Macisle

Hey, guys. I stumbled on something that may be a model glitch on the barrels of some Allied CW tanks. It looks like perhaps the artist finished the barrel model, but maybe hit a key on the keyboard by accident without noticing and thereby cut off the bottom of the barrel. Then, perhaps that base model was propagated to the various tanks that use that particular barrel. Anyway, there is a screenshot: http://www.flickr.com/photos/75956955@N08/6817313744/sizes/z/in/photostream/ Are others seeing this?

See comparison pics of King Tiger and Tiger, along with some Brit armor here: http://www.flickr.com/photos/75956955@N08/6817269018/sizes/l/in/photostream/ http://www.flickr.com/photos/75956955@N08/sets/72157629172818316/ I think the main issue with the KT is the tread detail, but yes, I agree it looks unfinished as compared to the other models. Most of the other models look fantastic. The Achilles and Cromwells really knocked my socks off. They're superb!

Mark, Thank you very much for everything. I'm glad you posted to point out all the new maps. I didn't notice the volume of new stuff until you did! Your hard work is greatly appreciated! Macisle

I was a heuristics problem. Under my Norton, I was able to look in the history and tell it to unquarantine the file. It offered exempting from future scans as part of the dialog. Now I'm running the game with Norton running normally at the same time.

Thanks, Martin. I had assumed that Norton was overreacting, but wanted to be sure. I told it to restore and exempt the file from future scans. Now the CW module seems to run okay.

Same here. About a minute later, a Norton (latest NIS) message popped up saying that "Suspicious. MH690.A" had been quarantined. It's from the CMCW exe file, so that appears to be the problem. I'm in a holding pattern now and have taken no action on bringing it out of quarantine. What should I do? (BTW, this is the first virus warning I've ever had following an installation on my system.)

Some good things in there. And a pleasant surprise on the flavor objects tweak. I just started using the map editor and that will sure help!

Running short on ammo and having to send teams to get more can create very juicy little mini-dramas within a battle. Some of my favorite battles have involved low-ammo situations. The one that stands out the most was in Hornets Nest--sweating attrition and low ammo reserves across my line while trying to hold until the reinforcements arrived.

Thanks for running the tests, YankeeDog!

Here's cool little sequence from another test run. -Just for fun viewing. http://youtu.be/_TQLH48N9Xo

That pic was probably too small to be of much use. Here is a crop of the kill zone, with bazookas circled.

-Forgot: Yes, there were lots of bazooka hits!

I'm using the most recent versions of Aris's texture mods, along with a ton of other mods that I like. I've attached a pic of the Amis setup (I haven't had time to set up a private space to host larger linked images yet. Will do soon.) Oh, forgot--the Panther was a +2, but then, the commander bought it right away, so I guess that didn't matter much. Again, this was not the kind of test I intend to do, as it was very weighted to the Amis side. I just thought the video was cool. For real testing, I'll put a smaller number of units in play and probably use WG (this was RT, which I usually use). The file will be set up so that a new tank comes along every few minutes. Panther, then Tiger, then PIV, then StugIII. -All +2 Veteran with High Motivation. The Amis are a Typical grab bag. Once the test feels right, I'll make it available to folks to mess around with themselves. Macisle

I had to do everything quite quickly, but I threw together a city street and sent a Veteran Panther with High Motivation down it. The Amis were a "Typical" assortment. -Quite a lot of 'em and on both sides of the street. This was just a first run, but it's fun to watch, so I thought I'd post it. It's my first time on YouTube! I uploaded it as HD, but it seems to have been down-sampled. Anyhoo, I gotta' log for the day, but here-'tis: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kUUG5mf5ENE Enjoy!

Very nice, Sergei!

I'm working on a test map for urban combat (much more detailed terrain to benefit infantry). That should also allow me get a better idea of bailed crew performance.

I was super-sleepy when I typed that. I meant to say, that it should not be allowed unless it can be justified as being historically accurate. My recollection of BF's earlier posts on this is that it was so rare as to be unjustified to include it. So, what I'm saying is that I don't want one unrealistic element to be introduced to solve another. I'm primarily an infantry guy, and would love to have the ability for soldiers to peek around corners, etc. But to be honest, that sounds like a CMx3 feature. I think the likely solution for CMx2 is a serious reduction (but only to realistic levels) in the ability of tanks to spot infantry and better map design. IIRC, it was not that uncommon for defenders with enough prep time to put adequately small AT guns inside buildings. If so, I'm all in favor of that. I can't remember, are PIATs going to be allowed to fire from buildings? I don't know how Market Garden will be able to satisfy accuracy requirements without solving some of the current urban combat issues. Anyhoo, I'll keep working on my test map. May take awhile... (Oh, and that was an Aris texture mod, BTW.)

I think the commando crew issue affects both sides equally. Players favoring the Axis side probably perceive it as worse on (i.e. advantage to) the Allied side, because they have bolt-action rifles, rather than semi-autos like the Amis. I remember running a (Hotseat) demo charge test a few months ago where I had a tiger with its rear facing a mound with a bocage break along its top. The tiger had a short front cover arc, so I could let a squad of engineers casually position themselves behind it while on top of the mound, to test throwing their charges. Well... they threw a couple and knocked out the tank. The crew then bailed and proceeded to kill half the engineers, causing the others to flee in panic--without taking casualties. So, that is a full squad of rested engineers facing the tank from an elevated position at point-blank range, having a crew jump out, turn 180 degrees, and whack half of them in seconds--without losing a man! So, big +1 on reducing pistol effectiveness and bailed crew performance to realistic levels. Macisle

As some others have said, I don't think this is a question of backblast weapons being allowed to fire in buildings (they shouldn't be allowed to). It is a question of map design. Current maps do not reflect the amount of cover and concealment in urban terrain. Just as importantly, they tend to give vehicles lots of maneuver room. I've never used the scenario editor before, but I jumped in tonight to start work on an urban combat test map. I just had time for a couple of buildings, but my plan is to make a full street segment to work with. I've got to log off and hit the hay, but here is a screenie from my first test. Macisle

As a casual forum reader (except when modules are coming out. Then I refresh with the best of 'em!), I'm pretty sure I've read a number of postings by Steve saying that the earliest that something like armor-only cover arcs might happen would be the Bulge title--and that was only a maybe. I believe I've read recently (was it Phil?) that the CW module/new patch should offer some modest performance gains. If so (I may be wrong here. Sorry if I am.), that is great news, as overall, better frame rates (I have a good rig) are still at the top of my wish list. After that, (we have some time to kill, so why not list them yet again!) I would put: 2) extreme reduction of ability of buttoned-up AFVs to spot infantry. 3) ability of crews to abandon and re-crew their ATGs at will. 4) Armor-only cover arcs. 5) Target heavy command for infantry - meaning a close up special attack that makes them specifically include grenades in their attack. Should be a color coded target line to let the player know of range limits. I envision the infantry as throwing at least one grenade every few seconds until they run our or the command is cancelled.

My sympathies, Ranger33. That's a major bummer!

That is a good point, though... Even allowing for a fanatical unwillingness to bail out, the front armor and firing systems holding up, and no armor spalling inside, could a crew manage to overcome the noise and rocking motion of so many shots coming in to actually return fire with such deadly effectiveness? That's a tough one. -Seems doubtful, but then, we're already talking about a unique event that probably could not be duplicated in testing.

In a way, this points to the beauty of the CMx2 system, rather than the opposite. Just like in real war, unlikely events can combine to create very surprising results. Like others have said, generally in CMBN, a panther crew would have bailed or the firing/optics would have been knocked out long before it could take out so many shermans. However, the fanaticism of the crew caused it to stay (not impossible in RL), the AI did not flank (which may be the real reason the results seem unrealistic. In RL, or with a human opponent, the panther would have been immediately flanked), and perhaps the angles of fire just happened to be perfect for the panthers defense. Also like others have said, were the file to be saved and run again for testing, the results would likely be different. A few days ago, I ran 4 shermans against 2 panthers and some lesser vehicles in a ME QB vs. AI. The shermans quickly took out the non-cats. However, 2 shermans ended up getting caught from the front in one-on-one's. In both cases, they bounced 2 or 3shots off the panthers (they were in good spots behind walls when the panthers came up--just unlucky on armor angle) before being taken out. The panthers shrugged those off. A third sherman met a similar fate, but caused one panther to pop smoke. My last sherman managed to catch the two panthers coming out of the smoke in column from the side, took out one and retreated to safety. After that, my tank made two attempts to flank. The first time, I got the first shot, but not before the panther turned to receive with frontal armor. It then popped smoke and backed up, allowing me to escape for another try. However, the second time, I guessed wrong on which side to flank (the panther was behind smoke) and my sherman marched right into the panther's target arc when it cleared the smoke. Boom! Anyway, the point is that, like in RL, the game models many interacting factors. In my game, with veteran crews in the panthers, they shrugged off frontal shots with minimal damage (slight optics damage on remaining panther at end), but the crews got nervous. After losing his friend, the remaining panther got even more nervous and popped smoke instead of shooting me on my first flanking attempt. Had the panthers been fanatic, perhaps they would not have popped smoke at all. I think you just got very lucky. Your crew was fanatic, the angle of incoming rounds was likely very favorable and the shermans were way dumb. If stuff like this was truly impossible, the war in the east would have been over a lot quicker, given the difference in numbers. Ain't it wonderful that CMx2 can model all this?! It's beautiful man, beautiful!

Yes, they do look good. If CM could add some of that, but keep its natural look (meaning--make it look real, not like what the Hollywood art director things looks cool), it would be great. Still, there is nothing about the clip I saw that would make me want to play it.

To me, it looks like a typical arcade-style "war" game. The graphics have the usual somewhat cartoonish (meaning overly-stylized), airbrushed look. To be honest, I really like the more natural/neutral-looking graphics in CM. Yes, mods sometimes improve them, but I actually prefer CM's graphics to games like this. Yes, the terrain could look better and I'd LOVE to get a better FPS, but I really like CM's vehicle models and the soldiers look quite good too. I looked at Achtung Panzer: Kharkov 1943 and the ONLY thing I liked better was the fluidity of motion of the soldiers. However, CM's soldiers look more detailed, so I'd rather have them anyway. Thanks for posting though. It's nice to see what other people are looking at/comparing to!