Pak40

I agree with Master Bates Having trees disappear or turn transparent would be nice in future versions. It's very helpful in other 3D games like Neverwinter Nights and I think GIC will have it also.

You might be able to install a second version which you can use as the "original" set of .bmps CMBO let us install more than once, IIRC, since there was nothing written to the registry.

Fortunately I got CMBB in the mail yesterday. Unfortunately, a friggin' hurricane is coming and will likely knock out power for days. So how much does a small generator cost? Forget the fridge, all I need is power for my computer

Your kid would love this game as much as you, although for different reasons(things go boom!). Your dog would would be all over the manual, perfect chewing material. As far as your job is concerned: you've heard of the alt-tab funtion, eh? It's the wife you have to worry about

Just got it in New Orleans. I have a new found respect for the USPS!

maybe you need Direct X 8.1 ?

OK, So Tomlin gets the award for being the first get his copy and post. :mad: And a Junion Member also :mad: Dammit BFC, where's the love? How bout showing some respect to your most loyal fans? Every member # under 1000 should have gotten their copy first

Damn Canadians

I'm in New Orleans, but I'm having a private courier pick up the package at the BFC office, fly to N.O., then drive it directly to my house.

My bet is Me

FlyPusher, I think the system is fine the way it is. The demo mostly has light AT guns in it, which is why we're seeing many multiple penetrations before the tank is discovered to be dead. The bigger caliber guns will require less penetrations. Some smaller caliber guns don't even have an explosive component in the projectile which will greatly reduce the chance of the crew getting hurt(and subsequently bailing out. ***SPOILER*** I remember playing the Citadel Scenario where my German tanks(75mm) quickly had a penetration on one of the KV-Is. The crew bailed quite quickly compared to tanks being penetrated by the 45mm AT guns.

Sorry for your loss. It sounds like it was a great friendship. Time will heal all wounds, and when they're healed and you feel like playing CMBB, you've got a lot of guys on this board that will be your next wargame buddy. Don't hesitate to email me for a game.

I've been playing CMBO since it came out. Trust me when I say that I've posted many times about the weakness of the campaign system and the need for a redesign. I like to think I had something to do with the changing of the system, because I argued that there was no way to successfully create an Object oriented Operation, such as the capturing of a bridge. All the time that I spent on making a historically accurate Arnhem Bridge Operation was for nothing because the operation system in CMBO doesn't function well enough to make the game playable. Now that they have added victory flags into operations, I can place importance on capturing a bridge, hill, building, crossroads and the AI will recognize that importance

I don't think this has been done yet for CMBB. But, the wave file may be the same name as the one in CMBO. I suggest going to one of the CM fan websites that has the list of all the CMBO wav files. From that you can determine which is the exit wav file.

Read the new features page on the CMBB site. It explaines all of the changes since CMBO. The campaign system is improved and should solve the problems that we had in CMBO.

This is definitely caused by captured units. A friendly captured unit is treated as an enemy unit as far as spotting is concerned. Note that you may have another unit that has LOS to the captured unit but that does not mean that it is seen. Since no marker is left for friendly units, it seems as though the unit disappears. Units surrender left and right in the Citadel Scenario because of the green/conscript status of many of the Russian units. Therefore, a Russian player may see several units disapearing. [ September 11, 2002, 04:46 PM: Message edited by: Pak40 ]

About your little situation. You mention that the sherman had to move up to get into firing position, which tells me that it wasn't in view of the Panther. No wonder that the Panther chose the Bren to target, it was the biggest threat with that Piat about to punch its side armor. Then the Sherman comes into view and fires and kills yours Panther. It all seems perfectly logical to me. The cover Arc command might have helped you kill the Sherman but the Piat would have had several free shots at the side of your Panther, it most likely wouldn't have survived anyway.

Yes, a KV got one of my MkIIIs at real close range. The smoke looks good and the wind carries it, nice effect.

Interesting...did your tank not fire any weapons at all? From a realistic standpoint, I should think that any sane tank crew would at least fire the bow MG, if the strolling enemy MG crew was within the bow MG's firing arc.</font>

The exact same thing happend to me. Once I reached the dried up river, I notice some tank hunter teams coming from the rocky areas, making fast for my tanks from their rear. The next turn, some AT rifles opened up on my tanks. I think at least two of my tanks were KO'd by ATRs. Next time I will leave a small rear gaurd. Experience is the best teacher

The reviewer was describing something different. He said that the new Cover Arc Command fixes the problem of a tank firing at an infantry unit while an enemy armored unit emerges somewhere else. The tank ignoring the new armored threat. This, to my knowledge has never been a problem in CMBO. Tanks and AT guns will always target an armored unit over an infantry unit once they "see" the new armored threat, it may take a few to many seconds to "see" the new armored threat due to being buttoned and its relative direction to the new armored threat. There are small exeptions to this rule but this has never been a problem or a debated issue. You, however, are describing a PzIV using the Cover Armor command. i.e., in an ambush mode. Your tank is ignoring the infantry and waiting for armor to appear in the trap(arc). Which is the exact purpose of the command.

Although the reviewer had obviously played CMBO before, the following two statements show how little: First off, the sneak command was very different than the crawl command. The crawl was a very slow prone movement, where sneak was a faster(at least 2-3 times faster) movement in a standing or crouching position. The sneak command also grants the unit of any Stealth bonus that it's HQ unit has. Second, the Cover Armor command was specifially designed so you could create an ambush on armor only units, which helps correct the CMBO problem of placing an ambush marker for you AT gun, only to have an ememy infantry trip it and give away your AT gun's hiding place. The arc also fixes the 300m limit imposed on AT gun ambushes. The Cover Armor command will not solve the problem of "when a tank would focus on a non-threatening infantry unit which was closer to it, but ignore a larger vehicle threat located farther away", which wasn't really an issue. They should have had me write the review

OK, guys. Thanks for the info. I'll have to experiment playing against AT guns some more.

I love the new death clock system. It seems very realistic and agrees with all I have read & seen about armored combat. Why can't this system be used for AT guns? Surely, a camoflaged AT gun would be hard to even see when put under a canopy of trees. How can a tank 700 meters away tell when he knocked it out? The tank would most definely fire extra rounds to make sure that AT gun is dead, unless more urgent enemies were visible. Any other thoughts? [ September 04, 2002, 09:32 AM: Message edited by: Pak40 ]