Lt. Kije

Schrullenhaft & Wicky, Good pointers and suggestions, but repeated bouts of problem solving behavior here at Chez Kije are getting me nowhere except headachy. I think this is turning into a sullen deathmarch across the plains of Mordor when all I wanted was to play a game, errrr... simulation, for a few hours, relive those happy hours spent screaming at the screen, "What! You can't do that! That makes no sense at all! That was my only tank and there's no way you could have nailed it with one shot from some invisible uber-gun! You cheating, filthy scum sucking dog!" I can't decide what the final straw was. Maybe it was when I somehow got my OS9.2 boot system so that it thinks my laptop screen isn't the main screen with the menu at the top and I now cannot use the basic menus in the Finder because I'll never see them again in OS9. Or maybe it was when I opened up my Controls Panel and Extension folders and discovered I have over 100 CPs and Extensions, including nine (9!) different ATI Extensions, and many CPs/Extensions without any English characters in their names. Hell, I have an entire folder in my System Folder called, and I'm not making this up, "∆ƒøˆ «√∑ر◊¿Œ". Clearly, this computer was set up by an IT Dept, and seeing to it that the user can make sense of things was not on their priority list. Might as well have a PC, if I'm going to have a computer where nothing makes any sense, right? I think that's what the IT Dept is hinting at here. Thanks for all your help. You guys, especially Schrullenhaft, have been great! I'm now moving on to something less irritating, such as hitting my thumb repeatedly with a can of baked beans. -- Lt. (ow!) Kije (ow! ow!) Ahh. That's better. (ow!)

I'm not sure what the designation of this PowerBook is. It was purchased for me by the college where I teach, so it's not something I researched and selected. They bought it for me, it works, and I'm mostly happy with it. I do know it's an aluminum case, not a titanium, and has a 15" screen. I dug around in the distant crannies of my hard drive and found the following specs that were given to me for this machine. I'm a little confused by these, as I see "32 MB DDR Video Memory" listed here but when I run Apple System Profiler it shows 64 MB video memory. So, as usual, I'm a bit unsure. Sadly, this machine did not come pre-configured, specifically prepped for CMAK. Where are these peoples' priorities???? It's an outrage. -- Lt. Kije Relying upon the kindness of strangers since 1973. (The year I first began working with computers.) 15.2-inch TFT display 1 Ghz PowerPC G4 processor 256 K L2 cache, 1MB L3 cache 512 MB SDRAM memory 60 GB Ultra ATA Hard Drive DVD-R/CD-RW Super Drive ATI Mobility Radeon 9000 32 MB DDR Video Memory 10/100/1000 BASE-T Ethernet 56K internal modem Two USB ports One FireWire 400 port Airport Card included Mac OS X 10.2/9.2

Schrullenhaft, Again, thanks for taking the time to reflect upon my situation. Actually, if you could spare a bit more effort, I wonder if you might make time to take my situation outside and beat it senseless? I'd be happy to hold your coat. I also wonder if mirroring could be going on, seeing as how the OS9 "Monitors" Control Panel thinks that there are two quite distinct resolutions on the "two monitors" it lists. (Last time I checked, it thought the LCD was at 800 X 600 and Monitor 2 was at 640 X 480.) Would mirroring assume or try to force equal resolutions on the mirrored displays? Also, when I'm in OSX, there is no option to Turn Mirroring On, suggesting that at some deep hardware level the PowerBook correctly recognizes there is no external monitor attached. As for running through the checklist and reducing all Extensions and Control Panels to a minimum, thanks for reminding me. One year of using OSX and I'd forgotten this basic step. I'll create a minimum list and retry. -- Lt. Kije Depending upon the kindness of strangers since 1973

Schrullenhaft, Many thanks for your pointers. I tried the things you suggested -- ATI hotfix, remove Classic RAVE -- but no joy. One odd thing I did notice is that my OS9 "Monitors" Control Panel seems to think I've got two monitors running off my PowerBook, an LCD and a second monitor. I assume the LCD is my PowerBook screen, but I may assume too much. In truth, I have no second monitor attached. Ah, well. Perhaps this is all somehow for the best. Perhaps. Somehow. Nah. -- Lt. Kije All snuffly and stuff

Has anyone succeeded in bringing CM to the PowerBook G4? Here at Chez Kije, we are in misery, saddened by what appear to be insurmountable issues in getting the CMAK demo to run. Are you a surmounter? And yes, I'm able to boot into System 9.2. The problem seems to be video. The CMAK demo wants my screen size to be something or other, yet all manner of resetting of screen sizes has so far failed to satisfy its imperious demands. I've tried setting several different screen resolutions from the PowerBook native 1280 X 854 all the way down to 640 X 480, including the hallowed 800 X 600, but nothing pleases CMAK, that haughty task mistress. I get a fatal error message before the game even launches, complaining of my screen resolution. I'm not even sure which video card is in this PowerBook. Here is what System Profiler tells me: Built-in AGP Card Type ATY,DDParent Card Name ATY,XiaParent Card Model ATY,RV250M9 Card (Video) Memory 64MB From my limited Sherlockian skills, I deduce that I've got an ATI Radeon, but beyond that I am unable to match the code words above to any ATI model names I've seen mentioned in forums (e.g. "ATI Mobility"). I've tried searching the Forums and FAQs and the only "clew" I've stumbled upon is something about my video card not announcing or identifying itself properly to CMAK. I went to the ATI web site in hopes there might be a driver update that would speak to CMAK in the proper tone, but never recognized anything as addressing my problem. I'd go on and on here about how much I miss playing CM -- I drained away my golden youth playing CMBO and CMBB on earlier Macs -- but then I'd just start weeping and you guys wouldn't ever look at me the same again. So I'll just stick with gruff and demanding. Any you grunts got some advice for the old man? Goldang it! -- Lt. Kije Baffled. Always baffled.

Thanks, Wicky. I'll follow your suggestion. Anybody else out there with other advice? -- Lt. Kije

After a long layoff, I'm trying to return to playing CMBB. Problem is, I've got a new machine, a pretty new Mac powerbook G4. Has this odd native resolution of 1280 X 854. When I try to launch CMBB, having booted via System 9.2, CMBB complains about screen size being too big. "Set a smaller screen size then try again," is the upshot. But in the Monitors Control Panel I find only one screen size to select: 1280 X 854! 1GHz G4 512 MB RAM Video card: "ATY" (ATI Radeon??) 64MB (machine was bought for me; I don't recall video card choice) Anybody got a workaround, a fix, or a word of advice? And yes, I did remove the Classic RAVE extension from the Extensions folder. It is a cruel irony that Battlefront cast its CMBB lot irrevocably with technology that Apple was just about to declare jihad against. CMBB is my favorite game of all time, but it has been many months since I've even tried to play it. Many thanks for any help, -- Lt. Kije Baffled. Always baffled.

- double post - [ July 11, 2003, 11:58 PM: Message edited by: Lt. Kije ]

Just a note from real life. My Dad spent the entire duration of the European Theatre (D-Day plus 6 to VE Day) as one of those artillery spotters. For forty years I listened to him tell stories about what it was like. He said that only one time in his entire service was he singled out as a target by anything other than small arms at close range, and it sure wasn't at 2km or while riding in the back of a truck. It was at less than 1km and exceptionally exposed in his role. (I won't bore you with the details.) Just a data point. One forward observer walked all the way across Europe without encountering even once what is common in CM. -- Lt. Kije (By the way, I found redwolf's summary of the TacAI's behavior spot on, and would like to note that one of the things that distinguishes a CM veteran is that he will take advantage of the TacAI's unrealistic hyper-knowledge, by not choosing targets himself. Big hint to new players. Don't try to help.)

Readable? Readable????? You bet. I'll just go and nomadize myself now. Looks like a dessication is setting in. But wait, where shall I nomadize myself to? Hmmmm... perhaps the inter-zone? Yes, that's it! The inter-zone my destination is. This way I won't find myself sincized. Gotta go. -- Lt. Kije

double post [ March 06, 2003, 03:38 PM: Message edited by: Lt. Kije ]

You think Glantz is a bad writer? Ha! I spit on your paltry bad writing. Let's see you top late-career John Keegan: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: "The settlers, particularly those implanted in the great bend of the Yellow River, tended to nomadise themselves when dessications set in and thus to swell the numbers of the horse peoples who beat in successive waves against the Wall; offensives by the horse peoples also undid the efforts of the frontier commanders to sinicise the semi-nomads whose natural home the inter-zone was." :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: I relish that final, exquisitely unreadable, phrase. Forgive me, but I must repeat it, "...to sinicise the semi-nomads whose natural home the inter-zone was". Now THAT is bad writing. Glantz is a lightweight, a PzKw38(t), in relation to Keegan. -- Lt. Kije My moving shadow scars the heart of the world

I also have experienced this problem. I would not call it rare, or even infrequent. It is indeed very frustrating and I see it as a serious problem, reducing both the sense of verisimillitude and playability. -- Lt. Kije My moving shadow scars the heart of the world.

Were there booby trapped little packets of garlic butter nearby? -- Lt. Kije

aka_tom_w volunteered as follows: Thanks a million, aka_tom_w! Where can we Mac users download your 'conversion' from? Can't wait! -- Lt. Kije

OK. Many thanks for the education. To net it out: Marder II and III vary in their chassis, but this is of little importance in CMBB. Both may carry either the German Pak 40 or the Russian 76.2/L51, which are pretty equivalent in penetration. No meaningful difference in CMBB usage. Both can take out the KV-1, with some luck, but neither has enough armor to block a robust sneeze. -- Lt. Kije

Thanks, demoss, for the idea of Move To Contact for guns. I hadn't thought of that one. Will try it. Initial practice QB shows that guns in woods, even on the offense, can be effective against KV-1s. The captured Russian 76.2/L51 has made an especially good showing in my first QB. The German Pak 40 75/L46 has roughly equivalent stats. Even Green KVs, however, acquire AT guns after a few shots. Maybe my AT guns aren't deep enough in the woods. Remember, since I'm on offense, I don't get foxholes. Less successful in this QB has been the 150mm infantry gun. It has had a hard time dropping a round near enough to a KV to hurt it. Pretty sloppy trajectory on that 150mm, which doesn't hurt if you are using it for area fire at a large patch of woods, or you are firing at close range like 200 m, but for hitting near enough to shock or demoralize a KV 800 m out.... not so far, at least for me. I'll keep trying. Thanks to your tips, I'm feeling less like surrendering when the KVs roll out on me. -- Lt. Kije

Sorry, Lindan. I don't get it. Thanks for the nice table, but I cannot find a reference for the Pak 36® 76.2/L54 listed in your table anywhere here at home and I seem to have misplaced my best bookmarks for German armor web sites. Are you saying the CMBB Marder III that says '76.2/L51' is mounting this 36®, not a captured Russian 76.2/L51 anti tank gun? The penetration tables for the CMBB Marder III match exactly the penetration tables for the CMBB captured Russian 76.2/L51. What is a 36®, anyway? I thought a Pak 36 was a 37mm gun available at the start of the war. More puzzled than ever. -- Lt. Kije

In my quest for anything at all to make life hard for KV-1s in 1942, I have hit upon the Marder III. Could someone enlighten me as to two technical points? 1. From what I can figure out, Marder II vs. III differ in that the II wheels around the battlefield on the Pzkw II chassis and the III does so on the Czech 38(t) chassis. Is this incorrect? Are there other important differences? 2. Both seem to be armed with the (excellent for 1942) Pak 40 75mm anti tank gun (L43 for the II, L48 for the III, right?), listed in at least one of my (dubious) home library sources as penetrating greater than 90mm armor, 30 degree slope, at 1000 m. Perhaps a bit optimistic, but the question is: In real life, was the Pak 40 in both the II and III? I bring this up because the CMBB Marder III brandishes a 76.2/L51 gun with characteristics suggesting it is one of the many Russian anti tank guns captured in 1941. I'm not saying this is any big deal. The Russian 76.2/L51 is probably roughly equivalent to a Pak40/L48. I'm just curious, trying to pin all this stuff down. Maybe the Germans opportunistically mounted captured 76.2/L51 guns into a lot of the Marder III vehicles, while the default Marder III came with the Pak40? I note with approval that there are Tungsten rounds available for the captured guns! Love that T. What's the scoop? -- Lt. Kije

Just a note from the other side of the hill. This problem of refusing to engage a scary enemy tank cuts both ways. German armor in 1942 will fire smoke/retreat upon sight of a KV-1, even if you order Target while in LOS at the beginning of a turn. You aren't experiencing a singularly Russian psychology here. -- Lt. Kije

Is this fabled RealColor mod Macintosh-compatible? I'm just askin' -- Lt. Kije

Hey, guys, thanks for all the tips! I see two chokepoints in this whole business. 1. Getting German armor to engage. Any tactical plan based on German armor assets depends on the German armor being willing to engage. My observation is that commonly available 1942 German armor will fire smoke and retreat upon sighting a KV-1 under Hunt orders and will often do the same even when in LOS and directly ordered to Target the KV. I suspect higher experience tank commanders may be more compliant in this regard, but fire smoke/retreat is the default order of the day. I feel gamey choosing Crack or Elite tanks. 2. Getting German infantry adjacent to the KV. Any tactical plan based on German infantry close assault has to deal with -- good situational awareness of even a buttoned KV, -- plenty of speed if the KV decides to split, -- Borg spotting, and -- the terrible indeterminacy of smoke coverage. (You think you are deep in a smoke cloud, only to find one or more enemy MGs or even guns have LOS to you.) And remember -- all this discussion is predicated on a situation (I see it a lot) where the computer runs out its KVs and positions them so they see right down the avenues of approach. To get within 500 yards of the KVs, you first have to pass over ground they dominate, unless you happen to have a river of woods that runs right up to the KVs. (They don't tend to position themselves that conveniently.) I continue to run trial scenarios. At the moment I'm investigating (thanks to Silvio Manuel's suggestion) whether German AT guns can either kill 'em or make the crews bail, crazed. (You would need to be lucky/clever enough to pre-position the guns just right so they have good LOS to places the KVs will run out to. On many maps this will not be possible and you would need to drive embarked guns out to emplacing locations, a dicey propostion.) AT guns, after all, cannot fire smoke and retreat, n'est c'est pas? Plus, they should be harder for the KVs to spot, and even Borg spotting will be slower to kick in. And many thanks for the suggestion (MikeyD,Robohn) about using the 150mm infantry gun for sheer shock value. I'm trying it. And I agree with the dearly hated Seanachai, may his beard fall out in patches, I may be living through an excellent simulation of life as a German in 1942 Russia. (Perhaps I'll shoot a toe off my left foot later today, try to hide the powder burns, and hope I get shipped home rather than executed.) I do see some differences, however, between RL and CMBB. Real life KVs are sometimes said to have slowness and poor situational awareness as weaknesses (see Foxbat's contribution above). In real life, this meant you could detour around them or, very carefully, close assault them. In a CMBB QB, however, they have plenty of speed (22 mph, a respectable speed) for the kinds of things that get done in QBs, so you really cannot detour around them (they just drive over to where your forces are) and their situational awareness seems almost preternatural when it comes to infantry approaches. Again, thanks for your help. I'm climbing the Kije tree of understanding, getting ever closer to the moon of enlightenment. -- Lt. Kije

I've finally gotten around to playing QBs in the year 1942 (against computer AI controlled Russians). Anyone who has been here before me will be nodding their heads already. What's a good German to do when the computer keeps choosing three or so KV-1s, then running them out where they can dominate the lanes of advance? If I let the computer choose my forces it gives me those cute little short barrelled MKIV panzers and a bunch of regular infantry with handgrenades. The MKIVs usually won't even shoot at the KV-1s, even with a side shot, and the infantry has almost no chance to succeed at close assault even if it can get optimal positioning and happens to have enough smoke to prevent widely scattered supporting Russian MGs from puncturing their peritoneal cavities. Any advice out there? And a second question, if my time is not up yet: Were KV-1s common to run into? The production numbers I've found in my library of Our Friend Mr. Tank! reference books (touch the tank and it makes sounds! grrrrrgrrrr! boom!) suggest that not that many KV-1s were around in 1942. And if there were a lot of KV-1s around, how did any Germans anywhere on the Eastern Front get anywhere? If the real life German experience in 1942 were like mine, they would have simply stayed put in their foxholes until Tigers and Panthers finally showed up. I've even run off-line test trials. One KV-1 boxed into a 100 meter by 100 meter arena, surrounded by trees filled with German infantry. Bear baiting. One guy over on the left runs out into the open, then back into the trees. Another guy fires a few rounds to button the KV-1. Now, as the KV-1 turns its attention to the guy running around, an entire platoon of German infantry tries to pull off a close assault, approaching from the 'blind' right side of the KV. Like a family of weasels trying to bring down a water buffalo. ("Git 'im by the nose, Cletus! That's it! That's it! That's....oooooooooooh..... OK, Billy Bob, you go for his fetlock. Ma and the twins'll sneak through the high grass, try to get at his underbelly.") Vary your infantry types (Pioneer vs. Panzergrenadier, for example). Vary your platoon leader's qualities. Vary your approach methods (sneak? advance? assault?). With smoke, without it. One conclusion I think I can offer: a buttoned KV (no cupola) in CMBB is far from blind. Even sneaking infantry get detected at least some of the time, even when they approach from the side. And in a real game, this problem is far, far worse. I just got well and truly macerated trying this in an ongoing QB, even with a lot of smoke, an outstanding leader, and a very short distance from the treeline to the (immobilized) KV. Probably Borg-spotting, right? Help! What should I be doing to deal with these guys if they are positioned so as to dominate the avenues of approach? Just surrendering and starting a new QB? -- Lt. Kije I've got a hole in my dermis, Dear Liza, Dear Liza.

JonS wrote: Joques, The quote above from JonS correctly summarizes a greatly complicated matter but is of no use to you unless you already understand that g.c. matter. You might search using keyword 'spotting' on previous threads. A perfect example is the Mysterious Ostrich-Like Pillbox. A concealed enemy pillbox opens fire on you, continues tearing your guys apart for a couple of turns, then seems to stick its head in some magic sand and disappear! You cannot even trace an LOS to the generic unit marker it leaves behind! AT guns, infantry in foxholes, all kinds of nonmoving things (I know...they CAN move, but that's not how they are pulling off this magic trick) get to decloak, deliver substantial fire, then cloak again. You think of this, quite reasonably, as an LOS issue. On this board it usually is referred to as a spotting issue. You will be amazed and astonished to discover it has many defenders! Or maybe you won't. I seem to be amazed and astonished at most everything that befalls me in this game. -- Lt. Kije

I'm surprised I never hear anyone bring up this point: Why the continual upgrading of everything? I happily run OS 9 on a 466mHz G4. I run FreeHand, Photoshop, the office suite from Redmond (ptui!), and five or so other weighty software packages just fine. Why must I buy a new computer every couple of years? A new operating system? A new version of Photoshop? At what point does a fellow say, "Hold on a minute here. I'm simply being hornswaggled by the corporations into sending them a never ending stream of cash. I think I want to get off this treadmill."? New applications packages that need more processor power. New computer. More RAM. New operating system that pushes me to buy new versions of my existing software packages. More processor power needed! New computer! More RAM! New software packages! New! Bigger! Must upgrade! Ach du lieber! Such clock! My take on OSX is that it is push marketing. "You folks out there aren't adapting OSX willingly? Fewer than 20% of you are using it? Well, we'll see about that!" OSX has very little pull. If it had a powerful pull, more than 20% of Mac users would have made the transition. The only pull I can identify is the computer won't crash as often. The program may crash, but the computer will not. (Yes, I do understand UNIX. Started using it in 1980 and have used it a lot since then.) Where is the other pull? And my Mac running OS 9 doesn't crash hardly at all and even when it does, it's a minor irritation, certainly nothing to make me look at OSX longingly. I, and some of the rest of you, still recall Word 6.0 for the Macintosh. No pull, all push, and boy did that change my perception of Microsoft. As much as I've loved Apple since one of the very first Macs ever sold showed up on my doorstep, my perception of the company has changed somewhat with this push to OSX. I say it's a racket and I say the hell with it. This is just my (apparently idiosyncratic) opinion. I am a little bit surprised that I never see anyone else voice this line. I guess it's just me being deviant again. Hey. Wait. Isn't being deviant part of the Mac ethos? Maybe I should feel better about my deviance? Yes. I'm fine. I'm OK, you're obese. There. All better. -- Lt. Kije You're just angry because the voices don't talk to you.