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

    Little Gems of ideas for CM2 thread

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    I'd like to have the ability to get the full unit info on the purchase screen. As long as you don't know every unit in the game inside out, this would really speed up the decision what to purchase for a quick battle.

    Of course, I'd like to have this feature in CM1 too (shouldn't be that hard to implement).

    Dschugaschwili

    ------------------

    Erst hat man kein Glück, und dann kommt auch noch Pech dazu.

    0

    What BigTimeSftwr should learn from Id Software and others

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Sparky9292:

    I disagree strongly.

    I think that CM should allow people to add their own tanks, tweak the stats etc. It would only mean a longer life for the game engine and more sales. It's short sighted to be paranoid about modding.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I really really don't think allowing people to add/modify tanks makes any sense. I have rarely seen good mods where the new weapon systems were balanced, but many of them that include nuclear missile launchers or some other über-weapon. I really don't want any bigger tanks than those already available in a game like CM. No third party mod-maker will spend nearly as much time on research and balancing the unit costs as BTS.

    Dschugaschwili

    ------------------

    Erst hat man kein Glück, und dann kommt auch noch Pech dazu.

    0

    German Uberweapon -- Easter Egg

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Dr Dan:

    Look guys, that silly thing uses ROCKETS, and we all KNOW how effective/accurate German rockets are.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Maybe, but we're talking about heat seeking missiles in a direct fire role here! eek.gif I wouldn't want to face one of those beasts. wink.gif

    Dschugaschwili

    ------------------

    Erst hat man kein Glück, und dann kommt auch noch Pech dazu.

    0

    Is artillery too powerful against tanks?

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

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

    While browsing through the excellent link someone posted a while ago: http://carlisle-www.army.mil/usamhi/DL/chron.htm

    I came across something that might be at least semi-relevant to this discussion.

    [...]

    Stay in Your Tank

    [...]

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I've always wondered why crews leave their vehicles during an arty barrage...

    Just doesn't seem right to me too.

    Dschugaschwili

    ------------------

    Erst hat man kein Glück, und dann kommt auch noch Pech dazu.

    0

    Panther turret speed revisited

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ari Maenpaa:

    I put some tanks to rotate their hull facing by 180 degs and clocked the required times.

    These are very close estimations (CM 1.05):

    Panther A: 17 secs

    Panzer IVG: 21 secs

    Stug IIIG: 23 secs

    Tiger I: 26 secs

    Lynx: 19 secs

    King Tiger: 30 secs

    M4A1 Sherman: 21 secs

    Churchill VIII: 33 secs

    Cromwell VIII: 12 secs

    M36B1 Jackson: 18 secs

    M26 Pershing: 23 secs

    All tanks were regulars.

    So it SEEMS that different hull rotation times are modelled BUT they are not based on neutral steering. At least not primarily.

    Ari<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Thanks for testing. I don't have access to a CM capable computer right now, so I couldn't do it myself.

    Anyways, I really think that tanks that have to move back and forth to rotate their hull (i.e. can't neutral steer) should rotate slower than tanks that can turn in place in CM.

    Dschugaschwili

    ------------------

    Erst hat man kein Glück, und dann kommt auch noch Pech dazu.

    0

    Panther turret speed revisited

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    I'd like to get away from the raw turret speeds for a moment to address two points made earlier in this thread:

    1. In most cases it's not the turret speed that makes a tank vulnerable, but instead it's the TacAI. I know very well that it's difficult to come around this, but seeing a crack Tiger turning the turret 180° to engage a Stuart 1500m behind it after all the tanks in front of it have hidden behind smoke can really make you want to shoot the Tiger's crew.

    So the question is: is it possible to have a tank keep its turret towards a potential threat (even if it's only a threat to the side turret) that has temporarily moved out of sight at least as long as there's no other danger to itself? It may require another "behavior mode" saying something like "ignore any non-threat targets", but it might make the simulation of slow turret vehicles much more realistic because any above-conscript crew would know the limitations of the tank.

    2. Neutral steering.

    I know most WWII tanks couldn't do it, but some could. My question is: Is CM's hull rotation speed of tanks that couldn't neutral steer historically lower than it is for tanks that could do it? If not, would it be possible/realistic to include this?

    Dschugaschwili

    [This message has been edited by Dschugaschwili (edited 10-16-2000).]

    0

    German tank optics seem lacking. Just a gripe

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

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

    Look.... I have several sets of binoculars. I have two 25x sets, one from China and one using Japanese optics. I can see the same things at the same distance, but the Japanese optics are CLEARLY superior. I get a much better picture and a far easier time picking out very small details (like individual leaves on trees). However, would this change my ability to shoot at a target if these optics were scopes? No. It might change my ability to SEE the target in the first place, but that is an entirely different discussion (i.e. spotting, not accuracy).

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Agreed. But I think being able to see the target more clearly might help spotting the place where the shell impacts, thus making bracketing easier.

    Of course, the transparency of the propellant gases also plays a role in this topic.

    <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>

    1. German guns are more accurate at long ranges - true. But what factors make them more accurate? Certainly more than the optics, so this position does not in and itself prove anything.

    Steve<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Again agreed. So you're saying that in CM guns with high muzzle velocity are already more accurate at long range than low velocity guns?

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Long 88mm lacking punch?

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

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

    By posting another set of test data up in the thread, with no explanation that you are fully aware that CM does not use this form of data, you unintentionally help to propagate the mistaken notion that CM does indeed use test data directly. It doesn't, and I want everyone to be clear on that.

    Charles<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I don't think you have to worry about that. Anybody who has followed this thread this far knows that you're using a formula to calculate penetrations, not some tables.

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Testing the 76

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

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

    After reading your extensive playtesting there is another point that concerns me:

    The low ratio of front turret penetrations at ranges under 500m.

    All panthers are rated with 85% armour quality which results in a front turret armour of 93,5mm at eleven degree.

    Normaly those 76mm guns ( 793m/s) should have no problem in penetrating the Panther's turret at ranges of 500 meters.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    I don't know if the armor quality is multiplied by the armor thickness to get the "effective" armor thickness. Actually, I doubt it. It may as well indicate a higher probability of weak point penetrations or something totally different.

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Operation Scoring error

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    Yes, I had the same problem too.

    In one operation (can't remember the name at the moment) where I played the defender I managed to almost totally wipe out the attacker while losing hardly any ground and with about 10 casualties to my entire fighting infantry force (not counting crews, I was a bit careless with my pillboxes and some of my tanks), and in the end, it was a minor victory with 3x the bunkers/pillboxes that I had initially listed as knocked out, and more tanks that I had lost too. Plus I had infantry casualties in the 200+ range, which is obviously wrong.

    My guess is that vehicles (including bunkers and pillboxes) that are knocked out and stay on the map as wrecks count as knocked out every time they are within the current battle map, and their crews count as infantry casualties again.

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Night combat revisited (long)

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    From a practical standpoint (meaning including it shouldn't produce too much work) I'd say that muzzle flashes could be implemented as something similar to the "sound contact" markers for AT guns or tanks. So you would only get a marker indicating that something is there (or near there). You could then issue some area fire commands in this direction if you want. Anything else seems to be too much effort to be included in a patch (maybe in CM2).

    Dschugaschwili

    ------------------

    Erst hat man kein Glück, und dann kommt auch noch Pech dazu.

    0

    Are half tracks TOO vulnerable?

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

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

    Tosh! Michael Schumacher, as everyone knows, received the Ritterkreuz for his successful attempts to stem the English troops advance by ramming their lead HTs.

    <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    LOL! But I've heard that he met a similar fate recently. biggrin.gif

    Dschugaschwili

    ------------------

    Erst hat man kein Glück, und dann kommt auch noch Pech dazu.

    0

    Should I buy Celeron or PIII?

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

    I'd take a Duron at the moment. Faster than a Celeron , but equally cheap. AMD will include a multiplier lock though, so you may not be able to overclock it without messing with the chip (see www.tomshardware.com for details).

    As for memory, I wouldn't go with less than 128MB, but more seems unaffordable at the moment.

    For the graphics card: If you can wait a few weeks, wait for the GeForce2 MX. It will have a performance similar to the original GeForce, but for a much lower price.

    For other hints on buying hardware, www.anandtech.com posts buyers' guides every months. Great for getting a feel for what you might want to buy.

    Dschugaschwili

    0

    Points Counting

    in Combat Mission Archive #2 (2000)

    Posted

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

    I can't think of anyway to stop it other than removing the unit groupings and letting the player spend their 1000 points on anything they like.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

    Well, I can. What about distibuting only some of the 1000 points to fixed categories and have the other ones free to place. I think an example will make my point clear:

    Let's say you have 1000 points for a given scenario, and you can buy troops from Infantry and from Armor (don't know how these categories are actually called, I haven't got the full version yet). So instead of having to spend 600 points for infantry and 400 points for armor, you could set up the scenario so you have 500 points dedicated to infantry, 300 points dedicated to armor, and 200 points that you can distribute as you like. That way the composition of your force is less predictable, and you won't end up with as many unused points that are spread across all the categories.

    By the way, have I understood this correctly that reinforcements have to be bought at the full price? I would opt for a discount on them depending when they arrive (although not as much as half price for arriving mid-way throughout the scenario, just a small reduction in price). What do you think?

    Dschugaschwili

    0
×
×
  • Create New...