David Aitken

Sounds like a graphics card problem - make sure you've got the latest drivers for your card/chip. If you're on a Mac, I could give you more specific advice, but I assume you're on a PC, so you'd have to ask someone else. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Cuchulainn wrote: > According to David Myers, Professor of Psychology at Hope College, Michigan > Any Scots about who would care to defend their scientists? Last time I checked, Michigan was in America. He was just speaking in Scotland. Send him back where he came from, I say. Some of what "scientists" and "psychologists" come up with is useful and interesting. Some of it is a load of crap. Unfortunately, in the latter case, they get listened to simply because they have "Dr" or "Prof" before their name. It really annoys me when newspapers print this kind of guff. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

The game is realistic, so if you can capture a village in 30 minutes or whatever, then you can capture a village in 30 minutes. You can't say "I thought battles lasted longer than this", because it's all dependent on the forces involved and the objectives sought. It's like asking the length of a piece of string. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Michael emrys > And don't forget too that most of the men we are seeing in the game are in their late teens and early twenties and are in prime physical condition. I thought that was taken for granted - sounds like a bunch of old-timers speaking here! "Yes, I remember the days when I could sprint 1000 yards carrying two machineguns and 5000 rounds of ammunition, and I didn't even get out of breath! Those were the days..." David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

I understand that BTS are hoping for backwards-compatibility. We'll just have to wait and see what happens. Definitely something I'd support - the thing about a series of games is that the earlier ones, while still as relevant and interesting, are let down by their dated technology. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

R-Man wrote: > I think one of the first things BTS would do in developing CM2 would be to establish some parameters. Good idea, you'd better tell Charles that, lest the game turn out to be a shambles. =) > Also, I would like to see the CM2 forum get established as soon as possible so that my questions regarding it won't clutter up this forum. There are no answers to your questions, and there won't be for months. > I guess I’ll go back to lurking, reading about neo-nazis and hamsters. You don't have to sound so hard-done-by! You're just jumping the gun a bit. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

CavScout wrote: > The US settled on one basic design and was determined to mass-produce it. Ah, the Ford ethos. Ironic that Ford refused to cooperate with the American war effort. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

One thing to consider, is that shooting at a TC isn't the same as shooting at a soldier. If you miss a soldier your bullets go thudding harmlessly into the ground (or shooting off into the distance and killing someone else). If you miss a TC, there's a lot of metal around him which will cause ricochets, thus amplifying the chance he'll be hit. If I were a TC with even just my head sticking out of the turret, I'd be very conscious that near misses could be as fatal (if not moreso) than direct hits. David P.S. I'd also expect AA MGs to be more effective against TCs, because of their higher elevation. Misses could bounce off the turret top and into the TC's face, rather than missing completely. ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT [This message has been edited by David Aitken (edited 08-25-2000).]

R-Man > I know, I know, it’s way too early to start begging for the next game Yup, so why the thread? David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

dumbo wrote: > also BTS consider banning Dr.Brian You're asking for trouble, matey. I'm sure BTS are quite capable of making their own decisions. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

As you're dragging the line, watch what your cursor says about the terrain you're passing over. Each waypoint might be in passable terrain, but the line could pass over impassable terrain. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Cripes, play CM1 for a bit, will you? =) David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Dr. Brian wrote: > Yes, I proudly accept the title of Anti-Nazi I think your opinions about Nazi Germany are less bothering than your views about "those that fought for it". Nazis may be evil, but a vast proportion of German soldiers were answering a call to arms and fighting for their country. Many of them hated the Nazis as much as you do, but they were doing their duty. About the signature... if "we" is referring to you and other people, that would infer that you fought in the war, which I doubt. If "we" refers to the people on the forum, it is inappropriate for obvious reasons. Anyway, as Tom says, you're free to your personal opinions - I just think you'll find such comments don't go down too well here. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

I feel the same way about urban diversity, but I'm well aware that it's just not practical to model it in Combat Mission. Atomic started Close Combat (visually) a bit like this, and then made it more realistic in CC2 - but the AI isn't particularly clever at utilising the terrain. I'd far prefer a nicely working game than a nice looking game. However, the realism of a map is much more to do with design than the game engine. It takes a bit more time and thought to create a convincing town, but it is possible. A couple of weeks ago I designed a scenario specifically for this purpose. You'll see a post about it over in the Scenario forum - please download it and let me know what you think. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

We're not just talking shallow water here. Riverbeds aren't paved, you know. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Panzer Man, what did you expect? The most likely outcome would be one dead Puma. There's not much risk to the MG, besides claustrophobia. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

The rule is, pick a defensible position and hold onto it at all cost, unless your whole line has collapsed. Men can survive a bombardment if they're dug in, but as soon as they start moving, they become much, much more vulnerable. So you're got a choice between: 1) Staying put, taking some casualties, and fending off the enemy assualt when it comes; or 2) Pulling out, abandoning established defences, taking casulaties by walking through a bombardment and exposing yourself to enemy gunfire, letting the enemy know where you are, and ending up in a less defensible location. In other words, only pull out if you've lost. Otherwise you'll probably lose anyway. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Dr. Brian wrote: > I'm actually hoping that by discussing it, the "AI" can improve, that the game actually becomes competitive if playing just the computer. So I assume you're an expert on AI yourself? (I'm not being sarcastic.) > We kicked those German butts in WWII!!! Who is we? This is an international forum. Such comments are unwelcome. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Cripes, you were running your test on the principle that both these AFVs were otherwise equal? Not very scientific... If you pitted Shermans against Shermans you would have a point. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Your test doesn't prove what you claim. The AI is not going to instruct each Nashorn to fire at the Sherman directly opposite it - it will decide on a worthy target using a lot of different criteria. There's no surprise you achieve better results by giving them specific orders. Consider that when the Nashorns are picking their own targets, they won't pick one each - you'll get two or three firing at one Sherman, while other Shermans aren't being targetted at all. There is a statistical tradeoff between killing all of the Shermans as quickly as possible, and killing each one as quickly as possible. To achieve the latter, you would target all your Nashorns at one Sherman at a time. To achieve the former, you would target them all at one Sherman each, as you are doing. What you've ascertained is that if the Nashorns pick one Sherman each and don't overlap, they will minimise the Shermans' edge. But statistically it's highly unlikely they'll pick one each unless you specifically order them to, so without orders the Shermans have more of an edge. It's also likely that, given orders, the Nashorns open fire slightly quicker. All this doesn't constitute a problem with the AI. However, if the AI fared no worse when left to its own devices, that would be a problem. In other words, you've proven that the AI is realistic. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

There is various information about 1.05 floating about. From what I've heard, there will be building damage indicators, and further modifications to vehicle crew targetting by AFVs. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Any REAL person plays will full Fog Of War. =) But seriously, No FOW and Partial FOW are really just for training purposes. The game plays completely differently with full FOW. It's unrealistic to know exactly where all of your enemy's units are and what they're doing. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Sounds like you were playing without Fog Of War. Have you tried playing with? David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

Charles Moylan would be the man to talk to, but I sincerely doubt he's sitting around looking for something to do. If you're desperate to talk to him, I'm sure he'll let you know his consultation rates. David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT

CEO wrote: > my 4 armored cars get smoked in the first few seconds What scenario are you playing? One from the game, or a Quick Battle, or one that you or someone else has designed? David ------------------ There's a splinter in your eye, and it reads REACT