Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

Dschugaschwili

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    792

  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Dschugaschwili

    Video Cards and FSAA

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    I don't know. I bought a GeForce2GTS recently, and I've tried using FSAA in CM, but I turned it off again. For general gameplay purposes, I didn't find the benefits to be great enough to warrant the drawbacks (my mouse behaves somewhat strange sometimes when I have FSAA on).

    Try it out for yourself.

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Knocking out immobilized tanks

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Supertanker:

    Some examples of pushover immobilized vehicles: I once used artillery to immobilize a StuG in the middle of a snowy field. It was a good 150m from any cover, in snow, within the field of fire of at least three MG42s and a platoon of infantry. It was going to be a tough nut to crack, but it had to die so I could manuever safely on my right flank. While I pondered this, the continuing barrage apparently convinced the crew that they had other plans, and they bailed before the end of the turn. Problem solved.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Well, I never really understood why crews abandon tanks during an arty barrage called down on them. Even if they are immobilized, have their gun damaged, and are out of ammo for their MGs, I'd much rather be inside the tank instead of outside in the open with all those explosions going off all around.

    Or is it really safer to be outside in such situations? confused.gif

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Hypothetical

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Thermopylae:

    Assuming the soviets will always overrun the rather open sections of West Germany in the early days of the war, [...]

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Open sections of West Germany? In the northern parts of Germany, yes. In southern Germany, you'd probably be surprised how rough the terrain is for the most part. I once considered creating a CM battle near my home village (about 50 km east of Stuttgart), but abandoned this project because I would have needed about 100m height difference within a 2x1 km map, with large parts of the map being impassable for tanks (either slope or woods). It looked quite strange in CM.

    So there are plenty of opportunities for ambushes throughout large parts of Germany. I don't think overrunning such a terrain would have been very easy, but of course, I don't understand very much about those things...

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    A case for lowering Global Moral

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

    The big thing we are thinking about is something that would remove the ASSURANCE that the other side has no more reinforcements. Who on Earth would risk rushing his last remaining beat up units if he thought a full strength enemy platoon, fresh from reserves, was moving up to the front? In real life a commander HAD to think about things like this, but in a CM battle (not Operation) there is no "fear" of the unknown because there is no unknown by the end of the game (at least for a Quick Battle).

    Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    In this case, would it be possible to include the option to purchase reinforcements in Quick Battles? Let the player choose the time of arrival, and lower the unit cost for reinforcements depending on the time of arrival (not in a linear fashion towards zero though). I don't know if it would be a good idea to have the purchasing AI put units into a reinforcement pool, but at any rate the player should be informed about the reinforcements in an auto-generated briefing.

    I don't think it would be too hard to implement this, the cost reduction function is probably the only thing that requires some thinking.

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Buying certain infantry formations and maybe a bug

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    I've noticed that it's impossible to buy some formations (mostly heavy weapons platoons) alone, while they're included in infantry companies/battalions. On the other hand, a few MG/Heavy weapons platoons/companies can be bought seperately. Similar for the Sturmgruppe squads that can only be bought in company size. Is there a reason behind the decision what can be bought seperately and what can't?

    Another thing (bug?) I've mentioned in another thread but don't know if anybody recognized it:

    1. Padlocked units can still be rotated. I don't know if this is supposed to work this way, but it does make a difference for fortifications and obstacles.

    2. Units in the neutral setup zone (gray base) can be moved to any friendly setup zone during setup although the manual states that they should be padlocked too.

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Hardware for CM

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    I've just built a new computer from the following components:

    Duron 700, 2x128MB RAM, GeForce2GTS, 45GB HD, 40x CD-ROM.

    I'm not yet finished with installing all my programs, but it looks like a very good gaming system to me, and the price was quite reasonable. If you want to save a few bucks, take only 128MB RAM and a GeForce2MX.

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Bug or undocumented feature?

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    I noticed this some time ago and I can reproduce it with every version of CM I have:

    1. Padlocked units can still be rotated during setup. This obviously doesn't make much difference for most units, but for fortifications and obstacles it matters. Of course, this could be intentional. I don't know.

    2. Units located in the neutral zone (gray base) can be moved to any friendly setup zone during setup (only for non-quick battle scenarios of course), although according to the manual they should not be relocatable at all.

    3. A question: the CM1.1beta readme states that you don't see passengers disembarking out of LOS anymore. Does this "increased" FOW cover other details of vehicles too? Specifically in one scenario I've played the marker of an enemy tank that had disappeared behind a hill showed "bogged in" and later "immobilized" although none of my units could see the tank until quite a few turns later. I don't think I should have gotten that much information. Is this fixed in CM1.1 too?

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Road Tile Tweak Request

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Regarding the tile concept: what's the advantage of giving a terrain tile a height instead of giving the height data to the vertices of the tiles? With the second option it should be easy to make a single tile completely flat (perhaps to place a house or a road on it) without getting side effects on the adjactent tiles that you can't easily see in the editor. And you would need only one row and one column of additional height data for the entire map. Overall it seems to me that having the height data stored at the vertices is the superior method. Or am I missing something important here?

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    BAR is better than MP44 ??

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Big Time Software:

    Having fired an MP44 (twice) as well as a MP38 (same as MP40 for this discussion), I can tell you for sure that the MP44 has about as much recoil, but far better in every other way (from a firing standpoint). Muzzle climb for 3 round bursts was hardly anything compared to the MP38/40.

    Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Then why is the MP44 rated lower than the MP40 in CM if it only has advantages? I'm not a grognard, so please excuse this question. I just never really understood how you derived the firepower ratings of the different infantry weapons.

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Panther turret weak point

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Charles' post regarding armor quality is rather old. So things might have changed since then. I would appreciate an official statement from BTS regarding this topic too.

    Another thing about the Panther's lower hull: is this the part of this tank's front that's sloped "backwards"? If so, is the sign of the slope used for the internal calculations? Because this would mean that incoming shells that have arced down during flight would strike this part of the armor at a greater angle, thus reducing penetration capability. If the sign isn't used for the calculations, this could explain the long distance lower hull penetrations.

    Dschugaschwili

    0
×
×
  • Create New...