MERC

I have started using the "GRIDS". I find it usefull, but there is still no substitute for LEVEL 1 view. I think the "Grids" is tool that help convey the information should be evident by looking at the terrain. Hopefully, others will continue their work on developing terrain tiles that are less obtrusive as the "GRIDS".

I have good and bad days. Just depends when reality/homelife slips into combat mission world. My worst days are 1-2 turns a day per game. Last night was a good night - I returned 27 turns between 6 opponents.

You may want to try a get a third party program such as HyperSnap. It can be downloaded for free (I believe its shareware).

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Richard: Okay time for a SHAMELESS plug.... Steel Beasts has this very feature but it is a modern sim, not something along the lines of CM. Check it out: www.shrapnelgames.com/esim <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What was your approach?

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by :USERNAME:: I am a Motion Engineer (BSEE), Army Veteran (Engineer) and have worked with modern armor as an engineer. I think as more junior members get on board and contribute we will see more tankers reactions. I wont contribute to any flame fest (well not till BTS comments that is). Lewis<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I see Lewis our experiences are similiar. I am aero engineer (MSAE) - Kansas: General Aviation Capital of the world, Army Veteran (Engineer) and have worked with modern armor as a engineer - CMTC, NTC.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Demangel: Merc I would just like to know what your credentials on the subject are? I mean have you ever driven a tank or even seen one in real life... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What are yours? If you or anybody want to make this a discusion of credentials, then post your first (or send me e-mail). I do think your missing the point of this board - discussion. If one can't disagree then what is the use, and if you require one to have relevant experience to discuss a subject -- then you will eliminate quite a few from the conversation that could possible add something of value regardless of their age or experience. I will say this: Essaysons - Always First/Sapper Steel <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I bet your one of those...... <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Why would you say any of this? I have never did any of this in the past? In fact if you compare my threads compared to Lewis's, you'll find I'm a Angel. I see the disagreement between me and Lewis to be a matter of perspective and our own expectations of the game. Some may disagree/agree with our relative positions, but like I said before that what this board is for. I think there could be some improvements in the problems that Mark IV pointed out with the view dropping down from your TC to the ground if you try and change your view perspective. It would seem to me that there really needs to be additional view level - TC. This I think might help alot of people. As far as adding a additional command, I don't see the need, but if there are enough people that want it and can articulate a well thought position, then I'm sure BTS will listen - as they have in the past.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by :USERNAME:: I think others grasp my point that being "hull down" is relative to a piece of real estate somewhere to your front. Now the real estate shouldnt move but you will to attain "hull down" status to it. Once you achieve it, you stop moving. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Your laughter is of ignorance. Your fallacy here is your forgetting that the ultimate goal is to be hull down to the enemy armour not a piece of real estate. Depending on where the enemy armour is located (relative to your position) that will define whether your hull down. I would refer you to the following discussion on the issue. http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/000453.html BTS stance on the issue is not much different than mine, though they probably expressed it more eloquently.

I fully understand what everybody is saying. I just don't think getting hull-down is a precise black/white issue. Its a relative issue and will be constantly changing throughout the turn and game. What is hull-down at this second may not be 10 seconds from now. I also believe that some of the difficulties that some are experiencing in getting hull-down in the game is the similiar to the difficulty you would face in real life.

I do agree, things would be alot easier if when locked on to unit at view 1, it would not drop down when you moved or panned around.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The game shouldnt "reward" people for getting around this, its a wargame not a sim. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Around what? The game should reward you for applying real world tactics in a realistic manner. It should reward those who are capable of reading the terrain and find hull-down positions over those who cant. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> The AI might be taught how to slowly gain better firing positions for its armor.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How? You were talking about a "command" for people to use, are you now suggesting a TAC AI change? [This message has been edited by MERC (edited 07-09-2000).] [This message has been edited by MERC (edited 07-09-2000).]

Lewis, <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I never said that the point has to have a enemy vehicle occupting it, mind you, and as your vehicle "hunts" towards the assigned point and it sees an enemy target, it will naturally stop and behave just like any vehicle that is hunting.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> How is what your proposing any different than the HUNT command presently in the game? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I think that a slow subjective process that is being used presently can be streamlined so that PBEM games dont take forever. Perhaps it can help the AI also. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Actually, I don't find PBEM games taking forever. I also wouldn't consider the current process slow - though it is subjective. You might expand on why you believe it will help the AI.

To order, click on the PRODUCTS in the battlefront.com banner. This will take you to a page where you can electronically order CM. It also has link to the PURCHASE POLICY. The price is $45 + $10 Shipping and Handling = $55 (US) If you still have "buying" questions then I would recommend you directly e-mail BTS at: sales@battlefront.com

There are no extra missions for the demo -- but if you do buy the released version you will find extra missions being created daily.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR> I have dug improved positions with an M9 ACE and the whole "dance" is about letting them see little and you seeing as much as you can. The engine/tranny/driver is as much a force multiplier as you might imagine. Everyone fights to live and gears-be-damned you will survive at machines expense. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> We are talking different things. Your talking fighting from improved positions that I assume have a hull defilade, turret defilade and a hide locations - which is really beyond the scope of CM. Your are right, Combat Engineers (and their works) are a excellent combat multiplier in real life - ESSAYONS. What I was talking about is the possibility of "AI Confusion" due coding where if when you give the command "HULL DOWN" against Tank A - especially if it the target starts moving, the AI would be trying to compensate and would create a possible "dance" that is not "real life" and could be very frustrating when your tank is "showing" itself or not is able to fire because its constantly moving. If you do the command versus a fixed spot on the ground, the problem I see here is that it is in reference to that spot. A tank at that same location will have a higher offset and thus greater LOS, thus you may or may not be hull-down. This is just a couple issues that I think would have to be worked through if this command was attempted to be implimented. Bottomline I don't think its necessary for 2 reasons. 1) Presently, you have the ability in the game to get hull down positions using the HUNT command. 2) Those who are skilled in finding hull down positions will be rewarded, those who aren't will have a bunch of burning wrecks. I have not had many problems finding opponents that can't get their vehicles in a hull down position. Most here in this forum most likely know the tactics (overwatch, bounding overwatch, interlocking fields of fire, hull-down, SOSR, etc). The diferrence on the battlefield (PBEM) will be those who are actually able to apply those tactics successfully. [This message has been edited by MERC (edited 07-09-2000).]

I see several Problems with a hull-down command becase it is all a matter of reference. Your tank can be hull down for tank A but not tank B. Also I could see a problem where you have a "hull-down dance". This would be where your tank is constantly moving to keep LOS and its hull down position versus a selected target. Therefore the TAC AI is moving to maintain the hull-down position to your target, but ultimately revealling it or not allowing you to get a shot off in time. Ultimately, I think a hull-down command would be rewarding the lazy or less skilled people. Whats the use of playing the game if everything is automated. This is where in CM as the overall commander you really have the chance to make your mark. [This message has been edited by MERC (edited 07-09-2000).]

I think one needs to remember that hollywood has an agendas that will drive the content ($$) and message (political). If you one is really interested in learning about history they should pick up a book. You can also supplement that with the history channel - though one must also watch out for the propaganda in some shows.

I have lost the Son battle twice to the AI (Germans).

Actually, I am having the opposite effects. I played the beta demo's game once from each side and it was all right but that all I played. I could never really get myself immersed. Now with the released version with blind PBEM games, I can't get enough!!!!! I have only played one game against the computer cause I want to save the scenarios for blind PBEM games.

Playing with the mods, having no problems.

Played my first battle - Son I LOST!!!!!! It was great. Of course In retrospect, I made some fundamental mistakes in setting up my defense (but that what happens when you play it blind), but still the AI was on the attack and made me pay for those mistake. Of course, when and if I play it again...the AI is toast.

My solution: I upgraded to a 32 mb card. I was also running two (SLI) 8 mb V2 Cards and was having similiar problems. Everything would be looking good for ~8 to 10 turns, then all of sudden everything turned to polygons. I would have to save, get out and reboot and then start again. Only suggestion I have if you don't want to upgrade Is make sure you have updated all your video drivers (this didn't help me, but It might with your system).

I RECEIVED MINE TODAY!!!! Except USPS decided it was to valuable to leave on my porch, so I guess I really didn't get it today....sigh

Preordered 6/17/1999

I don't like the FOW terrain idea for several reasons: 1. Doesn't make the game any more realistic, because your taking it to another extreme that is not real life. If you really want this FOW, all you would have to do is strictly play it from 1st person view 2. I have played several games that had the terrain FOW and they have not been that enjoyable. 3. If you get say a mission of "Capture Objective B", but you can't see the terrain and where objective B is, then how do you know what your doing.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by HumbleFaust: Where is this exchange located? CSIPGWH, where is that? TIA <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> CSIPGWH is a newsgroup entitled COMPUTER.SYS.IBM.PC.GAMES.WAR-HISTORICAL