Maximus

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzerman: Do none of you remember what KD said? He said that they hadn't gotten to them when they toke that picture.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> What are you talking about Rob? Not gotten around to them? Looks like a Russian uniform to me.

The Tiger tank is a converted T-34/85. There is a website that talked about this specificially and even had photos of it in various stages of conversion. The open-topped vehicles are probably supposed to be either Marder II's or III's. But they aren't "groggy-enough" accurate to determine which one they are supposed to be.

I totally agree with DeanCo on this. This TC will totally give CM a brand new look. Probably the look it should have had to begin with. I hereby give this mod the "Maximus Seal of Approval". [ 07-10-2001: Message edited by: Maximus ]

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rollstoy: Terrain data in Close Combat is defined at a resolution of 2mx2m, in Combat Mission it is 20mx20m. That means that for every terrain tile in Combat Mission there are 100 terrain tiles in Close Combat. Whether this is an advantage is arguable. It certainly puts a lot of strain on the planning and pathfinding AI.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well in this case it should be easier for the AI to plot around an obstacle. More tiles to use to plot a more defined path. However, your anology is wrong anyhow. CM does not use tile to tile movement ploting. It uses meter to meter plotting. I guess you have never seen the AI plot a tank to move inbetween the narrow corners of impassable terrain. If CM uses tile to tile movements, then you would see very unrealistic movements. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Also, terrain data in Close Combat has a height value for every 2m x 2m tile. Therefore, the terrain data (LOS) is 3D, but the display is 2D (large bitmap instead of 3D polygons).<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Wrong for the same reason above. In fact this is the beauty of the 3D maps in CM. Granted they could be even more varied if the tiles were smaller, say like 10m x 10m, but the engine dows calculate the 3D LOS down to the meter. Why do you think that each AFV has a silloutte rating? Do AFVs in CC have such ratings? <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>So what you say with regard to complexity may be wrong: both engines use 3D terrain, yet Close Combat works with tenfold spatial resolution.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I can't comment on this as I have no idea what you mean by "tenfold spatial resolution". You mean that since CC's "tiles" and "elevations" are 2x2m as opposed to 20x20m? Now as for AI differences, there's no comparison. I for one never got into the CC crowd. Didn't like the top-down, real-time aspect of the whole thing. I liked the isometric look, turn-based thing with Talonsoft's Campaign Series. CM took the best of both worlds and made them better. Isometric to full 3D and turned-based/real-time to WE-GO (turn-based with real time action). Now with as complex of a engine that CM has, the AI still does manage to whip my butt from time to time even on the attack. And I've been around since the Beta Demo days. Try a scenario called "Tiger Trap", play as the defender. I'll be the attacking French will whip your butt. [ 07-10-2001: Message edited by: Maximus ]

MikeT is working on it.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Mannheim Tanker: Something about sheep in the outback IIRC. Someone mentioned little balls dangling from...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> ...Mace himself. Outraged, Mace charged back into the FAQ and yelled, "Well yeah so what, I got FOUR little balls dangling between my groin." "Four balls, Mace?" asked the other FAQ'ers. "What happened? The sheep get a little too frisky one night?" With that...

Wolf^, I don't know about your woods/pine bases, but I like your wheat fields. However your grass and scattered tree bases are pretty cool too.

Well to really break down why CM as it is now will never be ABLE to go real-time is this: 1) Could not have the detailed ballistics and armor penetration algorithms going on in real-time. Would take a 2 GHz processor just to keep up. 2) Too many units over a large complex 3D map. The biggest complaint in the RTS genre is that when a RTS does go 3D, avid RTS fans have a very difficult time adjusting to a 3D map. For example, I just bought a new RTS from Westwood Studios called "Emperor: Battle for Dune" which is in full 3D. You can zoom, rotate the camera just about like you can in CM and I went to the message board and people seem to like the Red Alert 2 engine better. It's almost as if the avid RTS players (who tend to be teenagers or early 20s) can't seem to grasp 3D. These are also the types that are the Playstation gamers. Playing 3D computer games since the early 90s, I can thoroughly think in 3D. This is all ironic, because supposedly the BIGGEST RTS title to ever come out is coming out this summer or fall called Empire Earth is in about the same game engine as Emperor is and if these gamers can't adjust to it, then the hell with them basically. But back to CM, true, it does take a little bit of strategy in RTS's such as unit puchases and whatnot, but in a true war-game like CM, the only way to win is BY strategy. Try the same "rush" tactics in CM as you would in an RTS and you'll get your ass handed to ya. Because in CM you have to use real-;life tacics and the only way you can do that effectively is by the WE-GO system.

BAD-ASS! Well looks like someone has finally outdone Panzertruppen. I'll be sure to get these as these look more like what you would see on the BATTLEFIELD.

I don't know about Stuarts, but since the v1.1 patch when Tungsten use was fixed, I sure as hell don't under-estimate any Allied tank now against Tigers or Panthers.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Colonel_Klink: Does Tiger do most of his mods in Hi or Low res?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well they are mostly in Hi-Res dimensions, but they usually don't have what we call Hi-Res Detail. If you want good Hi-Res detail, I recommend Marco Bergman, Gordon Molek, PawBroon, Feldgrau, and Fernando's stuff.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by gunnergoz: Ben Galani, I have to ask... With a member number of #38, are you by chance GOD? :eek:<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Well, if I hadn't have lost my original log-in name I would probably be down in the #100's myself. My original name was "Wehrmacht", but it was lost just a couple weeks later in a server crash in Jan. 2000. Then my second "Ol' Blood & Guts" was lost during the "Refreshing Monkey" server crash in May 2000 during the Gold Demo release.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by lcm1947: Thanks a ton Maximus !!!!!! Man, I have a lot to learn. Where you been lately? I kind of missed you. Again, I really appreciate it man! <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I went on vacation. Go to the General Forum and read all about it. I think you might be able to find the thread.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Wolfshook: Are there any website, whether they be official or not, that are dedicated to Combat Mission 2. I know the game isn't out yet, but I was just curious.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Right here bub. Check out CMHQ for some preview pics.

Requested BMP numbers as follows: 5015 - German Helmet 5016 - Heer Tunic front/back 5017 - Heer Arm 5018 - Heer Pants 5019 - Heer Tunic side 5061 - Gerbirgsjager Arm 5026 - SS Tunic front/back 5027 - SS Arm 5028 - SS Pants 5029 - SS Tunic side

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ben Galanti: Any chance of making a slightly lightened version? The textures look great, but to me (and obviously this is a purely subjective opinion) the whole scene looks like I'm looking at the world through sunglasses Ben<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Try adjusting your video card's Brightness, Contrast, and Gamma settings. I've got all three set just above middle and it brightens up the screen quite nicely.

Hiya all, Just got back from my vacation. I see Mr. Dorosh is being too groggy on his markings again. Oh well, only he would notice. Anyway, I've got a copy of this beauty in my Email Attachments. I haven't had a chance to look at/install it yet. But this is definately the best Sexton mod we've had.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Rommel22: And Maximus, take it easy, but I do agree with you. People do need to upgrade!<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> I know. Just had a wild hair up my ass. But yeah, that's really all I'm trying to say. Just upgrade a little bit and quit trying to get by with 3-4 year old hardware. With the price of AMD systems and 32MB Geforce cards there's no reason why one can't afford to spend a little money on an upgrade especially if the old saying still goes, "CM will, in the long run, save you money from purchasing really bad games." So spend that money that you would spenbd otherwise on some new hardware.

Actually I think the grass in that pic looks to be a wee too bright and too stocky* looking. *stocky - originating from the original CD. I'd like to see Magua's Normandy Grass in that pic. I'd bet it look even better.

[rant mode on] Yeah OK, all you bastiches that play and like the stock CMBO graphics, whatchya gonna do when CMB2B comes out? You gonna want old CMBO style graphics in yours? IMNSHO, everybody that is content with stock graphics is like saying "Oh, I'm too lazy to either download new ones, too stupid to install them, or too stubborn to upgrade to a whopping 16MB card." Jesus people, you're holding back progress. Well what can I expect from a board full of conservative ex-Military members. [Maximus ducks and runs for cover]...INCOMING!!! LOL! Well, that's just what I think about people who fit the above classification. I mean people want the best graphics possible in their type of game, and don't tell me you don't, cause you do. Anyway, here we have have CMBO a year after its release and there is a mod for everything and people still use the stock graphics. It's like "Gee, I like good graphics, there's some out there that are WAY better, but I think I won't use them just because they don't really improve the feel of the game." To that I say, "BULL****!" You can't tell me that playing a game of CM with the stock graphics and one with Magua's Normany mod is not a totally different experience. If you don't think so, you're missing out on what 70% of the game of Combat Mission really is. If you play all of your games from View #4, then what are you doing playing the game in the first place? Go back to CC or Steel Panthers or something. The greatest thing about CM is that you can get down on the ground with your troops. Hell, one of my favorite views is padlocked to a tank in View#1 and then using the 8x Zoom to watch it shoot at other tanks. Really, and for those that still wanna push the bare minimum system specs, please. Go spend another $50 and buy you a modern video card with at least 32MB RAM. [/rant mode off]

The color of the targeting lines are as follows: For EXCELLENT LOS the line is a BRILLIANT BLUE. As LOS degrades, ie. looking through trees and such, the line changes hue to a lighter, paler blue. To about the color of the UBB posting box. When LOS is BLOCKED totally, it changes to a RED and BLACK line and where the line turns black is where the LOS is interrupted. During a Fire Mission, if you wish to change the target, you can by selecting the Target and moving the target line around, as long as it stays GREEN you will only incur a short "re-aiming" penalty. Go outside the range of roughly 50m I think it is, (changed in the last patch or so from 100m) and you will have to wait through the initial time, 1-3 minutes. When using a HQ to sight for on-board mortars, the targeting line will be ORANGE once a target is selected--the same as an "area fire" line as it really is anyway when you think about it.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzerman: No they can't. I don't know why, but I don't work for BTS not to mention I doubt it happened in realty. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Com'on Rob. Can you not give any more information than, "Not they can't, but I don't know why."? And what's not working for BTS have to do with the price of tea in China? The answer is simple, HQ can't spot for Forward Observers because it's the FOs that have the binoculars, not the HQs. However HQs can spot for on-board mortars as long as they are within C&C with the HQ. What I like to do, although I don't do it too often is to keep the odd HQ out, (the ones that aren't directly related to squads) and group them with on-board mortars. Keep the mortars behind a hill and have the HQ stick his neck out somewhere in LOS of intended targets.

<BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Panzerman: LOL <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> Very useful post to a post that wasn't supposed to be funny. Good one Rob. Come back when you got a little more to say.

Well, as for making the mod it is very simple. Just look up all the files for the treebases (can't recall them at the moment) and just paint them all transparent pink. But as for a really good pines tree base I really haven't seen one yet. As Soddball said, anywhere that has pines the ground is usually covered in a bed of brown pine needles. We had a few pine trees just behind our house by our patio deck and the ground underneath them was covered with needles. It's ashame BTS didn't make separate tree bases for woods and pines.

No, no. You don't have to download any special grass. The off-map grass is file 1503. Normal grass files are 1550-1569. Low-Res grass files are 1500-1519. The obvious solution is to make a copy of 1553 (1503) and then rename it to 1503. Or if want to, since Elevation 7 is the default in the editor, you could use the file 1557 instead of 1553. So just like above, make a copy of 1557 and rename it to 1503. The off-map grass will now be an extremely low-res and stretched version of your on-board grass.