TeAcH

This is a great one player scenario when played as US! Thank WBW!

1.02 was created and applied to the 1.02 demo first. It was also going to be incorporated into the full game, but other issues arose that prompted the creation of version 1.03. So 1.03 is being tested for release to patch the full version. Hopefully it will be available next week. Some people got 1.02 when they bought the full game, but a 1.02 patch for all of us who didnt was scrapped for reasons mentioned above. TeAcH [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 07-23-2000).]

I would guess that 1.03 will arrive Friday 7/27 going what I have read. The patch is being tested now and some have said that could take a week or so. TeAcH BTW, Welcome Onejob. Nice to have you aboard.

This is a bug. I notified Steve at BTS and sent him a 60 second movie file. I had an arty barrage of mine fall around an abandoned Cromwell. Each time it ot close a crew would bail out. 10 or so in all. Yikes. Its been reported. TeAcH

When I choose to setup a Quick Battle, define it as an ARMOR ONLY engagement and then allow the computer to choose all assets involved, it seems like the infantry is always included. Is infantry supposed to be included when I choose armor only? I hope not. I sometimes want to mix it up with just AFV and want the computer to suprise me with what it selected. TeAcH

Thanks Schull and Elmo. Schull, your last point begs the question again. Do you know if there are any plans to make CM's fog more compatible OR add vertex fog for the seemingly large group of BTS customers/CM players who are out here? Thanks TeAcH

Are there any plans on making the fog compatible with a card like my Viper 2, if the Viper 2 does allow fog (just a different type)? Thanks TeAcH

yikes! sorry for the dbl post!

Good point! It may cut down on a lot of posts that are addressed in the patch. Well said. I hope they release a readme. TeAcH

Good point! It may cut down on a lot of posts that are addressed in the patch. Well said. I hope they release a readme. TeAcH

To grid or not to grid. Hmm...Not to grid. Looks bad and is unrealistic. TeAcH

The author was referring to 81 mm mortar rounds (IIRC) in the quote I gave. If one hits near an infantry that was in marsh, versus, a ford, versus, rough, there sounds like there might be a difference in the damage inflicted. Thanks TeAcH

Hmm Ron. Nice title "Ungrateful Slackass PosterBoys" How about "Whiney assed Newbies" -or- "Cry babies and Pessimists!" Point is, I didnt care for your derogatory title. Maybe I'm way off the mark here, but you seem to be slamming new customers/posters to the board. Who appointed you keeper of the forum? I know you don't care what I think. Fine. But please don't slam those people who ask questions about the game. And if you ARE going to reply to them, please don't be sarcastic. That was all I was trying to say. Take care, TeAcH

Username: You got it. Thanks. Simon Fox: Sorry you missed my point. Oh well.

I have the Viper 2 and I am having a fog problem. This may be a driver related issue, I am not sure. I have the 6-26-00 card driver and DirectX7a. What happens with fog is, the entire area surrounding the map/battlefield, turns gray when full weather effects are toggled on. However, no fog is on the battlefield. When I toggle heavy fog off (Shift W) the outside area returns to green. SHift W again turns it gray. Seems like fog won't appear ON the map, just outside and around it. Is there any hope for me? I have tried all possible fog settings on my card with no change. Thanks TeAcH [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 07-20-2000).]

Just a quick note regarding my experiences with this new ASL scenario, Bucholtz Station (sp?). It seems that because there is not victory flag in the center of the town, the AI (when playing against the computer) does not know where to head. the end result in my game was that I, as the US, got into position on the town and waited. It wasnt until turn 11 of 18 that some german inf showed up in the outskirts of town. Perhaps this is how you wanted it. Perhaps this should only be a 2 player scenario. But if the TAC AI were better, it wouldnt need this guidepost of sorts to get it pointed in the right direction. Nice job otherwise! Just my thoughts, TeAcH

Well, I'll wade in here with a few comments of my own. Newbie, pleeb, rookie, whatever the designation, they are all foolish and stupid names that one can get on forums like these and we shouldn't use them here. Some people end up using them in a derogatory manner. Moreover, just because someone is new, doesn't mean what they have to say is unimportant. If Richard Garriot, General Colin Powel, or Bill Gates showed up here, someone would look at them as a newbie and might even "joke around" with them if they asked a question about the game when the topic had been talked to death. Also, I think there are some people here, that have been here for awhile and who do have a good working history of not only CM but of WW2. People we can learn from. Unfortunately, some of those people seem to get carried away with themselves and they act all high and mighty when a new poster comes along. They may even post a rude or haughty remark or two. THAT doesn't do anyone any good. Be an adult and answer the question. There was a poster awhile back named Talenn who is the best example of how to discuss an issue. In his Post "Questioning MG effectiveness", Talenn went to great lengths defending his arguement and retained his composure throughout. Very commendable. We could al learn something from him. Thats not to say that he is the only one either, there are many others. But some like to be sarcastic and dont offer a sliver of help in their replies. I say, keep those comments to yourself! Jeff, I read your post about exposure and didn't get the impression that you were ranting and raving for one bit. Then someone comes along and, well we all know the rest. As far as the comment "Im joking" is concerned, I say yeah right. You go around answering people's posts like a dolt and someone takes offense and you say, "Duh...I was only kidding". Well, people don't want you to kid. Go do that somewhere else, like on the elementary school playground. People don't know you. What's more, as fans of this game and of BTS, we owe it to everyone who bought the game. They deserve a little respect for at least being not only smart enough for choosing this fine ware, but for helping to ensure the life of BTS. Go "joke" somewhere else. I don't buy that excuse. I took your reply as sheer sarcasm. Guess I need some "insensitivity training" eh NOT As far as this forum is concerned, everyone here can ask whatever they want as long as it pertains to CM. And they can ask it as much as they want. Some people need to do a reality check and relinquish what ownership they feel they have over this forum. Flame wars on these types of boards are commonplace enough without someone coming along playing joke-zee-poos on someone else. Here's hoping this thread is closed for good, TeAcH

Though I did not find this topic discussed in a search, my guess would be that it has come up given the volume, detail, and life of this forum. Nonetheless, here goes: I am reading a book entitled "Goodbeye Darkness" by William Manchester. Mr. Manchester was a Marine Sergeant and fought in the Pacific during WW2 against the Japanese. On page 103, he is writing about waiting out the night in a foxhole while he and his platoon were shelled. His comments about artillery and its various reactions to terrain types got me thinking about CM. Manchester writes <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>"During one of the worst nights I was dug in behind a natural parapet, a long, yard-high ridge of earth, in so deep a hole that my greatest worry was of being buried alive. Barney was on one side of me and Rip Thorpe on the other. Behind us, to our rear, was a large field of mud. For once I welcomed rain. That field's slimy porridge absorbed a lot of the shell bursts. Dry ground would have been worse, and exposed rock the worst of all, because a projectile landing on rock shatters it into splinters which are as lethal as shrapnel."<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> So my question is whether or not this is modeled into CM's various terrain types. Does a barrage that hits marsh as big and as dangerous as the explosion that hits rough terrain, for example? Is this something that, if possible to add and if desired, would show up in CM1 or only for CM2 and beyond. Thanks for your time, TeAcH [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 07-19-2000).]

I'll add one more instance that occurred in a game I am playing now. A Panzer IV was on one side of a line of thin trees. He was facing along the run of trees, hence the side of his hull was exposed to the tree line. An enemy Cromwell on the other side of the trees raced forward hoping for a shot at the PIV. As the Cromwell moved, the PIV's LOS to it was broken and regained at about 1 second intervals. Each time the PIV wanted to traverse back to the direction of the hull. When the Cromwell eventually came into LOS, the PIV's turret had returned to face forward and thus out of position. I have a good feeling this is being addressed in 1.03 but I wanted to point it out nonetheless. TeAcH

I didnt like them. I put the original grass back in place. My 2 cents. 'preciate the effort though. TeAcH

Couldn't the Rhino attachment be listed in the tank equipment such as "Gyrostabilizer, Burns Easily, Rhino" on SOME of the allied tanks. Then, those that had it could plow through the hedgerows, while those that did not couldn't. That would make more sense and seem like the easiest fix. No need for new modeling unless a very simple 2D or 3D graphical representation could be added. TeAcH [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 07-18-2000).]

Thanks Kevin. No doubt the guy would remember to duck, the game showed his head stuck through the turret. That's what I was pointing out. You bet I can live with it as is. This is a fine fine game and the best I own. Cheers, TeAcH

Not a rip on the game at all, but I know how we all like to tout this game's attention to detail. I was playing the other day, when I saw that my Panzer IV had stopped and traversed the turret completely around to shoot at a target to its rear. The unbuttoned driver's upper torso and head was merged/mashed under the rear of the turret above him. This raised a couple of questions in my mind. For instance, does the driver have to button up for the turret to face to the rear? And if so, did that limit the tanks's forward obervation capabilities? Does CM model this? Thanks TeAcH

Send the turn to BTS. I brought this up awhile ago and they said it was a bug they would not be able to stamp out unless they had the file/turn it occurred in. I hope you still have it. TeAcH

Good for you Smoker (and us too). Someone mentioned this might be fixed in 1.03. Lets hope so. IMO, Id rather not micromage the ranges of a unit. Id like to give it a defend arc. If a viable threat arrives in view and it is outside of the arc, then your tank could turn towards it, otherwise, the arc dicates its primary facing. TeAcH