Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

Gromit

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    292

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Gromit

    Elvis, need help sorting my current CM pkgs and what is needed pls

    in CM2 General Tech Support

    Posted · Edited by Gromit

    Elvis and the Board:

    Greetings guys, it's Gromit. Been away from the CM scene but just got a new PC and I need to get some clarification on my current library of CM titles & what items I need to buy to be up-to-date and any limitations/drawbacks to certain setups.

    Here is the list from my orders page:  (Note that these purchases were from 2011 thru 2017, so they are not optimal)

    • CM Battle for Normandy Engine 1 
    • CM Fortress Italy Engine 2
    • CM Commonwealth Forces Module
    • CMBN Upgrade 2
    • Upgrade 4 Big Bundle

    If I read the website correctly, it seems I am missing a package to take CMBN from Engine 1 to Engine 3 so the Upgrade 4 BB will work wrt CMBN? Also, if I want the complete Brit experience, would I be better off just getting the Big Bundle for CMBN as I only have the one small piece currently?

    My goal is to bring my current packages up to speed (and completeness, i.e., the Brits) and then add on the later modules, etc. as I go. I would really appreciate some guidance.

    Thanks in advance,

    Paul West (Gromit)

    p.s., a belated congrats on the position Elvis, you deserve it!

    0

    Update on Engine 4 patches

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted · Edited by Gromit

    Well, well. Glad to see Die Alte Gang is still alive and kicking. Greetings to all.

    I can't say I haven't had my own moments of fist-shaking (mostly mental, not actual, mind) at Steve, Charles and all the other code monkeys up in the woods. One wonders if they actually bathe up there... anyway, I digress.

    I have had a hunch for years now that one slightly insidious human condition might be in play. Namely, a variation of the old standby "Can't see the forest for the trees". Now, don't get your hackles up, all I mean is that this WW2 TO&E stuff is best handled by those with long experience (i.e., our boys S & C) but I have run across too many examples of folks being too close to something to see what is at times obvious to others.

    Of course that's why you bring in the occasional brilliant new guy (he still squeaks when he turns around!) to help out in this regard. So, I imagine our heroes have enough checks and balances in place to keep from losing themselves day after day.

    My tongue-in-cheek contribution is my way of saying I love these guys, warts and all- despite their extreme proficiency at torquing my patience now and then.

    Hope everyone is doing fine and healthy. Looking forward to the releases guys! 

    1

    New Website status update

    in Combat Mission - General Discussion

    Posted

    Hey all:
    It's been years since I last logged on, but checked in today to test the new site.

    About the only issue I had was forgetting that I ended up having a Username for the Store and another variation of that for the Forums. I ended up confusing the two and eventually found my 3x5 index card with the login info, so reset went fine and I am up and running again.

    Now I am surfing around looking for a status update on CM:WW2...

    Good to see everyone is hanging in there.

    Gromit - one of the Old Guard

    1

    In Deadly Combat--How'd the Germans do what they did?

    in Combat Mission Red Thunder

    Posted

    It's been quite a while since I was active in the community here, and CM in general. Guess I am busy with other things. John, glad to see your latest post here is thoughtful and open to different view discussion/acceptance. Without getting derailed here, in the past I found that wasn't usually the case. Enough said.

    With regard to your observations, it does kind of make one wonder just who has the right of it when comes down to what really happened on the Ost Front and why.

    Seems to me the Soviets did a bangup job of strategic setup, smoke-and-mirrors and execution, i.e., they had some very capable generals. But once you narrow it down to the local level, on a tactical and possibly operational level, the Soviet warmachine starts showing those classic flaws that existed in 1941 and they never really got solved. I am no expert, but their use of manpower and support was less than optimal. However, it does fit who the Soviets were. I get the feeling the German troops at the local level just prayed that strategically their generals wouldn't get flanked or caught flat-footed. Otherwise they felt pretty confident that locally they would have a fair chance of surviving the onslaught. Basically, I think the Soviets never got around to updating their tactical level capabilities, the Germans knew that and them intimately and took advantage of it. I imagine Stalin and the generals felt the effort to convert their army from what it was in 1939 to something closer to the other major powers just wasn't worth the cost. If Mother Russia had been more the size of say France, their outlook on manpower and prosecution of war would have been very different.

    With regard to CM, history is replete with examples of every kind of engagement, from cakewalk to stonewall. Point is, the randomness involved in battles, encased in the fog of war makes it difficult to portray such actions with any degree of success. Steve has often made the point that map size (read engine/graphic capability) is a severely limiting factor for CM for the foreseeable future. It places hard boundaries on how close a designer can get to depicting WW2 tactical actions, any actions. So, it puts additional strain on a designer to try and get around these limitations. Typically, they don't. Too much time and effort for someone doing this on the side, a few hours a night or week perhaps.

    With regard to randomness and the role it plays in simulations, I will use an example from a different source. If any of you have had the pleasure of playing Chad Jensen's Combat Commander boardgame by GMT, you already know where I am going with this.

    CC is an excellent game that is fairly easy to learn, exciting and for a game that has limited fog-of-war, unpredictable and scenarios can be completed in around 1-3 hours typically. In a nutshell, the design incorporates events and random occurrences; from a fire starting or sniper targeting a random hex to reinforcement troops or a pillbox suddenly appearing in front of your squads. It combines this with a combat system that feels right to me (and many others based on the game's popularity).

    Predictably, the naysayer wargamer grognards in the community poo poo'ed the game as lousy because they couldn't maintain control of their units. Too random they said. Unrealistic they cried. Baloney I say! Combat Commander is probably the best game around to simulate the basic elements present in a tactical WW2 firefight. It doesn't get everything right or even close to perfect, but do we even need to go there?

    I can't wait for the day when CM or its equivalent can take on the task of simulating actions on a broader front with enough depth to allow historical tactics and maneuver. I actually don't think we are all that far from achieving it, but Steve and Charles are better judges of that I think.

    Nice discussion guys.

    0

    The start of actual news

    in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy

    Posted

    With M-G coming, I humbly ask again that the following 3D / textures be resolved:

    -Missing Lee-Enfield buttplate (it was fixed for GL, after all)

    -Missing Bren buttplate

    -Deletion of the finger grooves on the stock of the Springfield M1903A3

    -Removal of the bayonet lug (and its attachment on the barrel) from the M1 Carbine

    -Removal of the post-war windage / elevation sights on the Garand and replaced with the proper "lock-bar" sight

    Thanks. :)

    Weapon Grog...

    Calamine lotion works purty good when you get to itchin' from seeing those texture faults.

    Just saying. ;p

    Oh, and guys... it's somefink if you're an old fart around here. Surprised Steve didn't call foul.

    Looking forward to all the Market-Garden goodness Steve- thanks!

    0

    Do we really want them?

    in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy

    Posted

    Putting the whole issue of just why we tend to like this kind of stuff aside for a minute, I would have to say that at 48 I have a much better grasp of it than I used to growing up.

    My father was 40 when I was born and I remember being slightly sad and a little puzzled that he didn't show any interest in my wargaming hobby. I also knew that he served in WW2 from 1942 to 1946 in the US Navy as an Aviation Ordinanceman 2nd class aboard the carriers Randolph and Bon Homme Richard. Among his keepsakes, I have a silk aviator's map of the seas around Japan- there in ink around the edge are all the names of VBF-16 men who were killed.

    I had time to reflect on all this recently, as my father lost his fight with Parkinson's on December 22, 2012. He was 89 and had a good life with five children, and lots of grandchildren. Although I did talk with him at times about his experiences in the war, I could tell that, like most vets who have seen what war can do to humans, he was still haunted by the loss of friends in their prime. Worse still is just how vividly vets remember the traumatic events that will stay with them their whole life. I can only imagine how much worse it was for the ground forces at "the sharp edge".

    From the WW1 era, the Kohima Epitaph- I imagine many of you know it as well:

    When you go home,

    Tell them of us and say,

    For your tomorrow

    We gave our today.

    You begin to understand how so many vets felt a sense of guilt that they managed to make it through the war and their belief that the "real" heroes are the ones who never made it home.

    As Ron Perlman voiced, "War... war never changes."

    Perhaps our addiction to this pursuit is through some need to relate at any level, no matter how shallow, of what it must have been like. Could we have dealt with it? It amounts to a challenge for me most times, but I freely admit that I have difficulty defending my "hobby" to others who don't share it. Somehow it makes me feel guilty for the enjoyment I derive out of it, you know?

    0

    Urban renewal should have a penalty.

    in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy

    Posted

    They already have terrain deformation in the game, just not for collapsing buildings, which should be leaving piles of rubble strewn about.

    *shrugs* Again... where do you draw the line? Only BF knows.

    Having said that, I do agree it would be very cool to see more realistic depictions with buildings. Perhaps when they tackle fire down the road another look at deformation will happen.

    0

    Urban renewal should have a penalty.

    in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy

    Posted

    Apocal:

    I believe this is something that BF had to decide where to halt the investment of CPU and GPU cycles before things got out of hand. In other words, a more realistic representation would take many more resources than it would be deemed "worth" to display. I imagine Charles and Steve had to make many, many of these type decisions, as they have a finite amount of memory to work with.

    Until we get computers with an overabundance of memory and graphic capability at reasonable prices, things will remain this way.

    0

    V2.0 anything work right? blind, crew graphics, hotkeys, etc

    in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy

    Posted

    Weird on the patch order thing. I think I only had V1.10. I most certainly only did the 2.0 patch today. The only oddity was the install checkboxes (which appears that it should have been a radio button). (paraphrased)

    1) install 2.0 for CMBN only

    2) install 2.0 for CMBN + commonwealth

    Mike

    Mike:

    I think a lot of your issues are due to an improper install- not that the above makes it any easier mind you... (meant to mention it to BF)

    I noticed this same "checkbox" confusion a couple days ago when I got my CW and 2.0 downloads. Here is what I did for a complete installation (as I only had Fortress Italy installed at the time).

    Items needed:

    a) CMBN disk or DL

    B) CMBN patch v1.1

    c) CW disk or DL

    d) CM v2.0 disk or DL

    1) Install CMBN from disk or download; start and verify OK

    2) Install CW from disk or download; start and verify OK

    3) Install CMBN patch v1.1; start and verify version

    4) Install CM v2.0; You HAVE to check both boxes to get the proper install from what I can figure out. Again, start and verify version.

    Mine works just fine- no issues with the odd stuff you mentioned, not including spotting and other game engine items. To me those are a separate discussion.

    The whole checkbox thing is something BF needs to address- there is no guidance on what to do if you are uncertain here. What I mean is this:

    YES, I have both CMBN and CW; but both are installed and patched to v1.1. So... do I need both boxes checked? -or just the one? Which one?? It may seem "obvious" to some, but I did a mental double-take when I saw it. But then decided that the filesize for just the first was very unlikely to make all the changes necessary to bring my game up to v2.0, and thankfully, I was right... at least I THINK so. Maybe I didn't need to first one? WHO KNOWS!?

    This is needlessly confusing though BF- it needs clarification, particularly for the uninitiated.

    Hope this helps Mike.

    0

    Why was the interface not developed further?

    in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy

    Posted

    Not to pick on you, but part of the problem we have in discussions like this, in particular about supposed deficiencies in CMx2 vs. CMx1, is that often the information presented is wrong or, at least, misguided (i.e. because other things aren't taken into consideration). This comes from, I think, a sort of natural adversarial stance gamers take with game developers when it comes to UI. It's tough to have a steady, rational, un-emotional discussion about it. When it does happen, though, it's usually a discussion worth having.

    Steve

    This thread is about managing expectations, resistance to change and comfort zones more than anything else. Some people on this board are just a lot more uncomfortable when confronted with something new or different that requires them to adjust their thinking and/or behaviors. Our society has gotten so used to being catered-to these days; some folks have morphed it into a right they can apply to any situation that confronts them, rather than considering changing themselves.

    There are some legitimate gripes herein, no doubt. But Steve has IMO covered them more than sufficiently. People need to adjust their expectations in line with what Battlefront is capable of producing and give them the time to make those things happen.

    0
×
×
  • Create New...