HawkerT

May I be so rude as to ask from where you have that information Sir? You see at least for Nvidia SLI (the ATI Crossfie equivalent) the answer from BFC tech support and the first second BFC programmer is (link to post): I would really like for you to be right Sir and that this will extend to SLI as well, but from the above I have my doubts.

Bil and Warren ... HOT DANG! I found it on a dusty old CD ... everything from 16.02.2006 and back ... will try to put the old unfinished website up again just for laughs. MAN! That CD even has all the CMTB stuff we did with Jacques! Ha! Got the framework of that old site up, and you can even use the roster still, (only thing working in this version.) www.cmoc.dk

Well! Life is grand Entertaining the ladies as best I can (experiencing my second puberty at the age of 42 ... HA!) Actually much more fun and rewarding this time around, and also waiting like every sorry sod on this here fine forum for the grandour that will be CMBN. One bit of bad news though, my youngest fried my stationary PC with hot chocolate a few years back and that one carried the backup from the CMOC website, so basically everything went away with that. I will prowl through some old CD's I think I still have ... hmmm just maybe with some luck ... let me get back on that one. From the discussions here you and Bil sound as vibrant as always, witch is a pleasure to witness. Ahh and good olde Chappy (still wearing shorts with the Canadian flag all over I guess?). Give my best! Frans

Excellent Bil! Colour me mucho interested as well as 'willing and able'. And a resounding thank you to you and the other CMBN Beta Testers, I know your efforts are pivotal in making CMBN all she can be! Your hard work is greatly appreciated. All the best Frans

Hey Gents. Fantastic to see my labour of love suddenly spring back to view on the net. I still own the CMOC domain and have kept paying for it just in case someday that crazy inspiration to create something like we did for CMOC43 reappears. But man was that hard work keeping that whole thing alive with the specially created Airborne Assault maps i did in photoshop, the AA OOB's I had to create, the executing of every round of play in the airborne assault application, the resolving where battles should play out then creating the CM maps and the OOB's for each battle in CM ... ha, and that crazy spreadsheet I coded for resupply and tracking of every freaking round of every freaking calibre and using that data for each battle ... the website(s) I created, the initial operational orders and situation (extensive historical research to get close to something real) word documents for each side etc., the situational updates for every round written extensively on the CMOC forum etc, etc. I even helped make the CM map creator application better, and then all the stuff I have forgotten. But good times non the less. You two gentlemen was a pleasure to get to know and work with. Jacques and that Israeli guy (Moshe was his name I believe (learned me how to say haver! (Friend)) we lost ... and all the others from all over the world, great set of wargamers for sure. I will be up for participating in something grand for CMBN, I know I will not be able to help myself if CMBN is what we all hope for. And yes, the name is Frans ) And Warren (Chief), I see that you can still hold your own in any discussion on this forum as well, nice that some good things does not change. Let me know if something interesting materializes and I will hop onboard with pleasure. All the best Frans

Ahhhhhh ... I finally get it! So when having to ditch the tripod to be able to sport the weapon, he is doing a podcast? Never really understood that concept until now ... makes perfect sense now though!

gibsonm beat me to it ------------------- This is actually a topic that has popped up continuously throughout the years of CM and it has been discussed heavily on many occasions. So if you are interested in a deeper answer to your question then please do a search and you will find many both old and new threads ... however the short and sweet answer is: "Nope! Not going to happen as it is not realistic". Happy reading!

Well AFAIK the English interpretation of 'Reisberg' is 'Highmountain' or even 'Hugemountain', however I'm Danish so my German is rusty. Anyway my foggy recollection depicts for my inner eye what amounts to a small map (smallest of the four battles in question) with one big two story building on a smallish hill (hence to name the battle Reisberg was more of a joke really, or a pun towards the difficulty of the offensive task). There might have been one or two smaller buildings also. I specifically remember that the Germans had a FlaK 88, that was the first time I saw and played with that beast. I seem to recall the Germans setting up in defense in and around the main building, and the Americans on the offense starting on a quite narrow berm that stretched the map from side to side. However the main anchors for my memory is the map size, the joke that the name represented and the FlaK 88. That is about all I remember ... not much I know ... Could be fun to have the demo battles recreated in CM:BN All the best

I think you are right Thomm ... if nothing has changed in the doodad behavior from CMSF to CM:BN that is! This is from the CMSF forum, but written in a CM:BN thread (before creation of this here fine forum): link to post Hmmm however IMO, in this specific example of haystacks the 'natural' thing would actually be the other way around ... right, I mean at least as depicted in the ongoing CM:BN alpha DAR? Those haystacks look like a man or three can actually hide nicely behind one but they also look loosely bundled so that any bullet would pass right through. But anyway, the doodad behavior is of course also covering all the smaller stuff like barrels, tombstones etc. and onwards down in size where obtaining concealment is somewhat harder but actually providing decent cover. So I guess that overall doodad behavior of providing some cover but not concealment is okay. All the best

Ahhh ... but then with your fine take on events ... it could even be called Photo Realism ...

LoL Michael ... Well I should have kept that in singular instead of plural ... i.e. my tiny head ... sorry for not catching that this has already been seen and answered. Move along folks ... nothing to see here!

Thank you for the exiting times of closing in on a CM:BN release. Just a quick heads up... On the CM:BN TO&E web page, under German Small Arms, the following list is presented: KAR 98K KAR 98K (Schiessbecher Grenade Launcher) KAR 98K Sniper G43 G43 Sniper MP40 MP44 MG34 MG42 MG34 P38 Just wanted to share the obvious and also air my curiosity for what is to be (if at all) included in the list instead of the second MG34? Happy holidays. Thank you and all the best. Frans

You speak for all Europe? Awesome </font>

Thank you for the heads up Steve! I am looking very much forward to 1.04 and it just might be the version for me in which to give the campaign a full blown try. Been holding out playing other stuff until you and the hard working crew get the worst of them bugs squashed! A good game on your HD waiting to shine is almost as good as money in the bank! Thank you and all the best Frans

Hey Gents! Excellent work on the 1.03 patch, thank you! I redid the testing on MOS and gun distribution as well as team split logic using the 1.03 patch and nothing seems to have changed from 1.02. So just a short recap on the bugs and issues. _____________________________________________________________________ The Designated Marksman issue. There is some confusion as to the name of the MOS for the MOS depicted with the scope and the small '+' The manual calls the MOS in question for 'sniper' The special edition mousepad call the MOS in question for 'marksman' Steve, you have used the term 'designated marksman' in the original thread So to keep things honest, for the rest of this post I will use your terminology and refer to the grunt in question as the DM MOS Grunt. _____________________________________________________________________ The AT Split bug. WHen doing the AT Split for a std. US Stryker sqd in 1.03 we get this: Scenario A: AT Split with no Jav aquired for the sqd. Scenario B: AT Split with the Jav aquired for the sqd. Both scenarios should facilitate that the AT MOS Grunt joins the AT Split as primary character, but he does not! As you have clearly stated in the above mentioned thread, all it takes is a swap between the DM MOS grunt and the AT MOS grunt and the Scenario A is home free and good to go! Scenario B is somewhat better in that the Jav, when sported, is part of the AT Split as should be expected. However the AT MOS Grunt is still not present! But who is then carrying the Jav, if not the AT MOS Grunt? Well the answer is revealed here. Yup! Your eyes are on the mark ... a SAW gunner! When acuirering the Jav stuff my virtual troopers gives the Jav CLU to one of the SAW grunts. This is completely unrelated to any splitting issue and is simply a matter of 'who in the sqd. should sport the Jav?'. I would answer 'The AT MOS Grunt', but hey! that's just me. Here is the post Jav acquire picture to support the above. _____________________________________________________________________ The Assault Split bug. Your explanation on how the assault split should work for standard US Stryker squads says: If we look at the current assault split for a std. US rifle sqd. with in-game pictures then we see the following: The assaulting team The heavy weapons (supporting) team Okay! So to have the actual split allign with your explanation the following personnel needs to swap places: </font> The SAW gunner from team A must swap with the DM MOS grunt from team B.</font> This will make Team A the assaulting team as per your explanation and will make Team B the heavy weapons (supporting) team. So it seems that all it takes is a swap between the SAW gunner from Team A and the DM MOS grunt and the current Assault Split for a std. US Stryker sqd. is home free and good to go. _____________________________________________________________________ Thank you and all the best Frans

Gentlemen. For more information, bugs and the added bonus of BFC acknowledgement on the issue(s) at hand please see this thread. All the best Frans

Hey gouldjg ... or should I say wilkommen Herr Kaleun? I recall you doing some really wicked mods for SHIII. Thank you for that! Welcome to this here fine asylum. Please hang around and when you feel that nasty modding frenzy rolling through your vains ... well then don't hold back! All the best Frans

Shameless BUMP for added pictures to my last post.

Theatre of War does this via sound points placed in the mission editor All the best Frans

Steve, thank you! Sorry for not making my points clearly, I'll have to work on that. Please bear with me one more time. The Designated Marksman issue. The reason I was confused with regards to the sniper/designated marksman thing was the fact that the manual calls the MOS in question 'sniper' and not 'designated marksman', please see picture below: So from this point on I will refer to the MOS depicted with the scope and the small + as the DM MOS. The AT Split issue. As you clearly state, all it takes is a swap between the DM MOS grunt and the AT MOS grunt and the current AT Split is home free and good to go. Excellent! The Assault Split issue. Your explanation on how the assault split should work for standard US rifle squads says: If we look at the current assault split for a std. US rifle sqd. with in-game pictures (cut from my pictures at the start of the thread) then we see the following: The assaulting team The heavy weapons (supporting) team Before understanding the DM MOS issue I compared your explanation above with the pictures I posted earlier in the thread and thought that both a Sniper MOS grunt and a DM MOS grunt was present in the sqd. and that therefore the SAW depicted as number three from the top in Team A had to be the DM MOS grunt. But that is history. Okay! To have the actual split allign with your explanation the following personnel swap is needed: </font> The SAW gunner from team A must swap with the DM MOS grunt from team B.</font> This will make Team A the assaulting team as per your explanation and will make Team B the heavy weapons (supporting) team. This is exactly what I was getting at in my starting posts where ARRPEEGEE talks about 'massing SAWs'. It makes perfect sense to me to have the two SAWs in the supporting team and it fits your explanation perfectly. After all the SAW is a support weapon and more suited for that than assaulting up stairs and into rooms. So it seems that all it takes is a swap between the SAW gunner from Team A and the DM MOS grunt and the current Assault Split for a std. US rifle sqd. is home free and good to go. The "who's sporting the Jav" issue. I am at work and can thus not support my words with an in-game picture. However as stated in the starting posts, when acuirering the Jav stuff my virtual troopers gives the Jav CLU to one of the SAW grunts. This is completely unrelated to any splitting issue and is simply a matter of 'who should sport the Jav?'. My observation seems to be experienced by others as well: ARRPEEGEE writes and Is this a bug? Should the AT MOS grunt not sport the AT weapons (including the Jav CLU) by default? [Edited to add pictures as I have gotten home from work.] Here is the pre- and post Jav acquire pictures to support the above. Pre Jav acquire: Post Jav acquire: SAW gunner weapon graphics glitch issue Again I wish I could support my claims with in-game pictures. But as stated to KwazyDog in another thread the fact that the SAW gunner sports the Jav CLU stems a small graphics glitch when he switches back from the Jav CLU to his SAW. After switching back to his SAW it floats ½ a meter above his hands. It simply might be the fact that the SAW is then placed in the position the CLU had (the Jav CLU and missile combined being a bigger weapon and carried/fired higher right?). [Edited to add picture as I have gotten home from work.] Here is a apicture of the glitch. However I also noted that the issue goes away the first time he fires his SAW afterwards. It is then repeated if he swaps back to the Jav and back to the SAW. So definitely a small small small issue. Save it for a rainy day! End of post Sorry for the long post but I hope my explanation was clearer this time around. Please disregard if it still does not make sense! I know full well that you have bigger fish to fry at the moment. Thank you and all the best Frans [ August 22, 2007, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]

Cool man :cool: Looking forward to finally be playing one of them Normal scenarios Dude

Excellent Steve! Thank you very much for digging out this thread and answering questions! Your support and answering rate on this here fine forum is really top notch! Spitzen klasse! nothing less! The splits makes much more sense then. Also the fact that the DM carries a SAW seems ok through my foggy lay man glasses. The only thing I can not gather from your answers is wheather or not it is correct for the DM (SAW gunner) to sport the Javelin, as is the case in 1.01 and 1.02? The lay man in me feels that the right guy for the job would be the AT MOS grunt regardless of the squad splitting or not. Simply said ... when aquirering the Javelin stuff the AT MOS grunt should grab the Javelin CLU and maybe a missile or two and his designated helper(s) should grab the rest of the missiles! Right? If doing an AT split then the assistant leader (single star guy) should carry whatever missiles the AT MOS grunt can not carry himself and together they should scurry off and aim to perform some nasty Uri Geller metal bending tricks on the enemy armour. Right? I am sure ARRPEEGEE feels the same, or at least this is how I interpret his posts. Again thank you Steve for your most excellent support. All the best and may the CMx2 engine spin off more of those tense 'männer gegen panzer' moments than we can handle.

Hey KwazyDog Good to see that you're back on the pallisades giving a bit of rest to olde Stevo for sure, he's been holding the fort aaaaall by his lonesome here lately (I know that the rest of you guys has been slaving away in the armoury). Anyway I just wanted to shamelessly point you to my AT team split / AT MOS guy bug thread. I know full well that you guys have much bigger fish to fry at the moment, but this might hold you over on a rainy day at a later point in time. Here is the thread: Split team logics thread As a little 'on the side' stuff to the above thread the SAW graphics position for the SAW gunner goes wrong after he switches back from Javelin to the SAW. It sort of floats half a meter above his hands. All the best Frans

Ohh forgot to add that deleteing the languages you don't need was ok as described. What would be nice to have is working hotkeys for the emergency orders i.e. 'pause','cancel all' and 'evade' as well as a working reassignable hotkey other than 'del' for 'Clear Target'. The latter one seems to be in at some ponit which is good! Being able to sport 'space' as a hotkey would also be nice. All the best Frans [ August 12, 2007, 03:36 PM: Message edited by: HawkerT ]

Actually I fiddled with this for a couple of hours last night and my conclusion was that it only works if you have values for all commands in the camera and relative sections. I tried to delete those as I wanted some of the default keys for direct hotkeys, and everytime the game would crash when the mission load bar was at 95% (I guess this is where the keays are read by the program). The solution was to assign a valid value for all commands and I was home free. Here is my set FWIW.