

Hi Dan You should know I'm just sitting here giggling my self silly after looking at all those other lovely graphics. Don't worry I'm sure none of them will be as detailed and historically accurate as CM! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).]

With regard to the other locked threads about eye candy in other games, none of which are actually competing with CM because not one of the three of them has been released yet. -tom w

I guess this thread is now screaming "lock me" too now? -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).]

must BUMP

this is what they have to say for them selves: More Battlefield 1942 Details Unveiled GA-Source readers were the first to learn about Battlefield 1942, now GA-Source has even more exclusive details about this ambitous first-person wargame. Battlefield 1942 recreates the most famous battles of WWII in full 3D, and allows players to experience events like D-day, Iwo Jima, and El Alemien from a first person perspective. The game promises to include action packed multiplayer gaming along with a challenging single player experience. As a strong multiplayer game, Battlefield 1942 pits players against player as two teams struggle for tactical supremacy. The game will offer unrestricted use of fighters planes and bombers, armoured vehicles and ever warships in a first person perspective that will use every aspect of the battles of World War II. The single player section of the game is built on the same premises as the multiplayer game and time spent perfecting skills on one of the games will help players perform well in the other. During single player missions players will learn how to use terrain, vehicles and friendly bots to ensure victory, and the various missions and campaigns will present players with a constant flow of new challenges. Players will be able to choose between joining the Allied Forces of Great Britain, USA and Russia, or the Axis Forces of Germany and Japan. Each game scenario revolves around the most famous and hard fought battles between the Allies and the Axis. The battles of Iwo Jima, for example, pitches the Americans against the Japanese, while the Battle of Stalingrad sees Russia fighting Germans. Battlefield 1942 will support any type of connection, be it modem, serial, LAN or Internet. In addition, the most commonly supported protocols, IPX and TCP/IP, will be fully supported and tested with the game. Battlefield 1942 is in development by Digital Illusion CE, which aquired Refraction Games earlier this year, and is being published by Pan Interactive (in Sweden, Finland and Norway only) for a 2001 release. Watch this space for further details. Reported By: John Bergerud Posted At: 6:16 am CST - Wednesday, September 6, 2000 8613

MadMatt is just telling it like it is. This is not new. Steve and Charles designed the game with this absolute sotting the way it is because there is no way at this time to model relative spotting which means some units with radios "MAY" contact some other friendly units with radios and they "might" communicate "some" intel about some known enemy units. ALL of the "somes" and "mays" in that last sentence make relative spotting impossible in CM1. This the way it is now, first figure EVERY friendly unit has a radio (a magical radio) that works ALL the time and can instantly communicate everything it knows about any enemy unit it can spot or identify to EVERY other friendly unit that then immediately knows everything that the enemy unit that the original spotting unit knows. This is absolute spotting and it is also refered to as "borg-like" recon intel communication. Absolute spotting and LOS and LOF through live and dead non-burning vehicles and pillboxes and road blocks are two of the biggest "unrealistic" things about CM. If I understand this situtation correctly, sadly both of these problems are somewhat dictated by hardware limitations of their targeted "minimum system requirements" that prevented Steve and Charles from solving these problems when they arose during the planning and development of this great game over two years ago. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).]

Hi Commisar, I was agreeing with you completely ALL the way. I liked what you had to say the first time, so much that I repeated it twice in my post. I'm ALOT older than 16 but I'm glad you are as keen, aware, and optimistic about the future of technology as you are! Play CM and keep up the good work! (there'll be plenty of jobs for folks like you in the future.) I can't even imgaine what it would be like to be 16 right now and interested in working with cmputer technology 4-5 years in the future in my early 20's. Commisar I think You are VERY lucky! -tom w

OK THIS is MAJOR EYE Candy!!!!!!! Now those are hard core artistic graphics MODS! -tom w

I thought it was from the Read Me on either the beta patch b16 , b24 or the final v1.1. I remember reading it. Was the Tiger buttoned or unbuttoned? Is this an absolute spotting issue? Tanks seem to spot things like AT teams and target them efficiently even if they can't see them so long as some other friendly unit has spotted the possible threat. Some of these problems may be related to the BIG problem of borg-like absolute spotting. Buttoned tanks seem to spot threats on their flanks and to their rear that seem, (at least IMHO) like they should be VERY difficult to spot in a buttoned tank in the heat of combat. BUT, I am confident Charles and Steve are looking into this now for v1.12. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).]

perhaps I am mistaken but I thuoght CM2 would have smaller tiles. Maybe ? I was dreaming but I thought I read somewhere that CM2 would have tiles 10 m x 10 m instead of 20 m x 20 m and that smaller tile sizes would be part of the solution to some large map makeing and terrain problems so scenario designers would have finer control over smaller more detailed tiles? Maybe I have this confused with the future direction and ideas for CM II ( the next generation game engine) ? Thanks -tom w

What? no further posts no questions? Henri? I can't understand this ? No one cares about our little fire fight in the town last night anymore? Even after they asked us to post screen shots? Posted in good humour. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).]

from this web page: http://www.talonsoft.com/ageofsail2/description.html It looks like Wooden Ships and Iron Men an old Avalon hill Borad game (now on computer in 3D) that you had simultaneous turn resolution and you had to roll the dice for every cannon ball fired, and do a heck of alot of paper work and accounting to track all your ammo and damage. anyone else here play that game long ago? this is what they have to say for them selves: Naval combat makes its glorious return in Age of Sail II. Portraying real-time naval warfare with a 3-dimensional, realistic sailing and combat model, Age of Sail II accurately illustrates the mighty Fighting Ships from 1775 to 1820. Battle the great navies of 11 nations for supremacy on the high seas! Special Features: Captain the most memorable sailing ships in history! From the Constitution to the Victory and over a thousand ships in between. Over 1200 historical warships are represented, all beautifully rendered in meticulous 3-dimensional detail! Advance from Ensign all the way to Admiral of the fleet in both the American and British campaigns. Detailed, branching storylines reach around the world. Full floating 3D camera enables precision control of your fleet. Over 100 historical scenarios - from Copenhagen and the Battle of the Nile, to Trafalgar, Cape St. Vincent and Camperdown, just to name a few! Lush 3D Coastal Landscapes provide tactical obstacles and defensive havens. Reinforced Cannonry Forts serve as stalwart defenses - capable of bombarding the enemy into oblivion. Multiplayer Support for up to 16 players via LAN or over the internet. System Requirements: 100% PC Compatible Pentium 200 MHz or higher 32 MB RAM 50 MB free hard disk 4x Speed required Microsoft compatible mouse 16-bit High Color 3D graphics Voodoo, or equivalent 8 MB D3D 16-bit sound card Windows compatible Some how I doubt it runs on a MAC! oh well -tom w

Yes BUT the graphics do look Beautiful... very nice Tiger mod. I'm not currently using that one so I was impressed by it. -tom w

Now that is CLASSIC! "If you can't afford an upgrade that will cost you less the $50, you shouldnt be playing CM! Buy yourself some food and re-furnish the cardboard box you live in!" What will these faster better upgrades cost in 18 months, well The Commissar says it should cost you just another $100 after you pay for the game. In Canada, the game, (if it costs the same as CM1 when released), will cost you about $80.00 CND and the upgrades to 18 month old technology (if you can find it used somewhere) should run you about $250- 350 CND. Maybe I am ALL wrong about the 18 month prodcution cycle at BTS for the next release of CM2 but I'm not wrong about Moore's law. I think The Commissar makes a great point worth repeating: "If you can't afford an upgrade that will cost you less the $50, you shouldnt be playing CM! Buy yourself some food and re-furnish the cardboard box you live in!" !!!! And now...... I will be flamed..... (or so I should imagine) (I can live with it) -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).]

did someone say Show those Pics of the Battle? Screen shots you ask? Heres 6 shots from the end of the battle I opened the auto save file in PBEM mode on our last turn. ONE thing we both forgot to mention Major factor, we played at NIGHT and LOS distance was limited. In the middle of this shot is my dead HT, and a little out of the frame out to the left was where the first Sherm got nailed by the panther, I was doing well and having my way over there until the panther showed up, then BLAMO! no more sherm and he then routed all the rest of my infantry support. From Henri's starting point of view Over View: Henri attacked from the bottom and I started at the top how's that? And yes even though I lost I posted the pics and the AAR of my defeat. The only thing I might have done to save myself was to deploy my two Sherms close so they could gang up on the panther, but at night in big hills I figured they were better out on each flank. Oh well Henri played very well and that Panther did single handidly win him the game because it was ALWAYS well supported with infantry. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).]

Ok I am compelled to post. Moores law predicts that computer technology and CPU processor speed will double about every 18 months (depending on which version of Moores law you are interested in). And suggests that the price should be about half what is was 18 months ago. (? well doesn't really happen does it) Where am I going with this? I think CM is at the being of an 18 month production cycle. I don't really have any evidence of this but I would not expect CM to be finalized before sometime in summer 2002. So What? Well lets consider that what is the Fastest newest technology RIGHT now should be about one generation of technology old by then. I have been abused for this rhetoric before but I think it not unreasonable to suggest BTS consider a TOP of the line system right NOW to be the base standard to program to for a game that will come out until 18 months from now. This is a GREAT game its so good many folks here have posted about how they have bought new computers and upgraded old computers JUST to play CM. I believe stongly that it was Charles intention as stated in a previous interview I read some time ago that no one else was makeing statedgy based, ground based wargames that were taking advantage of all the latest video card graphics technology that other FPS and Flight sim games had been using for some time now. CM looks as good as it does because Charles has already incorporated smoke effects, transparent buildings and a FULL featured 3D environment to do battle in. That's a BIG deal to begin with. I do hope that we do get MORE eye candy, Dynamic lightings effects and more optimal use of GPU video card technology, in the future. I truly believe Steve and Charles want to play their own game with all the latest eye candy just like "some" of the rest of us. I am also VERY confident that cool new graphics effects and eye candy will NEVER compromise any of the historical accuracy or stratedgy game play features we have come to expect from BTS. In fact I expect that any new additional GPU video card technology that they adopt (like dynamic lighting) will ONLY compliment an already OUTSTANDING game engine. (maybe in some new way, I have NO idea how this could work, this new graphics card technology, could be used and exploited to find a solution to the problem of borg-like Absoloute spotting, just thinking out loud). Of course I would encourage them to push the code as far as possible to take adavantage of all of the latest video card technology that is currently state of the art today, so that it will be one generation old by the time they release their next Master piece! Thanks for the Rant. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 01-25-2001).]

ok ok First off thanks to Henri for not identifying me as the LOSER! It was a good battle as Henri described we chose to let the computer pick forces and we played no holds barred agreeing that neither player would label the other player "gamey". We were both happy and agreed to all the settings before hand. I hosted and set up the map. I got 2 m4A1 75 mm Sherms I think they were regular and one HT with the .50 cal MG and 3 T20 Recon cars, and the obilgatory company of infantry, it was combined arms. I advanced carefully and and took one Sherm up EACH flank and advanced the HT and 2 T20's into the town in the center of the map. I was successfull early on. My right flank was well protected and the advance went well over there, ?I secured a good position in woods on a hill to advance on one of the flags on the right side. But the left flank was another story, I met the panther on the left flank, it was well supported with infantry and in the fire fight his panther Nialed my first sherm and them collapsed my whole left flank. Unfortunately my two SHerms were WAY too far apart (Map had BIG hills all over) to be able to tag team the Panther and get in a good flank shot. I pushed EVERYTHING I had includeing 105 arty, mortars, 'zooks and twice attempted to attack with infantry in close assualts on that Damn Panther. NOTHING else mattered but I could not take it down, and every where it went it rained havoc and destruction. It met my first sherman head on as I was trying to back away from the engagement and Ko'd it. Much later in the game it hunted down the last Sherm and with the first shot it ko'd the gun and with the second shot it KO'd the tank. Nothing on the map could scratch the Panther. If I had been luckier MAYBE the 105's would have immoblized it, but no. It was a good game and it was fun, but I felt fairly powerless against The Panther from Hell. Is that how you saw it Henri? -tom w