guachi
-
Posts
1,165 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by guachi
-
-
I was just thinking how much more powerful my computer is now than when I purchased CM:BO back in 2000.
I preordered the game back in September '99 and hadn't upgraded my computer by the time CM:BO shipped in June. My computer specs:
AMD K6-2 350
Super Socket 7 motherboard (don't remember manufacturer)
32 MB (maybe 64 MB) 100 MHz SDRAM
Matrox Mystique 8MB (probably the G200 with SDRAM)
8 GB Western Digital HDD
CD-ROM drive (4x, I believe, my first one)
14" monitor (ancient monitor that was new in '92)
-
For me, the thinking is... how long will it be before I get bored and want another game?
Given that CM:BN is brand new, I suspect most of us could last longer between the first module and the second than between the second and third. 9-12 months would be no problem for me.
-
That video (the first part) was made way back in 2000, wasn't it? I swear I remember seeing it at the time. Also remember seeing someone make some black & white videos as well to give that '40s newsreel look.
-
My F5 key needs a workout. I want to bring down the Battlefront.com servers on release day. You know you do, too.
-
I think I can do one better than having someone send you the $23 you needed for the game.
The time lapse between CM:BO's preorder and its release was rather long. By the time it came out, I no longer had the $45 in my account. I received an email directly from Steve saying my account didn't have enough money. I gave him a sob story (my mom had cancer and I moved to Louisiana temporarily and had no money, true story - and my mom is fine) and he said, basically, that I was a good contributor to the forums and some anonymous person had purchased copies to give away, so I got my CM:BO for FREE!!!!
I never posted about this when it happened, but this seems like a good opportunity.
Thanks Steve and thanks anonymous dude!!!!!
-
Did I hear someone say "Northern Virginia Preview"???
I sure hope so.
-
Console games may have high art budgets, but the graphics capability of consoles is severely limited. Compared to a modern PC, the specs are a joke.
Looking at some screenshots of X-Box version of CoD:Black Ops - the images are nice, but they are really small, not even 1 MP. So the images are really soft looking on my computer screen. I wonder how much the low graphics horsepower prevents console game designers from adding things like slings (even if they weren't hard to make)
-
On two of the helmets is a patterned design. Is it netting/webbing or a paint job?
-
I can understand waiting a bit for 64-bit support - according to the Steam survey, about 50% of PCs are 64-bit and 50% are 32-bit.
However, 90% of PCs have more than one core. I have no idea how easy/difficult it is to program for, but it's something that would be beneficial to almost all the customers. I think the only single-core processors currently available from Intel and AMD are their ultra low power CPUS.
-
I find it odd that CM:BN won't use more than one core considering multi-core processors have been out for PCs since mid-2005. It would seem that using them would speed up the turn calculations.
-
It looks like battles, because of the shakier morale, progress much slower than in, say, CM:BO.
Would that be accurate? It was sometimes hard tell how much was happening in what period of time in the DAR because I didn't always look to see how many turns any particular report covered. Or, it could be that lots of stuff was happening, but neither participant decided to write it up.
-
Thanks for the DAR. If the game isn't slated to come out in the next two months or so, it would be fun to see another one done so we can see what's new/changed. Certainly would be a way to stay excited about the game getting a chance to see new and improved features.
-
Now that both major video card manufacturers (nVidia and AMD) allow multimonitor support, will CM:BN work properly if I want to put three monitors together and game in 3600x1920 or 5760x1200 goodness?
Sure will be a nice upgrade compared to CM:BO when I was using a 14" monitor at 1024x768.
-
I haven't found not having an OOB to be a problem once the scenario starts. Unfortunately, having an OOB, exactly as described in this thread, would be a great help in the sometimes very lengthy set up.
QBs are the worst because all the forces are on the map at once and the setup is so free form. What a nightmare it is setting up a battlion of infantry plus all their support weapons.
BFC has their reasons for not having an OOB, but their reasons carry no weight with me if the OOB screen is limited to JUST the set up.
Initially, an OOB wasn't deemed necessary partially because large scenarios requiring one weren't envisioned as playable.
Jason
-
I'm guessing he means an in game switch for seeing all forces. No, there isn't one yet.
I've found that some designers get around this problem in big scenarios by having large amounts of forces as reinforcements. That way there is less of a headache on the first turn. Or the designer limits set up zones for units.
I wanted such a feature way back in the last millenium. But large scenarios are so messy anyway that I wonder how much of a help it would be.
Jason
-
In a scenario where both I and my opponent were running out of ammo, I assaulted with my 'low' ammo units because all they had left were grenades. Plus, at close range, 'low' ammo units actually fire their weapons.Originally posted by Bone_Vulture:That's crazy! Ok, just a reminder to all: squads that have "low" ammo, should never be used for any other task than acting as second line fire support, behind squads that still have ammunition. Close assaults are definitely out of the question!
Not that I recommend doing that unless you are desperate.
Jason
-
I concur. I have never had a problem gettinga prompt reply from BFC.
When I bought CMAK a few months ago, I received a reply from Steve by hte next day.
Have patience and you will be rewarded with a great game.
Jason
-
You can be gamey and, at longer ranges (~200m+) split squads up and use the LMG half for supressive fire. That way you only use up 1/2 ammo and get 80-90% of the squads fire power.
Then you can be even gamier and recombine the squad, then promptly split it up again. You can't split up a squad once it has taken a certain amount of casualties (1/3?).
I also use worthless squads (conscripts, already broken, etc) as fire support. A German squad with 2 men that still has its LMG is still potent at ranges of 250m+.
Also, like others have said, having enough other fire support (mortars, MGs, vehicles) is the only other way I have found to get around low ammo limits.
Jason
-
Yes
Jason
-
I suggest zipping your turn files. Although this may not solve your current problem, it does solve a potential future problem of people having difficulty downloading what may be nothing but textual gibberish.
Jason
-
In the annals of time, Steve, when he posted to this board often (ie, before CMBO was released) gave his reasons for not allowing this.
Basically it was because they wanted to make sure everyone was playing the same game and no one could be labeled a 'cheater'. Plus, if you think about it, if people can do more than mod the look of things there is less incentive to buy a new game.
If you could have downloaded someone's vehicle mods of Eastern front vehicles for free months before CMBB came out or paid money for CMBB, what do you think many people would do?
Conversely, allowing people to create an endless array of new graphics, sounds, and scenarios only increases the likelyhood of someone buying a CM game.
Jason
-
You'll be glad you picked the game up.
Play some games against the AI, download a mod or two. Then jump in and play a PBEM game, it's where all the real fun is at. For some reason, PBEM games of CM are the only games I don't mind losing. Maybe it's the fact that each turn takes only a few minutes so I don't feel too invested in any one game. Or maybe it's becaue if you have enough games going, you are bound to be winnning one of them.
Jason
-
Playing a PBEM as Italians in a scenario and somehow managing to immobilize all but one of my opponents company of Matilda IIs with my trash conscript and green Libyans and Italians.
I had nothing that could actually penetrate the Matilda's armour. But track hits and then swarming with platoons of conscripts sure helps.
My favorite part was, after he had run over most of my guns, was seeing a Matilda charging one of 20mm AA guns. The AA gun was blazing away as the Matilda got closer and closer, eventuall immobilizing it about 10 meters away. I think I could see the panic in their little pixelated eyes.
The Matilda and the AA gun then proceeded to have the stupidest gun duel ever. 20mm HE versus 2 pdr AT. The AA gun was firing 20+ shots per turn. I eventually got the tank by massed grenades from green platoon.
Jason
-
Went to the site. I am VERY impressed with what I see.
Jason
Is this the game for seniors?
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
I've been a fan of wargames ever since I had some BattleBooks (I think that is what they were called) back in 1980 when I was 6. They were about 64 pages, large, hardbound, that had some history and then a little game about every 8-10 pages. Very fun. Wish I still had them or could even remember what the actual names were. They had battle books for other types of military history as well.