BDW

I think this was mentioned before, but I'd like to see a tool where you click on a unit and you see ALL possible LOS for that unit (rather than having to drag the LOS line all over the place). So the map would be shaded appropiately (as if the LOS line was dragged everywhere at once). I seem to remember the official response was negative on this idea for some reason.

Actually, I was referring specifically to the doodad rocks that are added to these terrain types - the rocks that will turn red if you use the red rocks mod. [ December 22, 2003, 06:48 PM: Message edited by: BDW ]

Michael - There are 2 bmp files for each of the two models of rock (depending on the location i.e. Italy or Africa). Unfortunately, these rock models are used for both the ROUGH terrain and the ROCKY terrain. Therefore, using this mod will result in ALL rocks being bright red. NOTE: the ROUGH terrain rocks disappear at camera view 4, while the ROCKY rocks disappear at camera view 5.

Hi - I'll share my red rocks mod: red rocks zip enjoy!

Request: Damage to tree tiles Could be abstracted: if heavy artillery falls in a patch of woods, then LOS through those woods would be increased. And it could also be eye-candy: replace the normal tree tile with a damaged tree/crater tile .

When it comes to smoke or dust, the LOS tool seems to become binary. In other words, it would be nice to have partial line of site (think dark blue bar) a certain distance into the smoke/dust cloud - the same way it works for targeting into woods. This way you would be able to target enemies near the edge of the dust/smoke.

I agree wholeheartedly about adding degradation of LOS through smoke/dust. Re: the dust - I still insist that the more dust put into the air, the longer the dust cloud will exist, due to the cumulative effects. It is the effect of fine dust carried on the air that I am talking about. You cannot tell me that if a hundred 300mm shells landed in one spot of dry earth on a dry day that the dust cloud created would disappear within a minute. You would have a large, dense cloud that would be carried on the breeze and would therefore exist at a higher density for a longer duration than that from a single shell. Now I am going to have to test this in real life, damnit. Anyone have some 300mm rockets I can borrow?

Michael, Good point. It was my understanding that the physics work like this: round 1 throws up dust cloud, then round two lands near same spot sending more dust into air and also propelling existing dust cloud higher into the air, thereby creating a larger dust cloud that lasts longer. Also, when a shell explodes, it is not just dust from the ground, there is a smoke element as well, right?

I don't think you read my post closely enough, or maybe I was not as clear as I should have been. What is missing is a cumulative effect on size and duration based on the factors I listed. Yes, an AP round makes a smaller dust cloud than a 25pdr, but 300 AP rounds hitting the same spot at the same time should kick up a much larger dust cloud that lasts longer than the cloud created by the individual round. I think the problem now is that the engine handles dust clouds separately for each round. What I would like to see is the following: If two rounds land right next to each other, then there is a single, larger dust cloud created (rather than two separate dust clouds of short duration)

After playing CMAK for a few days I have come to the conclusion the dust FX as currently implemented do not reflect my understanding of how dust behaves in reality. I tested the dust the following way: hot, dry map, no wind. I dropped 20,000 pts of 300mmm rockets in a pre-planned arty barrage on turn 1 (wow that was fun!). I would expect THE MOTHER OF ALL DUST CLOUDS to be kicked up and linger on the map for many turns. Instead, the dust was gone by the end of the next turn! In other words, there was no cumulative effect of heavy shelling reflected with the dust effect. I am very happy to see dust FX in the game finally, but the effect should take into consideration all of the following factors: - ground type - wet vs dry - wind - size of shell - number of shells hitting within a certain radius of each shell Therefore, a single shell hitting wet ground on a windy day will have a very short and small dust effect. Whereas, twenty 300mm rockets landing on dry ground within 50m of each other on a calm day will create a large, lingering dust cloud. Also, the same logic might apply to vehicles on the move: A single jeep will kick up less dust of shorter duration than a column of Tigers. If not patchable for CMAK, then consider it a request for CM Deux. thanks

1. being able to "area fire" into smoke/dust - sometimes it seems very unrealistic that you cannot fire into that dust cloud where, 10 seconds beforehand there was an enemy unit visible. One of the more frustrating times for me was as follows: I was firing HE rounds into a building full of enemy troops. A smoke round landed between my tank and the building. Of course, the game would not allow me to continue firing. I am all for decreased accuracy if firing through/into smoke/dust, but I feel we should be able to do so. Realistic? 2. I feel "green" units are currently modeled too simplistic. I think, instead of being simply more cowardly than regular units, that there should be an added element of unpredictability. For example, green troops might be inexperienced in combat and full of bravado because of it. Whereas the vets may be less inclined to rush into combat guns blazing - becuase they understand the danger and when to take cover. Realisitic? Someone, please convince me otherwise on the above points so that I won't be annoyed anymore! Thanks [ December 05, 2003, 04:04 PM: Message edited by: BDW ]

The new drivers hosed my CM. I have a GeForce4 Ti4400 and WinXP. Installed the new drivers and the Main Page came up fine. Then I went to load a PBEM, and noticed that the brown texture in the "loading graphics" window was black. Then when the map appeared, there was no map! It was all black - except the buttons on the bottom were there, and the landmarks were there. So I closed it out and relaunched CM. It was fine for one PBEM turn, then on the next turn it all went black again. This is the first driver problem I have ever had with CM. So I just rolled back to the 44.03 drivers. Back to normal.

I did make an ambient sound mod. This is for rain. It is a rain loop devoid of the annoying booming "distant explosion" sounds present in all the ambient sound files. I propose that CM2 (3?) have separate ambient sound tracks (multiple tracks for each ambient environment), so that we may better mod them (without having to own sound mixing software). I'd be happy with the existing ambient tracks, if the "boom" track was simply removed. In any case, enjoy the quiet rainy day with my mod... Patricks CMBB Page (You can find my mod in the sound mods about halfway down the page)

(somewhat off-topic) one of the coolest effects in CMBO (and CMBB) is to go down to views "2" or "1" and ZOOM IN. It is not very useful, but it gives a great telephoto zoom lens effect. not useful for much, but very cool effect in that it tends to accentuate the terrain. especially if you zoom in leaving your forces in the foreground and angel up so you get to see the beautiful sunset in the shot. (ahh the photographer in me is satified my CM! how bizarre) I wish there was dynamic lighting so we could see those Tigers in full siloughette!

sounds reasonable. thanks for the reply

This may be utterly naive sounding (I am no military expert) but... If squads receive a bonus for being in contact with the Platoon HQ unit, then shouldn't the PLatoon HQ units get a bonus if they are in contact with the Company HQ? (which would also benefit the squads) It always seems like the COmpany HQ ends up hanging out in back with the arty spotters. Could someone explain why it is the way it is? I just don't get it (admittedly becuase I don't know jack about this area). It seems to me like the Company HQ units should be more invovled in the actual combat. What what their historical role? How should I be using them? thanks

One vote for old view.

if anyone wants a replacement for the ambient rain sound, email me. diggystyon@earthlink.net I found that the rain with thunder and all the booms was just too much, so I made a rain loop that is clean of all thunder and booms. What's a good website to post these sound mods?

YEah EQing doesn't work because the explosions have a lot of high-frequency stuff. I did discover that the opening music track is 00005010! Cool, now I can replace it with "Mandatory Suicide" by Slayer!

Thanks for the reply guys. Now I just need to replace them with clean tracks. Anyone have the version of these files before the "boom track" was added? These booms are causing a constant heavy rumble to come from my subwoofer! But I really like the ambient sounds of rain, birds chirping, wind, etc. I will try EQing the low end out, but I am not sure that is going to work very well... any sound effects guys out there who could help mod these sounds?

Is it possible to remove the distant explosions from the ambient sound track? ie, is the ambient sound multiple wav files, such that I can edit the level down on the distant explosions? If so, what wav file number is it? thanks!

Wondering if anyone knew if it is possible to remove the "distant explosion" sounds from the ambient sound track? ie are the explosions separate wav files? if so can I delete them without screwing things up? and if so which of the 2300+ wav files are they? I like the chirping birds and the weather sounds, but the constant explosions drive me batty! thanks [ September 24, 2002, 08:36 PM: Message edited by: BDW ]

check out Powells Books for a huge selection of (new and used) military books! It is much better than amazon or anything else I have found online. They have many of the books listed in this thread in stock. [ September 18, 2002, 05:03 PM: Message edited by: BDW ]

(not only should I have posted this in the tech forum, but I found the answer there, too. DUH.) I am trying to load a map someone sent me, and I get the following error: "You must update to a new version to use this file. Please visit www.Battlefront.com for more information." what the hell? I have ver 1.12, of course, and so does the guy I've been playing. I think he uses a mac, but we haven't had any problems before. [ September 10, 2002, 08:32 PM: Message edited by: BDW ]

thanks [ August 21, 2002, 12:57 AM: Message edited by: BDW ]