TeAcH

Well, I must say that although the AI needs some tweaking, this seems like a return to CC2 style gameplay. I played the demo and found that it was fun again. No more of the CC4 - Red alert like crap. TeAcH ------------------ "Ah-ah, I know what you're thinking. Did he fire 6 shots or only 5"

Well if it isn't my old buddy Simon Fox waiting in the wings. Steve: Anyway, thanks for allowing the derailed discussion to continue despite the mudslinging that took place. I'm heading back to play the game. [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 10-06-2000).]

Well, Steve, that is somewhat of a rhetorical question now isn't it. Hmmm. Nice one. I don't profess to be an expert on tanks and their attributes. When the people in the "know" began to debate, I watched. Although I am not an expert on AFVs, I can sense sarcasm when I see it. Thank you very much. Ouch BTS Regards, TeAcH [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 10-06-2000).]

For what's its worth Jeff, I agree with you. I just wanted to publicly display my support for your efforts in this discussion. I think the whole flaming war started when Slap subtly accused some of us who were for the optics advantage as being part of some secret nazi lovers party then saying that we were anti-science lovers. BTS even made a comment to that end that there are those that are devote freaks of German ww2 military might. An "optics supporter" could easily infer that they were being painted with that brush. Then when the warmth got returned to Slap, he posted fifty times a minute and pointed the finger at everyone else, namely Jeff. Sad. Slap, you were even being snide in your response to my post back on page 7 or so (about the search warrant issue). Funny thing is, and I wont go into it, but there you were trying to use a police related, search warrant example like you knew what you are talking about. It was innacurate at best. Overly presumptious of you, wasn't that? But that appears to be right up your alley. I would not even begin to tell you about, or make examples out of, your field of expertise, because I have not studied it nor have I practiced it for any length of time. If I had a nickle for every person I met who thought they were smart because a certificate on their "I love me wall" says so, well..you know the rest. I realize my post is off topic, but I really found it disturbing that Slap (you) would make subtle snide remarks towards others (Jeff) and their arguments, then cry fowl when they respond in kind. Unfair. I agree with the poster who said this forum would have gone a lot smoother had slap been missing from it. So now what? Slap quotes my whole post and disects it piece by piece? Who cares. Good going Jeff. [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 10-06-2000).]

Since it was my post that reignited this whole debate, I feel I need to make one change to my first post, which by now is totally irrelevant. My tank duel was not at a range of 300 meters but 700 meters. Secondly, though I am not part of any secret society nor am I a German WW2 lover, I cast my vote for the inclusion of the optics. I would say that the same logic that called for including gyros to all US tanks, should be applied to the optics as well. I think the benefit to the germans would be: 1) better target identification 2) an increase in accuracy, albeit a small one. Perhaps the same benefit given to the gyros for US tank firing on the move. I've been to the shooting range more times than I can count. Sometimes, I get handed cheap eye protection when we set out on the pistol course. It is a bit harder to see the target at a distance. When a good pair of expensive eyerwear frees up, I put them on and, let me tell you. The target is easier to see and hit. A placebo? Dont think so. I know this is a simple analogy, but its late and all that I can muster. I am a bit suprised at BTS' stance on this issue given all of the debate. Furthermore, as BTS has mentioned, the dilema must be tackled sooner or later for CM2. Tackle it now and let us see how it works in CM1. Then you can fine tune it for CM2 I say.

One quick suggestion that perhaps was made already (I didn't read all of the previous posts.....just some). What about creating a pool of available unit types based on their rarity. For example, say tank X is very rare, perhaps only one is available for purchase. Factors such as the timeframe of the QB and a randomness multiplier might mean on the same QB, 1 tank X might be available, while another similar QB, 2 or 3 might be available for purchase.

Thanks for the comment. In a PBEM game last night, my crack, unbuttoned Jagdtiger missed a US TD at a range of 300m 6 times in a row. The US TD, although a regular unit, hit with his first round which bounced off as did its subsequent five or so. Just doesn't seem on par, but what do I know. Ill defer to the experts. [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 10-01-2000).]

I haven't had them enter combat yet. Ill email it to you Madmatt. I think I still have it.

I agree with the graphics request to show brewed tanks randomly and continually popping off. See here: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/Forum1/HTML/010941.html

While playing a PBEM operation as the Germans, I set up a platoon that had two split squads at start of 4th battle. The squads were side by side. During the 1st few turns, they rejoined. The problem was, one squad listed its strenght as -6 OK 15 injured/incapacitated

I saw it. It was great.

Simon, please tell me you aren't being sarcastic. Incidentally, REQ was short for request. Here's a towel in case you need to wipe the egg off your face. [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 09-26-2000).]

I was watching The History Channel tonight and they had a show called Battle Stations. It followed and covered the Sherman tank pretty darn well. Even showed a working model inside and out. Anyways, during battle footage and subsequent tanker interviews, they showed brewed tanks popping off while they cooked. I instantly thought, man, thats gotta make it into CM1 or its successors. Just adds to the whole battlefield experience. And while Im at it, one more pitch for an add to large arty bursts. Smoke that remains in the crater(s) for 2-5 seconds. Would top off the explosion effects quite nicely TeAcH [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 09-25-2000).]

Ill second that! I use the GSlinger mods and was royally disappointed when I saw the snow terrain with those awful grid lines! YUCK. Can someone tell me the file numbers for the original snow so I can copy them off the CD again?

Good points by all. Thanks

Better yet, what about a popup menu showing available units visible while a key is pressed so that when you enter a QB, you can press and select a unit you want to place from this menu rather than scanning all over the field for them. Move to that good spot, press and hold the key, choose a unit or units from the pool, release the key, and place.

It seems to me that if there was one unit that would be almost invisible (especially to AFVs) it would be the sniper, yet he is seemingly seen far to easily. I would think the sniper would enjoy the same amount of "invisibility" nearly throughout his firing as hidden AT guns do during those first few shots after unhiding. The sniper, with his limited load, should only be spotted at very close distances. I ask for a reexamination thats all. TeAcH [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 09-24-2000).]

Im no expert when it comes to AFVs and I know this has been touched on in the past, but the German tank optics, which are supposed to be superior to those of the allies, don't seem to benefit them as a whole. I base this on lotsa CM gaming since the early demo. ANyways....back to the game.

I truly love the Tiger tank engine and tread sound. The squeeks and rumbles truly aid in the magnificence of this beast.

Id agree. I would say create a list of all missing vehicles from the theatre and then label them as most common to most rare. Then start to include those that are most common first. End of story. As far as adding new vehicles go, that would be nice. I think the same approach should be taken with features and or fixes. List them all out, and assign a priority level to them then start at the top. I know this isnt rocket science and is a quite obvious approach, but I wanted to post it nonetheless. [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 09-23-2000).]

I have all the mods and like em all but this one is cause for a post! IT ROCKS!!!!!!!!!!!

A couple of quick questions: 1) Can arty clear a minefield in much the same way as an engineer tossing a satchel charge? Logically it seems that a significant or prolonged arty barrage on a given area would clear a minefield to me. I have experimented with this several times (in case it was undocumented) and have yet to see it occur. 2) Are the satchel charges in the game modeled with enough power? It seems that a satchel charge tossed at enemy infantry in close quarters are somewhat weaker than I imagined. They just don't cause the number of casualties I would have expected. Is there anyone out there who could comment one way or the other? Thanks

In the meantime, I am saving all of my movies from a particular battle to HD. Then, as soon as ELSA releases their video module (Oct 00), I am going to get that and link all of the movies together onto a VCR tape OR into an MPEG. Has anyone experimented with creating an avi or mpeg? If so, what was the file size and what prog was used. TeAcH

Id like to pose a question to all of the pro-mod-sters out there. Is it possible to convert photos into .bmps for use in CM? and will they look good? I'm wondering how the terrain would look if a photo of grass (say 20x20 top down) was used. Maybe this was already done or attempted. TeAcH

Well said. A very thorough and well articulated point of view. Id say if it was historical (as suggested by the post) than make it so. [This message has been edited by TeAcH (edited 09-04-2000).]