Kurtz

Maybe firing direct fire (e.g. machine gun area fire) "blind" at Target Reference Points should be possible? Assuming there is LOF, of course.

I'm a bit curious about this as well. What was the squad footprint during WW2? 50x50 meters?

At least Britain have abandoned the pounder system.

Leopard 2 with prototype 140 mm gun: More kinetic energy but less rounds in the vehicle. And as I mentioned above: a challenge to drive in woods and towns. Right now the 120 mm gun is sufficient to kill the likely targets, so don't expect to see it in production anytime soon.

It may look like an easy solution to just add a longer barrel, but imagine trying to drive through the woods or turning a corner in a city with a 10 meter long barrel! :eek: The Swedish Leopard 2 (L44 gun) only have APFSDS and HE (converted 120 mm mortar projectiles), no HEAT or HESH. The HE round is considered effective enough to use against light armoured vehicles. [ September 05, 2005, 12:49 PM: Message edited by: Kurtz ]

The L30 is obviously something else, but the L44 and L55 is a description of the length of the barrel measured in calibers. E.g. L44: 44 times the caliber (120 mm) = 5280 mm = 5,28 m L55: 55 x 120 mm = 6600 mm = 6,6 m barrel lenght It the caliber was smaller, the results would differ. The barrel of a 105 mm L44 gun would be 4620 mm long.

The Swedish mortar round Strix is not laser guided, it´s IR-seeking. But laser seeking rounds requires a different firing procedure in the game (if added). I don't think you fire vollyes of laser guided rounds. And the most important question to consider: Who is aiming the laser, is it mounted on the heads of sharks?

If you buy a computer today you probably need the former. If you buy the pc when CMx2 is released I guess the latter will do fine. Actually it will be the same computer, but a lot cheaper if you buy it when CM is released. But there will of course be a faster computer available by then... The recommended specs will be available when the demo is released, I guess. And you can use the demo as benchmark, if you need a faster computer you have time to get it delivered before the game is shipped. Start saving now, if you don't need a new computer you can buy something else!

I don't think non-combatants are really relevant in a "CM-scale battle". The survivors come out of the ruins or woods when the fighting is over, and the refugees clogging the roads affect the time/chance of reinforcements showing up. REMfs could be represented by lots of different HQs and some scattered conscript rifle squads with low ammo. I see no real need for Combat Mission: cooks, clerks and civilans"

But would these vehicles be used to cross waters during a "CM-scale" operation? Isn't the amphibious capability of this kind of vehicles more of a strategic art? To be able to cross rivers to get to the area where they will fight? IIRC BMP's use some kind of screen to protect the vehicle from waves during the crossing, but this screen also hinders visibility and prevents the use of the weapons. Landing craft during WW2 and "brown water" craft during the Vietnam war is another issue and are (to some extent) designed to be used where there is actual fighting

Interesting, this is a kind of fire ission i miss in CM. The current oval pattern can be useful, but sometimes you would like it oriented along a treeline or similar target. It is also worth noting that the effect of artillery IRL drops very fast because the targets go prone. And the ammo expenditure to achieve the same number of casualties increase at the same rate. This is why it's useful (as JasonC mentioned) to fire more guns, but during a shorter time.

The value of those film snippets for coulour representation can be questioned. Did the film depict the right colour? That is still a problem (or a feature) - films highlight/saturate different colours in different way. Add to this the question how colours might have changed when the film was stored. But at least we know if the house in the film snippet is green or red. And is fascinating to watch. I agree about the real world. The real world isn't always what we would like to see. I took some photos a while ago and found them hazy and dull. A while later I encountered a similar situation and realized that the real world actually looked dull and hazy in those conditions.

What? Everyone knows there was no colour in world war 2. Everything was black and white back then.

Another quote from the thread linked above:

:confused: I thought the Universal Binaries would run in OS X regardless of platform? I.e. it shouldn't matter if the hardware is G4/G5 or Intel, as long as the appropriate version of Mac OS X is running. Or did I misinterpret "backwards compatible"?

Take a look at this thread:

The Apple laptops will be the first to be upgraded. The G5 Powermacs have enough power and no real heat issues. AMD might be better desktop cpu:s right now, but who knows what Intel comes up with in 2 years time when the desktops will be replaced (just guessing about the timeframe). And as I said, it's about logistics. To speak in CM terms: it doesn't matter if you have the best tank in the world if the roads collapse and you run out of fuel and ammo for it.

But Intel let Apple peek into their crystal ball and see what lies in the future. I'm sure Apple talked to AMD as well, but Intel was apparently able to present a more interesting deal. Besides, it's not so much about technology, it's more about logistics. Intel has bigger resources and will hopefully be able to deliver what they've promised. I agree on the image, but we'll soon see a "1984-style" transformation. " "Intel has the best processors. Intel has always had the best processors".

G4 will probably be the first processors to be replaced starting next summer, some 6 months after CMx2 release. But there will still be a lot of G4's around for quite some time. All iBooks, Powerbooks and Mac minis. Not to mention a lot of Powermacs. The complete change to Intel will take another year. So there will probably not be any G5 replacement until some 12-18 months after CMx2 release, and those G5's will probably still be running fine by then. Making G4/G5 versions makes lots of sense. The life expectancy of a computer in CM context is more like 3-5 years, if we look at the system requirements for the current Combat Mission.

Check Steve's post here for more info: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=30;t=003979;p=2

Star Wars? Ewoks destroying armoured vehicles with logs? The horror! The horror!

Tom: Thanks for compiling all info. I just want to say that I'm fully confident we'll get a good game. Battlefront brings us Combat Mission and we'll buy it and play it. If they don't come with anything new we'll continue to play the older titles. If CMBO never had been released I would still play the beta demo!

Tom: Thanks for compiling all info. I just want to say that I'm fully confident we'll get a good game. Battlefront brings us Combat Mission and we'll buy it and play it. If they don't come with anything new we'll continue to play the older titles. If CMBO never had been released I would still play the beta demo!

Unfortunately, Rosetta will most likely be too slow. From the Apple document "Universal Binary Programming Guidelines": I was planning on switching completely to Mac when Cmx2 is released, I guess I'll justhave to wait and see what happens.

I made a workaround: I made an extension cable and connected the graphics card fan to one of the fan headers on the motherboard. I have no RPM feedback, but I can control the fan speed with SpeedFan . I also underclocked the card slightly. (With Nvidia Coolbits registry entry)