Miles Teg

KrazyDog, I've been wondering about this. Whenever, I set an op to zero no-man's land and then save it, the parameter resets to 400m. Is this a known bug and perhaps part of what Charles fixed?

After reading/rereading it, I don't believe it was fairly reviewed. To me the review seems rushed and uninformed. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>The bad: No TCP/IP support; 3D graphics aren't quite up to par<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>. If indeed the reviewer prizes graphical representation, he should have a system capable of running the game properly. Look at the screen shots. They look horrible. Obviously, he's running in a low resolution with a voodoo 2 (square smoke). This surely can't be fair to Combat Mission to display subpar screenshots because of a subpar system and then, claim the graphics are less than average which is ludicrous for a game of CM's scale. As for multi-player, the TCP/IP patch is a fact. I don't think he knows that there was a vote on this. The vote was release without and patch later. Walker does state, "... Battlefront.com claims that a TCP/IP update is in the works..." But that statement and the first sentence: "Every so often a game pops up that shows what a few coders armed with a vision can accomplish"... seem to convey a sense that the reviewer is uninformed that BTS are professional developers not amauters. Perhaps, I'm misinterupeting it, but seems biased because they are not a big named Electronic Arts or bending over to the power of retail distribution. Maybe I am wrong but that's the impression I get. With that aside, I think he misses some of the good, namely, the editor and fluid interface. The editor alone is tremendously impressive, but is only briefly mentioned. But I think CM's interface-I don't know if thats the right word to describe the way you can change views and move around the battlefield- is very strong. He may use words like "innovative", "simple", and "fun". But from the overall review and screenshots, an audience member could easily get the wrong impression. If CNET is a professional e-magazine, they should at least require the display proper screenshots. Oh, well at least it was reviewed. That alone could promote interest.

Whenever I try to save an operation with no man's land parameter set to zero, upon, reloading or testing the op, it resets to four hundered. Is this a known bug, or is the option of zero unavailable?

Hey Wild Bill, DeSobry is a great operation. But I noticed a place on the left flank of the German lines where the road, coming down the hill, has a "slope" in it. Initially, I didn't notice it, and I sent a group of German vechiles charging down it. The result was a big traffic jam. I was wondering if it was intended to be there? It occurs around an area of elevation 8 and some 10s. Again thanks for a great operation!

Hi Scott, Elevation. If there are small open ground areas seperating woods, this indicates an elevation change. In a test, I placed the woods in the same pattern. Then, noticing the small areas of open ground separating the clumps of woods, I was able to recreate a number of different combinations, where the gun has los through the open area between and even over, seemingly through the trees. At no point did the elevation changes, ever need to surpass + or - 2. For instance, two woods set to 8 and adjacent woods set to 6. Moving on the the area where the gun is positioned, if it is +3 it will shoot over woods set at 6. If it is +2, it can shoot through the a portion of the woods set at 6. But, like I said there are a number of elevation combinations, what about the smoke? If we look at the smoke, the epicenters of many of those do not interfere with the gun. If the center of one or more of those bursts was on top or a few meter in front, no los. I feel the los calculations are good. You just have to beware the extreme corners of buildings. I found out the hard way in the Ardennes-Team Desobry operation.

Hi, I think I might have a problem. My card was charged on the 15th of June, I preorder in November, and I live the southeast. I was going to wait till Friday, the 23rd, but there are some people in CA who have their order, which shipped on the 20th. Now, I support you gentlemen 100%, but I really, believe the shipping process is an area to examine for improvement. I'd like to primarly focus, on the fact that a confirmation e-mail, of when an order is shipped, would be great. There must surely be affordable and timely methods to coordinate barcode, database, and email to communicate confirmation. Presently, I'm in limbo as to the status of my order other than, I might have gotten it the middle of this week... I could get it this weekend... or I possibly should recieve it next week? Thanks [This message has been edited by Miles Teg (edited 06-23-2000).]

Next time, could you, please, put spoiler in the header!? How long do you expect a few tanks to last, sittin' out there in the open? So you have allied units in front and behind you? But about the AI targeting, a patch exists for stickiness, a search would tell you this. But I don't think the problem is heightened threat stickiness, but rather, the fact you have a tremendous number of enemy, which are at times out/in los. Now, also while your reloading, if the AI finds a greater threat, it will shift to the new target, yo-yo effect.

Hi Maximus, If you need a topographic map of anywhere in the US, I found a site a few months ago, called the topozone. It has every USGS topographic map from 1:100,000 to 1:25,000 for free online. Check it out. www.topozone.com [Edit to open in new window.] [This message has been edited by Miles Teg (edited 06-18-2000).]

Mr. Sabot, You are a liar and a fool. Here is what you wrote on the Ross board: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>****Ill tell you what is going on... I posted a message on the CM board this eve and it was quickly taken down by their moderators. Bull****...I think it had maybe one word you could call a "cuss" word. It wasnt even very confrontational. I just gave them a taste of their own medicine...and they couldnt take it. They can come here and debate with us, but we cant go there. *shakes head* My user name and ID there are probably banned now. Not that I care, the place reeks of self-stroking jugheads. Just go read some of the lame posts from their teenage contingent. ****Actually, Im sick of the whole debate. If you cant convince a chimp that a banana tastes good...well you got a dumb chimp. I dont know...we dont have Bunny to kick around anymore...maybe the CMers should come over more often <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

The links didn't turn out the way I wanted. Searching under TNT might help you find something you like.

Hi, I have a friend who purchased a TNT-2 M64 32MB SDRAM PCI w/ DVD for his 200Mhz. It cost him $66.95+ship from buy.com and works great. http://computershopper.zdnet.com/texis/cs/coframe.html?u=/texis/cs/nav.html http://computershopper.zdnet.com/texis/cs/coframe.html?u=/texis/cs/nav.html

Hey Y'all LOL. I, the opponent described by Sgt. Morgue, was just thinkin' of posting: Yeah, I've seen that kind slaughter, but was on the receiving end in the American reinforcement zone. I thought I'd experiment with faust. I charged the zone on turn 9 with four squads. Turn 10, I separated the one with two faust. I had three Shermans pegged with faust, and concentrated on the Allied HQ with the remaining squads. My men were weary and except for one failed to launch (missed), as they shifted targeting to respond to Allied infantry. As the smoke cleared, I got a nice view of the dead body marker. Nasty, to say the least. Hey, Sgt, that was a good game; I'll have to avenge those german boys in our CE game

The tank commander could be a causualty relatively degrading the tank's performance.

One factor to consider is turn processing time and computing power requirements. I'm upgrading, but even with a new processor, I'd rather not see an increase in the amount of time to process a turn because of civilian representation.

No, Scott, the new marketing buzz-word is frenentic: "...frenetically-paced RTS played out in stunning 3D world." Ground Control. **Warning pissing on chokefull of maps with "tactical nuance".** No, I retract the warning; I'll express my opinion, however, the hell, I please. What a joke, it looks like the VP of Marketing and Sales (SPR forecasts) of Mattel/SSI chose a great setting for the latest battle. The new maps look full of "tactical nuance". Charge your men across the beach. Watch them get slaughtered. It should surely test the extent of once presumed infinite 'battle groups'. But wait a minute, I thought the invasion occurred at low tide. Those new maps don't appear with 800m of open beach, and mines? It must be optimized with tactical nuance. I can read the spew now: an ultra-frenetically 'real time' strategorical battle featuring new enhanced maps, chokefull of tactical nuance.

Hey Steve, Can I pre-order CM2 now? ...that way I can be at the front of the line!

I noticed this. But I believe the three MG listed in the bunker provide 3(250). Rather than listing 750, it goes through three sets of 250.

Wall Street Journal has had nothing but praise for OS X. In fact, this is one of the reasons, Gates shifted positions, to concentrate on his emulation of many of the great features of OS X. Well, that and a little anti-trust problem.

Hey y'all, I should've been more exact, AT and AP seems reasonable. But what about multiple tiles of AT or AP, would this increase the density? If so, at what point would the number of similar fields, overlayed have a negligible effect? How 'bout including a sink, a wargame, and a six-pack?

Hi, After playing the German side a great number of times, I've found some very strong setups. Also, the German reinforcements seem relatively strong. I would chose A. However, I think it depends on your opponents setup confidence and, perhaps, his overall experience, with the effectiveness of the various German units. Congratulations on the new family members!

Hi y'all, Does stacking 20m mine fields have any effect? (increase probability of casualities, number of bangolaors/satches to 'clear a path') I suspect the answer is no effect [stacking mind fields, even sounds 'gamey'], but couldn't find the answer in search. I found some other exciting info, though. Steve 2/24/99: <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>I know, we really shouldn't be giving everybody the kitchen sink as well, but what the heck!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Hot Damn! A sink and a kick-butt wargame!

Tyro, The *Shift-p* hot key is a great tool. Shift-p, once, shows 1) all movement paths. Using Shift-p further yields: 2) all target lines 3) all target lines and movement paths 4) all off I usually keep all movement paths visible. It helps me plan out my platoon and HQ spacing/timing. Also, for my experience with the demo, there is a, command execution lead time, for a squad, which seems to be a function of a number of factors, including the squads experience/battle shock/fatique/etc. [ Just my quick interpetation]

Darkwind, Are you using the default visual scale? If you hit shift-c, you can cycle through the settings of: realistic to enlarge +1 through +4. Unless, I'm mistaken the default is enlarge +2. Also, consider ,no casualties, doesn't seem statistically impossible depending on where the explosion occured in proximity to your squad.

From a team of 2 and for $50, the AI is mighty good. [Anyone want my copy of Electronic Art's Fleet Command?] Further, BTS responsiveness to customers seems unparallalled. A few examples include: fast move command for schrecks, rifle grenades, smoke graphics, etc. Gawd, what other game company would do this? The majority seem more preoccupied meeting compressed horizon due dates and fulfilling ROI goals (of their publishers), with little regard to customer desires or AI. There is no doubt in my mind to the continued improvement of CM/AI. [Although, they could just say the hell with it, and goodness forbid, alternatively, develop ERP software or bulldozer logic.]