karch

I just found my cmbo, cmbb and cmak disks. Anyone still play those? I loved the games. Fire off an email to Scott@fwiz.com

I haven't been back to the boards for about 2 years... these AARs are a blast. Great job. I think I'm going to dig up my CMBB and CMAK disks. I miss the game

My first choice for non Windows users would be Crossovers, as you don't need Windows. There was a post over at ArsTechnica from MacWorld that the next Parallels beta in a couple months will be supporting 3d hardware acceleration, so you wouldn't need to reboot to play if you had enough RAM to feed both OSs. Parallels Interview I currently expect to be working 90% of the time in Windows, but if I could get Outlook, Word and FileMaker Pro 8.5 working in Crossover, I might switch to mainly running in OSX. I'm really excited with the way the whole Intel switch has gone for Apple. Our company is a FileMaker solution provider and we will be standardizing on MacBooks from now on so we can develop and test for both platforms. For the casual user that needs one or 2 Windows only programs, maybe Crossovers will be able to allow them to use a Mac as well. Scott

There are a lot of posts about them trying to get 3D accelleration into the next version. I need to run Windows a lot so I like that option, but if there is some way CrossOver could work, that would be the cheapest solution to for people that don't want to run/purchase Windows.

Hey Slapdragon, have you tried to run CM from inside Parallels? Just curious.

Because it's using OpenGL instead of DirectX, there may be another option that doesn't need a license of Windows. http://www.codeweavers.com/products/cxmac/ CrossOver Mac. Lets many Windows applications run on a Mac. I'm pretty sure it's WINE that's easy to run and configure. If any Mac beta testers want to try it out, there is a free demo of it. I'll be getting a MacBook or MacBook Pro this spring and not needing to reboot into Windows to play CM would be great. Also, I'm curious if Parallels works. I know there isn't DirectX support, but I wonder about OpenGL.

Lots of people will be put off by the $299 for XP Pro or $199 for XP Home. Yes I know geeks go pick up OEM licenses, but most users will just go to Best Buy/Circuit City to pick up a copy and that's expensive. I understand your point, but someone with a new Mac can't "simply boot up in Windows". It's not as simple as that. That being said, I'm curious of the quality of a ported vs Windows game. If it were "good enough" I'd rather not boot into Windows.

Shift + F10 will get you there... and here's a link to a cool input mapper.. http://www.olofsson.info/ it will give you fn + left click for a right click. or this site gives you ctrl + click for a right click... http://www.geocities.com/pronto4u/applemouse.html I have an intel mini I use a lot and love it along with boot camp. I'm hoping for a MacBook or Pro in the near future.

Now THAT is a very cool idea. If someone makes a scenario or 2 I'd love to help test. scottkarchcm at gmail.com

Peter, I saw the same Mythbusters show. They took a medium sized piece of frozen meat and put it into a microwave for a few minutes. Don't remember, maybe 3-4. When they took it out the center was either frozen or still very cold to the touch, and the exterior was bubbling hot. The radio waves cant penetrate that far or most of them are absorbed by the outer layer. The inside seems to be heated by a combination of the residual radio waves that make it to the center and through radiation of the surrounding hot meat. Test it yourself.

I posted this a while back, but a silver lining to those wanting WWII ( myself included ) is that new features will probably be figured out and added for the WWII game when it's released that wouldn'g be included if it were game 1. Imagine if BF had done CMAK second, figured out the multi-turret thing and we would have had T35s and T28s with multiple turrets in CMBB when it was released 3rd. BF doesn't just slap together new vehicles and leave the engine the same.. they constantly try and make the game engine better between versions as well. I'm interested in SF but really looking forward to what new features they even add for the next WWII version. FWIW, I'm sure I'll be purchasing SF partially to learn about modern combat. I've been pretty stuck in WWII info for the last... uh.... 25 years.

I'm a bit surprised by the game. I'm pretty sure I'll get it. I'm actually a little glad they can work out the kinks in the program and add more features before getting to WWII. That just means the WWII version will be that much better out of the gate. ( I'm guessing ). Just imagine if CMAK had been done second and CMBB had been done 3rd, we may have seen T35s and T28s with multiple turrets. Things like that. I'm still in love with CMBB and CMAK and will probably play it regularly for years to come. I'm not extatic, yet, but am very interested. I'm sure I'll learn a lot of new stuff.

I really like the concept of slowing down troop movements in the woods. Is it possible to have troops get lost in the woods, especially in the dark or in fog and have the AI change their waypoints to another direction? I'm thinking about night friendly fire incidents that are exciting to see ( in the game, not reality ). It would be frustrating but accurate to have men lose their way. Sure you could redirect them, but it would throw off schedules etc. Maybe even a drop in morale when they get "lost". I know it would tick people off, but I'd love to see a platoon of tanks go off the opposite direction around a stand of trees "on accident". Stopping them and hauling them around would represent someone getting on the radio and stopping them. Something like that. Maybe even walking into an ambush they don't know about yet ( unit knowledge). well, there are a couple of ideas. FWIW Scott

Interesting responses. I work for a small software company and I tend to agree far more with Steve on these issues. Heck, I wish I was allowed to respond back to some of my clients like that..... we tend to pad our responses to a $50-100,000 client that is being unreasonable.

I think he was describing the code to model those studded boots I always read about the Germans wearing. Right Dan?

1) any sort of full movie playback would be great 2) the ability to turn on or off FOW would be fantastic. 3) not given that option, I'd rather FOW be ON and I could either watch it from one side or the other 4) BEST CASE, you could turn on or off FOW in movie and even flip between opponents view on the fly. I'm guessing a full movie file on a 30 turn game to be about 100-300MB depending on troop count and action. ( I guess less if they go with binary rather than text/ascii files. I don't know the file size hit they take by making the attachments text )

Somewhere in the last 2-4 months I recall Steve mentioning a non-simultaneous release. I'm actually thinking that it might be an order of magnatude easier to make the OS X / Intel port than the PowerPC port. With Intel working on it's compilers for Apple, it may be much easier to compile for Intel than Intel AND PPC. I;'d love to see it run on PPC, I'm typing this on a 12" powerbook and have a 1GHz G4 and a dual 450 G4 in the basement as servers. I'm a die hard Mac fan. But I also realize that releasing for PPC may not make enough sense for them. But, heck... what do I know?

DON'T CHANGE 1) keep pbem of some sort please 2) keep the movement command to the unit, not individual man. CHANGE 1) vehicles and infantry can get cover from being behind other vehicles 2) ability to have slow surpressing artillery fire or different shapes ( line along a ridge etc), or slow fire smoke to keep a screen up 3) follow vehicle or follow road command 4) work on CAS ( I just got strafed not 20' from 2 enemy infantry units, too close )

anyone see the new chips IBM announced today. Low power 1.2-1.6 GHz G5s and Dual Core G5s up to 2.5GHz. I wonder how a 1.6GHz G5 compares to a 1.6GHz G4. As for the dual core jobs. For single threaded apps, dual cores will do nothing, but for highly threaded server apps, this sounds great. the Windows world is getting a taste of this too. Sounds like the next round of performance increases will be far more on the developer's ability to create and manage multiple threads across multiple processors. No more just raw speed increases.

I'm guessing D-Day or Battle of the Bulge. They would have the largest initial interest ( I'd prefer Kursk to be the first, but I know that aint happening ) and sell the most. You see those so often because they sell. People know them. not grogs, but people.

ThinkPad T42 1.6 GHz Pentium M 1.5 GB RAM 90 sec for 2 runs. Not bad for a laptop.

as for potential LAN issues, my guess is that they will go back to BOTH comptuers computing the turn if they can get the calculations to be identical with different processors/OSs. I seem to recall that was the original plan for TCP/IP, but the math they were using ended up being slightly different (rounding differences) and occasionally you'd get different results from 2 players computing the same movie. Tank A shoots at Tank B. Player 1 calculates a miss, player 2 calculates a HIT. Rare, but made them change the IP play to one player calculating and sending the result over IP. SO, I'd guess the HUUUUUGE file size is irrelevent for IP play if this is the case. And this just gave me an idea.... If you can guarantee both players can calculate the movie EXACTLY the same... (don't shoot me) what if you don't ever actually send the movie file between players? You actually email the file after you plan your moves but ..JUST.. before you calculate the movie. You email your planned moves only. No results. The planned moves must be MUCH smaller than the movie file. If we're sure both players will calculate the result the same way... you end up emailing a much smaller file... calculating the movie upon receiving it, and then watching it. Steve... any way something along these lines could bring the horse back to life? [ March 05, 2005, 03:42 PM: Message edited by: karch ]

I only play PBEM because of the limited time I have available. I turn around maybe 5-10 turns a week. That's all I have time for. I hope the only limitation ends up being file size. It's a compromise I could live with. With current broadband speeds ( sorry modem users) I'd guess the biggest PBEM file size that would be manageable is arount 100MB or so... and if upload/download speeds keep increasing, that could jump to 200MB+ per movie file and I'd sure still play. Otherwise I would end up playing agains the computer (which I already do when I get a spare moment). I maybe play 2-4 IP games a year. Because of my schedule, 9-10 hr workday, 2hr commute each way and trying to be a dad, it's nearly impossible for me to play someone else live. It's not just a decision of how I like to play, it's really the only way I can play against another human. BUUUUUT. I think I'd still buy it because it would be such a better game. So mark me as a disgruntled buyer.... and would probably get 2-3 other friends to buy it. FWIW

Has this really been said? I sure hope not. The only way I can get a game in is 2-4 turns a week via email. If there is no PBEM, I'd rarely play. Sure, I'll still buy it... but not play it as often. I turn around turns on my train ride in and out of the city.. things like that.

thank you both! holy Smokes! Verg! 10 meg of scenarios. Wow. Can't wait to look at them. Thank you too George. I'll keep your seperate so I can review them as my friend and I play. Verg.. I run my own mail server and have no attachment size limits so fire away. Scott Karch