aka_tom_w

Hi Great Work Where canI get the latest version for download. Does anyone have an update on the Mac Mod manager for sound files? Just wondering thanks -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Jarmo: Yep. And they're pretty good at blowing up tanks as well. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yup Engineers and Demo charges are one of the really fun parts of the game, them and Flame throwers when you can actually get them to TOAST something -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by IntelWeenie: A timer in Hotseat would be nice. If you're playing against the AI, use your watch. Otherwise, good suggestion. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I just knew Some Weenie was going to say "Well Just use your watch" In fun..... -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by fdevassy: Hey thank you all. im really touched by your helpfulness. I am glad that the wargaming community is so helpful and polite. I play Counterstrike and Firearms(which are FPS games) anyway lets just say those communities could use a lesson in respect and helpfulness from you guys. I appreicate you giving me these tips. I'll check thos websites out. I don't own the game yet i was playing the demo. Once i can get a little better i'll be buying this game. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ohhh its just the demo warning Spoiler below here if you have not played VoT as the Allies in VoT (Valley of Something) Easy Pick the Allies and sit back and use the ALL the ARTY you have, (they are the FO's) sit back and wait, let them call in the arty and let it rain on the bunkers and Pill Boxes, unitl they go BOOM. Hold the tanks WAY back until the 75 mm anti tank gun bunker is knocked out. Then advance the infantry using that bounding overwatch technigue they spoke of earlier. Fan our your Sherms out and pound all the biuldings in the city.Until they falls to rubble. And in this one (like most of them) you need to be VERY patient in your Allied advance toward the town. ok? any one else, Any comments on how to hang on and win as the Germans in this one? -tom w

Ok So I'm dreaming away about TCP/IP and the timer.... And I Think gee... wouldn't it be nice if I could practice against the AI WITH a timer on. As it is Now you can spend as much time as you like plotting a move against the AI. How about for the sake of honing our skills we play against the AI with a built in timer on. Just an Idea for CM2 perhaps there could be an optional timer for Hotseat games and games vs. the computer AI. for the purpose of practicing game skills under a time constraint. Just and another Hair Brain Scheme from the fertile mind of tom w

um... This is just crazy I think I'm a pretty good judge of Eye Candy and CMBO v1.o as it was released did not have any great grapahics or and earth shattering Eye Candy So what the hell are they talking about. Its a GREAT game, most people complained that it did not look so hot, NOW we hear someone suggest its not a good game because it has too mauch Eye Candy? Who are "they" where is this published? The game has some little tiny nit picking things we debate and disagree about here, but it is the VERY BEST small unit WWII combat tactics video game every to hit the market, and now we hear, "Oh we can dismiss CM because it looks too Good and has too much eye candy" What utter nonsese! Have you played the game? What? are all the cool NEW mods making some think this game is JUST (?) eye candy and no substance? There is historical and accuracy and detail right down to the mm of armour in the specific location it was found on all the AFV's modeled. I just don't understand this complaint? -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Stuka: It hasn't happened to me but an opponent in a recent pbem reported that his tiger became immobilised with the report of 'mechanical failure' Anyone else seen this?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> interesting? I have never seen "mechanical failure" come up as a report or warning I play the Allies mostly and I have never seen it if I play the Germans I have not had a Tiger 1 recently I think the last time I had a Tiger 1e was that demo Last Defence. Anyone else ever seen a "mechanical failure" report for a vehicle? On which vehicle and in what weather conditions? I'm curious now thanks -tom w

what is the name of that "first scenario" you refer to? if you can give us an idea of exactly which scenario you are refering to and which side you are playing and then I'm sure some one here can give you some scenario specific advice ok? Welcome aboard, and good luck -tom w

oh yeah! Gunslinger's are a great base, but then add some other mods too, Mangua's buildings are Amazing, I have blended the two. What Gunslinger did was HUGE, he tweaked EVERY single .bmp file and toned them all down, other mod makers have taken it from there. The terrain and buildings now look really stunning, and the vehicles which have all been modded many different ways all look GREAT now too! -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software: Aaronb, Thanks for trying to help, but as I said... a solution is not to be found. The sync of the randoms isn't the problem; it's the internal floating point math. It simply is not the same from chip to chip. In other words, one chip says 2 + 2 = 4.000000001 and the next one says 2 + 2 = 3.99999999. Fuerte, double percision would be very slow and it still is likely to have the same problems as we have now. Sigh... no easy solution except to go with the slower method that works no matter what Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Ok This one has me thinking.... (dangerous I know ) Does anyone else on the board know how other programs or institutions deal with this? I know this is Crazy but doesn't NASA have to sync computers on the ground and on the space shuttle (Doh! I guess they just buy the same cpu.) I am aware that floating point math problems have been issues with computers used in scientific precision and accuracy in the past, BUT I would NEVER have guessed this, ever so minor, deviation would effect combat results in CM. It is hard for me to imagine that Charles and Steve have had to literally invent the wheel on this issue? Do no other mulitplayer games have this problem? Is CM really so ground breaking that it has now run up against this minor deviation in the way different CPU's handle Math that it has crippled the simultaneous multiplayer crunch? And no other software or video game company has tried this before? I am in awe! Totally, because that sure must be have been one MOTHER of a ground breaking attempt to do something REALLY new and different with that simultaneous multiplayer crunch proposal. Anyway thanks for all the detailed updates all us of and especially the computer geeks here, really appreciate all the news, even if it is not so good. -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Fuerte: From the numbers you gave it seems that you are using single precision (32-bit) floating point numbers. If that is so, then the fix is easy: use double precision (64-bit). If you are using double precision already, then you should just use a C compiler with IEEE 754 support. It is a standard which works the same in all computers. Good compilers can even work around the Pentium FDIV bugs with proper settings. I don't know, perhaps Macintosh doesn't have a proper compiler and that is the problem.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Is there any chance these suggestions could be part of the solution for the simultaneous crunch, on one common complier? Fuerte sounds like he may know about these things. I'm a Mac tech geek but ?I have NO idea about a common compiler? IF the math problem is right down in the CPU then maybe the common to all platform compiler would not do the tirck any way? In the simultaneous crunch proposal the rate detemineing step would be the slow speed of the crunch on the slowest cpu, so the other one would be waiting or have to slow down to accomondate it. Sounds like a VERY difficult problem. I guess we are back to master and slave cpu's for hosting the turn crunch? -tom w

ooops! Back to the drawing board, I guess. Thanks for the detailed explantation of the technical nature of the problem, I think this is WAY above and beyond the call of duty, but we all sure do appreciate it. And yes you are likely correct we all now trying to figure out a new solution you have not thought of yet. BUT it does make sense to ONLY crunch once and to crunch the turn on the fastest cpu, so I guess one cpu will host the crunch, I really can see how the floating point math problem woudl kill your first idea and how it really does differ from cpu to cpu would REALLY screw up the simultaneous crunch, it WAS a GREAT idea if you could have really made it work. Sorry to hear about that little set back. Oh well, lets move on! -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Snake Eyes: I would like to see a 10% variable factor added to game lengths. For example: a 30 turn game could end anywhere from turn 27 to turn 33. I believe this would mitigate a last minute rush to the VL. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I like the 10% variable sounds good in most 60 minute games you really have a VERY good idea who is clearly the victor by the 54th turn in a thirty minute game the battle is usually largely over by the 27th minute except for the now infamous last minute flag rush. Even still there are gamey gamblers out there that will still try the late flag rush on the 27th turn a 30 turn game hoping that they can gain a draw if the game ends on the 27th turn, as there would be a 1 in 7 chance (could end on turn 27-28-29-30-31-32 or 33) their last minute flag rsuh might just netralize that VL I wonder? Has anyone official from BTS ever commented on the variable turn ending? Does anyone have any good reasons as to why the possibility of a hard coded and variable turn ending is NOT a good idea? Is it technically do-able? is it possible we could see it in a patch some time down the road? comments? -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Chupacabra: Tom - it's quite possible to play QBs, and to purchase your own forces, using historical OOBs. It takes a bit of research, but nothing that can't be found on the web. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK Thats sounds good but I think that it only works if you know your opponent will do the same research and use a similiar historical OOB. I still like the idea of trying other people's custom designed sceanrios there are now so many of them out there, two players should find it EASY to locate one they have both never seen or played. I advocate this because then you can have scheduled reinforcements, (which might actually help the late flag rush as both players may now have a sizable reserve) REAL rivers and roads and bridges that are well thought out and VL's that were planned out AND if your are lucky good recon intel from the scenario briefing. I just prefer a scenario that has been designed with a little more human thought behind it than the quick and easy random map QB. But thats just my preference. -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 11-06-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Conall: The piccies are of Michael Wittmann (note, a Tiger commander not a gunner, Bobby Woll was his gunner in Russia until he was also made a tank commander) & Kurt Knispel (a gunner & then commander in Schwere Panzer Abteilung 503). IIRC Knispel had about 180 kills by the time of his death in April 1945. BTW I have the scans of the US M4 75/76mm sights - I'll try to post them later, when I get home. regards, Conall<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Welcome aboard Conall! You certianly have picked a contentious thread to join but we would all be interested to learn from you if you have any insight into this issue. Have you played CMBO much, if so what do you think of the long range hit accruacy and overall chacne to hit percetages on both sides as modeled in CMBO? -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mikeydz: Can I refer people back to the title of this thread? The question put forth was whether this was gamey or not. That answer is easy. It most certainly is gamey. Is it also absurdly easy to defeat, especially if there is an imbalance in the size of the opposing forces. Though not impossible, I doubt that I would normally put myself in a position to lose to this tactic. But that's not the point. It is gamey because it utilizes a totally artificial game design limitation. The most frustrating part of arguing with people about what is gamey or not is that most of the time, the "defenders" seem to have the idea that the "anti-gamey" faction is attacking them as cheaters. We aren't. We are just pointing out that sometimes, because of game design limitations, there are things that you can do in CM, that would not happen in RL. I don't think there are very many people that are saying that is you play using gamey tactics, that you suck, and are a lousy no good cheater, or anything like that. The "pro-gamey" faction needs to be a little less sensitive when it comes to these debates. [This message has been edited by Mikeydz (edited 11-06-2000).]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hi In addition to this I would suggest that there is nothing more "gamey" than the whole idea of the Qucik Battle. I would suggest that the concept of random VL's combined with the gamey "purchase" system is gamey to being with. I REALLY don't like QB's where players "buy" units based on the point system. I think the concept that two players can buy any unit they desire within their "budget" is the beginging of where the term "gamey" starts. There are PLENTY of good well balanced, and largely unplayed scneario's out there to choose from that you can play double blind with your opponent. Its the concept of 'buying' units within a budget based on points must be considered a contributing factor here. VL's and the late VL's rush and flag grab are just another example of gamey, but if you ask me in a well ballanced custom designed scenario, the late VL flag rush is a little less likely. I also agree with Maximus when he says, with some degree of certianty, "you will always win if you destroy all the emeny forces", then they have none left to hold VL's or to counterattack, the VL's you may be holding on to by a thread. BUT since we are playing a game I prefer to play to win and since the AI feels perfectly comfortable to do the same to me to deny my victory if it can I will and do feel perfectly comfortable attempting the late flag rush to throw whatever I have left in the dieing minutes to win the game, no problem. I know the AI will do it to me given half a chance. -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by RMC: The latest CGW has a quickie comparison of the the PS2 to state of the art PCs. Apparently the 66 million polygons is a theoretical maximum and the sustained rate is around 22 million. A top of the line PC can do 25 million per second. The real difference seemed to be in the textured pixels (texels) PCs can do these much better than a PS2 and the max resolution for a PS2 is 640x480. I left the mag at home, I'll post the details later. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> That's interesting do you have a web page link that mag must have a web site with that comparision posted somewhere I would really like to read it thanks -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Madmatt: My appologies, I completely read Kwazydogs post above as a list as in "Tom, Matt and me" instead of the way it was meant which was: "Tom, Madmatt and me" I will go back in my hole now...Nothing to see here expect me making an ass outa myself. And you can always see that! Madmatt<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> OK Thats all well and fine BUT Who Is WINNING ??! Come on Guys Somebody must be kicking somebody's Butt live via TCP/IP, fess Up Who is Losing? Can't wait for the LIVE action to begin, TCP/IP coming SOON to a Computer screen near you! Featuring Newly minted MODS (Stunning Mods by the way) AND Live TCP/IP where are all those Reviewers NOW? CRAZY new Idea (at least I think its new?) Has anybody thought of this yet? *******! When the next BIG patch comes out BTS should cut a few dozen CD's with ALL the Coolest new Mods (with all the artist's persmissions and credits given of course) AND the latest TCP/IP patch on one NEW CD and send it off in a NEW press release to all those Video Game Mags for review AGAIN with new mods and new multiplayer TCP/IP, and with all the NEW great reviews BTS will need another order/burn run of CD's just to keep up with all the new orders from the legions of video game fans who may NOW turn on and tune IN for all the new Eye Candy AND Live Head to head play Seriously (Maybe there still is an opening in that BTS Marketing Dept. for a Guy with great Idea's like me KIDDING!, just having fun with myself, mostly I just have Hair Brain Schemes like that ALL the time and no one in Real Life™ pays much attention to me so I'm not really sure why anyone would take me seriously here either.? BUT Still Laughing Giddy with excitment! -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 11-05-2000).] [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 11-05-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kump: Sorry folks, but I seemed to have been over eager to get Magua's new M3 mod out. He is not finished with it. He will have it back out soon with winter versions. That and some other issues has prompted him to request its temporarily being removed. Please have patience. It will be back. For those who already downloaded it, be ready to download again. Once again, sorry for any disappointment, but its worth it in the end. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> HI Kump Sorry From Home, my ability to relay e-mail seems to have been discontinued. So now I can only receive but not send e-mail. I will look into this as soon as possible in the mean time I can pick up your e-mails to me, but can't send any to you. thanks stay in touch, everything will be fine tomorrow once I'm at work (I hope) -tom w

Thanks Rune Did not Know Madmatt was refering to you. Are you a Beta Tester playing with the new TCP/IP patch? Does the patch you folks are testing have any fast recon and hull down tweaks and fixes in it or is it JUST the TCP/IP with the Taunting Feature Thanks to all for the updates and "news" Play ON! -tom w

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by kump: Yes Tom, I sent you e-mail. Waiting for some coordination on what we can do with your FTP site. Waiting to hear back. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Sorry Kump I'll check the e-mail tomorrow morning and get back to you can't do it from where I am now. Sorry to all for the hold up, I'll get on it tomorrow. -tom w

VERY Cool! ha ha ha I love it, thanks for the inspiring update Now re: the P.S. Who is Tim? I'm Tom, you are MadMatt (I think ) I thought KwazyDog's real name was Dan because of his e-mail? But who is Tim? and who or what did your P.S, refer to? Thanks So Who is Winning, and who won the first go round between Steve and Charles? Ever so curious..... -tom w [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 11-05-2000).]

oh? Sorry to get you so worked up? just a technical comparision of how fast the darn thing is no big deal -tom w

Well here is it 11 Times faster than a FAST MAC Sony PS2 "can crank up to 66 million polygons per second. This represents an astonishing 11 times more than what a Mac equipped with a current high-end consumer video card could expect to do." This things looks like it will really be able to make all that new 3D Eye candy Dance in ways we have not ever seen before. Now if I could just find one for sale somewhere? -tom w from: http://www.maccentral.com/news/9909/20.sony.shtml In a series of press releases issued the company, Sony announced the specifications for their next generation home game console, the PlayStation2. The specs are impressive for a video game console: the centerpiece is a 295 MHz 128-bit processor called Emotion Engine. A 147 MHz dedicated graphics processor called the Graphics Synthesizer assists the Emotion Engine. It will also come equipped with 32 MB of RAM, 4 MB of VRAM, and 2 MB of RAM dedicated to audio. The Emotion Engine's capabilities were shown off at the Electronic Entertainment Expo (E3) earlier this year. At the show, it exhibited the ability to produce lifelike and realistic motion and physical effects unparalleled by anything produced for a video game console to date. The specs on the system, released earlier this year, suggest that the Emotion Engine can crank up to 66 million polygons per second. This represents an astonishing 11 times more than what a Mac equipped with a current high-end consumer video card could expect to do. Not only will the PlayStation2 feature support for audio CD's, but it will play DVD videos as well. The PlayStation will also feature complete backward compatibility for games designed to run on the first-generation PlayStation enabling PlayStation2 owners to keep their existing libraries of games. The entire unit is clad in a color that Sony refers to as "space black," with bluish accents. The console can be laid horizontally like a traditional piece of a/v equipment or stood up vertically like a tower computer. The clamshell design of the original PlayStation has been replaced with a CD tray; Sony executives indicate this design change was necessary to support the high-speed 24x CD-ROM and 4x DVD speeds of the PlayStation2's drive mechanism. Interfaces on the new box will be familiar to many Mac users. The PlayStation2 comes equipped with proprietary game controller and memory card interfaces, as well as an A/V cable interface and an optical digital link, just like a high-end DVD player. Additionally, the PlayStation2 comes with a Universal Serial Bus interface and an IEEE 1394 I/O port, which Sony refers to as I.Link. This is the same interface that Apple has incorporated on its Power Mac G3 and G4 product lines as FireWire. In a conference call with journalists, Sony executives were cagey about what exactly the company planned to do with the USB and I.Link interfaces, but various options -- including digital cameras, storage devices, and other peripherals -- were casually mentioned in passing. Sony's decision to use the IEEE 1394 standard puts a powerful ally in Apple's court, as the computer industry tries to figure out what to do about FireWire. The PlayStation2 is also equipped with a Type 3 PC cardbus interface. In a separate press release, Sony outlined their plans to make PlayStation2 a centerpiece of e-commerce technology. The company will produce a network interface card by 2001 to connect to the PlayStation2's cardbus slot. This will enable users of the PlayStation2 to download complete games and other software via broadband media such as cable modem networks, storing them on local hard disk drives connected to the PlayStation2, perhaps through USB or I.Link interfaces. Sony appears poised to offer PlayStation2 users not just the ability to download games to their consoles, but other entertainment media as well, including movies and music. More than 200 companies have pledged support for the new PlayStation2, including 89 game publishers in Japan and 46 in North America. More than two dozen European publishers have also signed letters of intent to develop for the new game console. Another 45 companies plan to support PlayStation2 with the development of tools and middleware to assist game developers. Sony indicates that the PlayStation2 will make its public debut in Tokyo on March 4 next year. This is a few months later than originally anticipated by Sony, which hoped to have the PlayStation2 on the market by the end of the year. The company still plans a North American and European introduction for the new game console by autumn of next year, however. The price for Japanese consumers has been set at 39,800 Yen- about US$373. The original PlayStation debuted in Japan at this same price. Will Sony be able to get the PlayStation2 down to $299 -- the same price of the original PlayStation in the US? Sony executives remain closed-mouthed about their North American release plans. Executives queried at the teleconference suggested that more details would be forthcoming about the PlayStation2's North American and European releases at next year's E3 Expo in Los Angeles, California scheduled for May 11-13. Ok its old news but it does sound FAST! [This message has been edited by aka_tom_w (edited 11-05-2000).]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Slapdragon: The M73 used on the M60 was totally different from the 1917 variants used in WW2 on US tanks. The Canadians still use the M1917 exactly because it is one of the most study machineguns ever made. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Canadian armed forces HAVE machineguns?? I highly doubt we ever actually fire them with intent to kill, we FAR too polite to use such a noisy weapon as an MG. (Even a GOOD one) (Total Sarcasm) -tom w