hoolaman
-
Posts
1,929 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by hoolaman
-
-
Oh sorry I meant to say: Gee whiz everything's great!
There was never any suggestion that it was a beta version of the map that I saw. And I'd be very surprised if there is any change to terrain elements from CMFI.
Though I probably should have posted on Bil's side, since it's his map.
-
Italy as a geographical area has all sorts of grass type, from very lush to semi arid. Grass in predominantly farming area around immidiate vicinity of settlements would not be left unattended. It would be either grazed by cattle or cut by farmers for hay. I don't know when peasants from that particular front area were deported away - the longer they would be away the longer the grass but it also depends on the time of the year fighting took place. Looking at old photos from the area I'm a bit surprised lush tall grass has been chosen by Bil - maybe just because of practical gaming results and not for flora correctness.
I'm a bit disappointed by the map as a historical recreation. Ok for an "inspired by".
Go down there in google street view and it doesn't look much like this. The slopes seem a lot steeper and a bit rocky, with some terracing, to the extent you might have trouble operating tanks on them. The centre road is on a very sharp spine for a lot of its length. Italy also tends more to shrubs than full sized trees, but the CMBN palette isn't too strong on shrubs. In reality I think this would be terrain that it would be very easy for men to hide in, but very difficult for tanks to hide or manouvre in.
-
Yep. Tits are real. I know because I saw them on a website once.
You really think the ones on that website are real?
-
This battleground is real terrain:
-
The visual images may not be particularly realistic, but the end effect is perfectly valid... the idea of an ATG in 1944 'dodging in to cover' when a threat appears is rather laughable. A small ATG (50mm Pak 38) weighs 1800lb. 75mm is 2600+. We are not talking portable in combat here...
The tactical reality of running away from a tank I agree with, but as for their portability, I think you are wrong.
On a reasonable surface you could push them running. Imagine, can you push a large car with six guys?
Plenty of good footage of how portable and how easily packed up and swung around these guns can be.
-
What are you referring to here John? I was not aware that there were any issues with weapons modeling specific to the Russian forces in CMBB.
Russian 76mm underpowered vs Stugs?
I was not aware that the turret traversal times were not already modeled. It feels like it is to me. I watch my Sherman and Churchill tank turrets turning a different rates and same for PzIVs and Panthers.Tanks don't intelligently slew the hull while moving the turret.
That would be awesome - I agree. I think changing the gun's facing works reasonably well now. If it could be extended so that moving a short distance would not cost the full packup and setup time that would be very helpful. Clearly moving a gun should not be free and easy but moving slightly should not really involve packing everything up.A gun crew could move a deployed gun short distances very quickly, almost a running pace. Especially the smaller calibres. Packing up all the ammo and getting it ready to mount on a vehicle etc is another thing of course. But the game doesn't seem to think so.
-
Could have taken the same route as the old PzIV. Postwar French sales to Syria. Wouldn't surprise me if they just got locked up in a warehouse somewhere and forgotten.
-
A thread with an entirely unneccesary "no nazis" in the title is asking for it really. And the OP's question was answered about as well as it is likely to be in the second post.
And whinging about posts about nazis is making a post about nazis.
-
Will they wear the party uniform as differentiated from the normal Heer and SS uniforms?
Michael
Normal uniforms but with a +1 modifier to all stats to show how much more badass they are than ordinary soldiers.
-
I think BFC should include nazis.
-
Battlefront have planned in the past to deliver new vehicles/oob content packs WITHOUT campaigns or scenarios. So it seems the exact opposite of your wish is likely.
"Official" campaigns and independent scenarios are extremely time consuming to create, compile and playtest, and they compete against free content from the community.
-
You just asked John Kettler if he has links to websites. :eek:
Just having a larf. I would ask for proof but that is usually not as productive.
-
The arrow points in the direction the camera is pointing in the 3D environment. When playing one is looking in the direction the camera is pointing. I don't see what is so counter - intutive. It sounds simple, and straight forward to me.
Even simpler and more straightforward - so much so that we wouldn't even be having this discussion - is if it actually WAS a compass.
-
Tank barrel elevation limits not being implemented is another limitation when there are multi-story buildings. A tank can fire straight up at right angles from its muzzle to nail some infantry directly above.
-
interesting...
Do you have links to various websites that can substantiate this??
-
Battlefront have been strangely defensive of this baffling non-compass. But then "let's make it counter-intuitive" seems to have been their CMX2 UI mission statement.
-
You know, reading one of those threads JonS linked to, Kettler came out with some very knowledgable statistics about links from this forum and how high they come up in google searches etc.
You don't realize this, but the BFC Forum is what Google deems an authority site. As such, it is heavily watched by the Web spiders and often comes back page one, sometimes first citation, on searches. Don't believe me? Type "syrian airborne" and see what you get. I did that in Google Images and got a bunch of CMSF screenshots. BFC's Alexa rating is a highly respectable 123, 867, and it has no less than 551 sites linking in.I've noticed when he posts some of his absolute rubbish, it often sticks out like dogs proverbials form his usual postings. It reads as a blog post, with many many useless links to his mates websites.
Is it possible John is a cynical genius and is using this forum's high traffic and reputation to boost clickthroughs to his loony brigade websites?
-
You can always get your external IP address - ie the one your computer/router broadcasts to the net - by googling "what's my IP".
You then have to forward the port connection to your internal IP if you are behind a router firewall.
Or just use hamachi, though I find it a bit annoying because it creates fake network adapters and messes with your network settings a bit.
-
What I don't understand is that BFC freely allows downloads from the repository of 100s of MB of files to any Joe Schmuck on the internet, but doesn't permit something that is standard practice for digital delivery sites to their paying customers. I say allow six dowloads in six months, then one per year forever.
Or better yet put all their installs and patches on torrents. They are useless without a valid license anyway.
-
I get it. I was pretty bored of CMBN when it was released (though admittedly I was playing it long before then), as fundamentally it is the same tactical game system since CMSF 1.01, with all its various quirks and annoyances (I won't bother list my favourites).
So even a new century didn't really do it for me.
There are of course a lot of non-game extras, including the quick battles improvements, the editor improvements, and some extremely modest AI scripting improvements. I am pretty interested to have a play with the new MG tweaks too, that's the first decent game mechanic overhaul that has been done to the engine.
-
This link about V2 hits is also pretty cool. The impact of a V2 was so huge that the demolition of a whole block of pre-war buildings still shows up pretty clearly on the landscape. There is something odd about most of the spots marked, a modern building, a carpark etc among the old terraces.
-
Except that BFC have told us in the past that the drawn trajectory/impact point in WeGo playback doesn't necessarily match the actual, calculated value.
That always sounded like a bit of a cop out. In my experience it works pretty reliably, especially for the example of rounds going through the mantlet that are either labeled front turret or mantlet hits.
Unfortunately the whole system is so esoteric that it is very hard to tell whether there is a faulty label on the 3D mesh, a penetration through one 3D plate and into another, or an innaccurately depicted shot trace.
I have a feeling there are dozens of buggy labels on various armoured vehicles, and it should be easier to find out other than statistically.
-
You can actually tell - with difficulty - if a shot is going through the mantlet and striking the turret. In a replay you can zoom in and pause to see the round penetrating one of the 3D models before "exploding" (god I hate that petroleum fireball).
-
lol at the comments on that page.
Gustav Line Beta AAR Round Two PEANUT GALLERY
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
Well I don't really have time to argue about it. Just read the account of the real battle anbd look at the pics: http://www.ibiblio.org/hyperwar/USA/USA-A-Small/USA-A-Small-3.html
Of course there were trees, but not many. The valleys were steep and cut by "draws" including muddy creeks. Look at google street view will tell you the terrain off the road was not favourable to tanks. Tanks are mentioned only pushing along the road.
I don't think CM is very good at modelling the type of fighting in Italy anyway. There are no 3D rocks, no 3D rubble, and the entrenchments do not represent the kind of well established defenses the Germans had.