Bil Hardenberger

Thanks Fionn.

Just another of my hair brained ideas.. (An example)I think the battle between Martin and Fionn would be an excellent opportunity to have two commanders for the German side... one for the relief force, and the other for the poor doomed FJ's in the town. Or one for each of the battle groups... you get the idea. Is there a way to save the Orders phase in mid stream? So you could, for example, give the orders for the relief force, and then e-mail it to a friend and have him give the orders to the FJ's... etc. I think this would open up all kinds of opportunities for some very interesting Play by E-mail games.

So, correct me if I'm wrong... but with what you say we will have FULL CONTROL over where the reinforcements come on... We can just have them come on at the map edge right? Wouldn't that be basically the same thing as I suggested? They wouldn't appear in the middle of a formation... that was my main concern.

Okay, sorry. I understand that you guys are getting to the end and have an agenda that you need to stick with. How much control over placement of Reserves does the scenario designer currently have?

Me: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>...being notified of their arrival during the orders phase before they come on the map. They would then arrive and drive on during the TAC AI phase(or whatever it's called)immediately following. A commander would at least have that much notice they were in his sector. And probably more notice than that in reality(i.e. he would see them or hear their engines, have radio contact with them, etc).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Steve: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Bil, great suggestion. Although generally having your guys pop up isn't a problem this is a good idea for the future. No time to do it now though as it would take quite a bit of coding to get it to work.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> After thinking about this I have to say, How hard would it be? All you have to do is place the reserves RIGHT on the map edge of where they enter (hopefully, a road)is this much different than how it works now? Other than being one phase earlier...

Fionn, <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I suggest that you take recourse to the field of battle with the beta demo when it comes out and settle it the old fashioned way<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> This has already been scheduled BTW Dave and I have had an e-mail chat and everything is hunky dory. We agree to disagree.

Now isn't that gentlemanly? I suppose we are going to have to settle this for good on the field of battle when the CM Demo comes out eh?

I apologize to the other readers out there. I hate it when a Forum becomes a public Bitching ground between two people. I would have rathered SgtRock send his concerns via e-mail, but he chose to post them instead. I was forced to respond in kind.

SgtRock, So now you are attacking me? I was just having a little fun with you. For your information I happen to agree with you, I just don't see how "emotions" can get coded into the AI at the present state of technology. *That* was the Genesis of my retort. I'm sorry you missed it, but really that doesn't surprise me. Don't go throwing the stones at me. You don't know me, and chances are, you never will. [This message has been edited by Bil Hardenberger (edited 10-20-99).] [This message has been edited by Bil Hardenberger (edited 10-20-99).]

I,(and it sounds like the rest of the loyal throng)really appreciate the efforts you guys have put in. It was a great story and has been fun to watch unfold. Thanks for posting them, they were worth the wait. My only real criticism, is the fact that the plane was included in the scenario. As the AA part of the game wasn't implemented yet,I think that really unbalanced the game in Martin's favor.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Ok i heard/read somewhere engineers are going to be in the game. What are they used for?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Someone has to drive the train.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Although generally having your guys pop up isn't a problem...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Okay... as long as we don't have enemy tanks suddenly appear in the middle of our formation like a U-Boat surfacing in the midst of a convoy!

Yeah, why don't you just add Commander Data's Emotion chip?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>once you get over 10 fps basically your eye sees smooth motion<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Really? Gee, I can save a lot of rendering time then! All this time I render at 30 FPS. If all I need are 10 FPS, well then I can cut my rendering time by 2/3rds! Thanks Fionn. P.S. Just yanking your chain. I had to jump on that statement. While Fionn's statement may be true for a game, for actual smooth motion your eye needs 30FPS for video and 24 FPS for film. [This message has been edited by Bil Hardenberger (edited 10-19-99).]

I knew that. I was just clarifying.

John, I am talking about being notified of their arrival during the orders phase before they come on the map. They would then arrive and drive on during the TAC AI phase(or whatever it's called)immediately following. A commander would at least have that much notice they were in his sector. And probably more notice than that in reality(i.e. he would see them or hear their engines, have radio contact with them, etc).

When are we going to be able to read the rest of the AAR's? There are some really long intervals between postings now. Can we just get them ALL posted so we can see how the game finished?

M. Hofbauer said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>#13) I find it unsatisfying that reinforcements arive in the middle of the map in plain view of enemy troops or pop up unexpectedly... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Steve said: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> ...Where the reserves come in is up the the designer BTW. In the two scenarios I just made, the reserves that came in for both sides were never seen entering play.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What if.... The turn before the reinforcements come on the map, the owning player gets a warning, and the opportunity at that point to give them movement orders from their entry location (most probably a road). That way he can be sure they don't just pop up in the midst of his force. They can just drive/walk on the map according to their orders. Not unrealistic I believe and would give the player some control.

Oscar, The only real comparison I can make between a 2D representation of the battlefield and a 3D representation is what I do for a living. I am a 3D animator. I know how powerful 3D can be. I fully expect CM to be as big a revolution in wargaming as 3D animation has been to the motion picture, Forensic, Scientific, and Commercial industries. Do you think there is a correlation between the amount of animation in movies and the reality that can be achieved now? Is it any different for wargames? In my opinion, no. Using the power of 3D to recreate reality is a force that has taken us into never before dreamed of realms. There is nothing that cannot be done today in 3D; it is only limited by your imagination. And your imagination seems lacking, or perhaps it's just your vision. You remind me of the old Disney animators that shot down 3D animation as lacking art and passion. Now these same Disney animators utilize 3D for what it is, a tool to create a superior, deeper picture. I know what kind of "tricks" and abstractions are used while working in 2D. I also know that these tricks are unnecessary while working in 3D. To say that 2D is superior to 3D is not only fooling yourself, it is the most ridiculous rhetoric I think I have ever heard. Perhaps you live in a 2D world and are speaking from ignorance?

Use the search feature to find the threads about textures. All this info is in there. A quick answer, yes you can change the textures.

Here Ken, try these direct links: http://combathq.thegamers.net/battle/Turn34x/axisturn34.htm http://combathq.thegamers.net/battle/Turn34a/alliedturn34.htm

Yeah, It's you

Steve, Yes, it would be difficult to put in. You (the programmers) would have to plot the radio network for the entire force, from C.O. down to the lowest unit. You would have to separate the nets into BN command net, Company Command nets, to Platoon nets (if available). Then you would have to simulate the reporting time for the company to disseminate information both up and down the chain... this would have your scouts (for example) perhaps sighting something minutes before you see it on the battlefield, and by the time you do, the information is obsolete. You would have to have friendly unit locations disappear as enemy units do when you lose sight of them. Then you would have to re-do the way the whole control structure is currently implemented. The player would only be able to give orders to company HQs, unless, say he is collocated with a Company, then lower echelon orders should be possible. Yeah, pretty complicated... (would be really cool though) Perhaps better kept for an Operational level game

Jim, <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Sometime back I advocated the notion of additional command/control, such that you could not control everything all of the time and might not, therefore, be aware of every unit's situation.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Yeah, this sounds good. I agree that during a battle the Commander would and did lose contact with his own troops. I would love to see friendly units on the battlefield that are not under the commander's control, or/and units that he loses control of (i.e. loses comms). Communications is a sorely neglected part of the battle. This is a feature that has never been addressed before in a wargame (to my knowledge) and would certainly add to the immersion. I would also like to see you lose sight of your troops when this happens. It could have you firing on friendly troops, mis-identifying units, etc. Is this realistic? You bet it is. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>This was pretty much trounced by all and sundry - control of all units was much preferred.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I am sorry to hear that Jim. God-like control of all units is not reality. Perhaps this is a feature we can talk Steve and Charles into adding for future releases of CM

I agree with Fionn, and obviously with the way that CM disseminates it's information. A real Battalion Commander could care less how a vehicle got immobilized or taken out. He only cares that he lost a resource. This micro detail is irrelevant to how he wages the battle. He doesn't have the time to look through all the reports and ascertain the shell's angle as it passed through the armor, who cares? He wants to defeat the enemy, to do that he wants to know what he has available to put toward that end. Even after the battle I really doubt that he would care about the details unless vehicles were lost to a new weapon system that he will have to take into account in the future (Egyptian SAGGERS against Israeli armor in 1973 comes to mind). To my mind, this argument is no different than the thread about whether dead bodies should be left scattered about on the battlefield. It would be unnecessary clutter.