Ben Galanti

I still wonder if the MacDX DirectX Interface Library would work. I would think they could then use the DirectX calls in the PC source of Combat Mission and let the MacDX library convert the Direct3D callsto OpenGL. It obviously wouldn't preform as quickly as rewriting the engine for OpenGL would, but it would be a lot easier to to impliment. Now, whether it would be cost effective, since there would be licensing involved, who knows. I would think only the Direct3D portion would need to be licensed, which would save some money, but there is also the time factor involved of integrating these libraries. It's probably a pipe dream, but it sure would be nice if CM would at least run in Classic. Ben

Interestingly, the G4 towers currently at the Apple store all can boot into OS 9. From the picture, they look just like the Mirrored-Drive Door models that couldn't boot into 9 just a few days ago... Ben

The thing one needs to understand about Quesa is that it is a replacement for the QuickDraw3D APIs not RAVE. QD3D was/is a higher level API for dealing with 3D graphics in terms of objects and scenes and what not. It's a level higher then RAVE. Now, originally they were intertwined, because RAVE was the low level API that QD3D used. What the Quesa developers have done is allowed the QD3D API to sit on top of different rendering engines. So, you can use the same QD3D calls but the underneath stuff is RAVE, OpenGL, or even DirectX (I think). The programmer is the insulated from the low level calls and can just use the higher level stuff. Now, CMBO/CMBB apparently does use at least a few QD3D calls (I recently read that the models are in 3DMF format) but I think the problem is the low level RAVE calls themselves. Obviously, this is a lot of conjecture on my part, but for the most part QD3D calls weren't used in games, it was the direct RAVE calls for better speed. Quesa really wouldn't fit the bill for this. Now, the graphics library that translates DirectX calls to OpenGL (I forget the name off the top of my head) might be something that would work, but that won't happen for the reasons already outlined in other posts in this thread. Ben

Jagdratt, What video card do you have in your machine? Is it running with hardware or software rendering? At what resolution is it running? I had heard of folks running CMBO in classic with software rendering, but not CMBB. Maybe something's changed recently... Ben

Hearts of Iron is coming to the Mac... Anyway, I'm looking forwardto playing with a Mac version of this. I wish I had the time these days to help with the programming. It's an amazing idea... Ben

Heh, I meant to mention something about this. I thought that the reason that a lot of the scenarios were not as the usenet poster described was that they wouldn't be much fun. Whether they would be more historically accurate is a question best left up to some one much better versed in the history then I, but I can see how they would be boring... Ben

Just from reading those threads, it really sounds like they have a problem with the scenario design instead of the game itself. Now, this may be a very valid point that the shipped scenarios are "too close for comfort", but I don't think that is due to engine limitations. You can make (or of the game generate) a large, open, flat map fairly easily. One of the demo scenarios was a map like that. While I'm not usually one for "if you don't like it, make scenarios your self" but that is somewhat the case here. Now, if that is not your thing, and there are not a lot of downloadable scenarios more to your liking, I can see how someone could be wary of spending their $50. Ben

I had a somewhat strange setup in CMBO for a while, but it would allow me to run software at a higher resolution the 640x480. Basically, the monitor resolution was fixed, so CMBO was unable to switch the resolution to 640x480, so it happily played in software at the higher resolution. I've since upgraded, so I don't know if that would happen with CMBB or not. If possible, it would be nice if software would just keep the resolution at whatever the desktop is currently set for. Or, at least, starting with the option key down or something would bring up a dialog that would ask whether or not to switch resolutions. Ben

My understanding is that facing does have an effect on morale (as well as spotting for that matter). Another thing that infantry units don't like is getting fired upon from a variety of different places. Basically, being fired at from a unit in front and on each side is more of a morale hit then being fired at by those same three units from the front. Ben

You shouldn't have to move, it's just a bad miss. It's most painful when it's a large HE shell being shot by a thinly armored vehicle... Ben

Because PC's never have compatibility problems with games... Now, obviously, if you are buying a computer for the intent of gaming, a Mac isn't it. But, that has absolutely nothing to do with this thread, hence the negative responses to your comment... Ben

Ummm...might be. I dunno, I don't speak Russian http://klad.hobby.ru/military_rus1.htm Ben

I think sticking to scenario default is only for the AI side. The player always has the option to move his forces. If you turn this option on, the AI will always set up in the same palce (the place were the scenario designer put them), if you have it off, the AI will move it's forces as it sees fit during the setup phase. This will give you a different fight each time, but human designed placement will generally be better. I'm pretty sure this doesn't affect human players at all though. Ben

Was there maybe an arty round that you missed? Light vehicles like that will scatter when coming under arty or mortar fire... Ben

You might want to try to see if you can get a copy of Voidhawk's Mod Ben

A question for Steve (which I suspect I know the answer too...) Does the TacAI have any concept of supressive fire? I would assume this would require the knowledge of 'my buddies are getting shot at' which you have already said isn't possible with this engine. The only occasions I have had trouble with over watch units not firing is when advancing on an area where troops haven't been spotted yet. new enemies appear (at some fairly low spotting level) and pin my advancing troops, while the supporting troops usually just watch (I'll try to keep a saved game the next time I see it happen). I s the TacAIs idea of a 'good shot' is one that has a decent chance of causing causlties? Often I would just like supressing fire from my overwatch units, and that TacAI doesn't seem to do that. I've taken to using a lot of area fire in these case, which seems to work out ok, though it is a little ammo-intensive. You've mentioned that you don't often use area fire, and just have the TacAI choose targets. I do that in a known pitched fire-fight and on the defensive, but have had poor results doing that as overwatch. Just wondering where I'm going wrong tactis-wise... Thanks! Ben

The larger one is for the non-US versions (ones not bought through the battlefront.com website) Ben

Just throwing this out there, but would it be more appropriate for units (especially lower quality ones) to go to ground and be pinned or panicked instead of trying to crawl away? Now, they squads would take more casualties, but in the CM simplification of casualties meaning combat ineffective, that would represent single soldiers routing away instead of the whole squad. Now, this is somewhat based on my understanding of panic in CMBB. That is, that the unit is still somewhat functional (will take the occasional shot) but can't be directly commanded. This would go to pinned if after a turn or two they hadn't taken any casualties. Now, I'm sure this would lead to howls of protest about "my squads just sat there and got chewed up and wouldn't go anywhere!!!!" so, I don't know if that's really an improvement Ben

I've seen a variety of spellings, but I think "ampulomet" is the correct one. The following pictures are labeled as such, but I make no claims as to whether they actually are or not. I swear someone else posted a sketch in another thread, but I've been unable to find it via search. Ben [ November 19, 2002, 09:46 AM: Message edited by: Ben Galanti ]

There are two levels of fire for buildings now. The smaller one doesn't cause units to bug out. Ben

I'll agree that vehicle spotting seems a little tough in open terrain. In a PBEM I'm playing, I didn't spot a truck on a road at 100m until it started moving. I haven't watched for this specifically, but I did think that odd at the time. I know there is an inital bonus for vehicles if they haven't moved since the beginning of the scenario (representing prepared positions) but it may be a bit over done for vehicles in the open and on roads and what not. Maybe it should only be brush and light trees? I don't hose every inch of open ground, but likely tree lines and the such always get the royal treatment... Plenty of support weapons alwyas help this. It may slow down your attack to keep these guys with you, but it seems to be worth it. Ben

Area Fire! The key to advancing in CMBB. Don't be shy with it. MGs and Platoons with lots of rifles work well (though arty and direct fire HE are the best). Often, units will get spooked and move, then get cut down by everyone in sight (a little bit over done, but there's nothing that can be done about it until we get relative spotting). Even if you don't spot anyone until you're close, they'll have their heads down. Send in some SMGs and you're good to go... If you get careless like I did last night in a QB against the AI, you're in trouble. I didn't area fire a patch of woods. I sent in three tank hunter teams, all 3 teams (6 guys total) were cut down in one burst from the SMG squad hidden in the woods :eek: Ben

When you boot into 9, there will be an extension in the OS 9 extensions folder called "Classic RAVE" or something close to that. You'll have to remove that (or set up an extension manager setting without that one) and boot like that. Ben

One of the allied minors has 60mm mortars. Romanians maybe? Ben

One thing to point out, 'Move' has changed since CMBO. I believe it is more stealthy and akin to sneak in CMBO then just a road march. Though, it doesn't have the stop while fired upon effect. This is just going on earlier posts from here, no first hand testing or anything... Ben