Panzertruppen

You may also find this of interest: http://www.warfarehq.com/page_left_column.php?content=article_disp&p=176&page=1&cat=1

Also try Warfare HQ. http://www.warfarehq.com -- official website http://www.warfarehq.com/forums -- official forums There is a large and active CM community there and several ongoing tournaments.

Something I would like to add on this note: we did have a very basic TacOps ladder at Warfare HQ at one time (about a year ago) and only a handful of TacOps players used it. One of the major reasons why it wasn't popular was that there was no mechanism to track how balanced a particular scenario was. Allow me to address this. The new ladder will be open for business very soon and it is head and shoulders above the old one. First, it is fully automated and has more info than the old one. Second, it does contain a mechanism for tracking not only each player's individual statisitcs, but it will also track each scenario individually. That means you will be able to look for a particular scenario, see how many times it was played, and what the results were. If that isn't enough, it will also contain the ability to have a "mini AAR" each time an endgame is reported for that scenario. I would hightly encourage TacOps players to start reporting their games once the ladder is fully operational. Even if you are not interested in competitive play (most Warfare HQ members aren't), the ladder will still serve its primary purpose as an opponents registry and to track scenario balance. You're going to love it! I will make an announcement when the TacOps ladder is up and running.

http://www.warfarehq.com

Don't miss this one. http://www.warfarehq.com/forums/showthread.php?p=30607&goto=postid

In fact, the entire webpage needs some quality time with a spell checker. But that's less than relevant, since it's a game tournament, not a spelling contest! /SirReal </font>

This is just a friendly reminder for those that don't know that the TacOps ladder is still running at Warfare HQ. There is also a TacOps forum that sees a small amount of activity.

A most interesting thread. I don't know the particulars of the above mentioned article, so I'll only comment on the subject from a very general point of view. Wargame simulations not valuable in recreating historical situations? Hmmmm...I guess we fools in the US Army have it all wrong. We use wargame simulation software at many levels to recreate both modern training exercises and historical encounters. This is certainly a limited tool, but a very useful one. Nothing, not even the most rigorous training, can guarantee he outcome of a battle. Just too many variables involved. However, by using several different methods an officer or senior NCO can make a reasonably accurate assessment of his unit's chances of surviving a given battle. Computer wargame simulation software is an important tool in training all four of America's major military services. The US Army War College and the US Army Sergeant's Major Academy are full of people who can testify to that. I have participated in many training events up to Brigade level and observed the results from within the Brigade TOC. A little more in depth than the average wargame perhaps, but it has the same basic priciples. In fact some of the folks who now design Wargames started out designing software for the military. I believe the TacOps designer started out that way (although I'm not 100% sure of that). As far as military folks having a manopoly on historical knowledge...well, they do have a unique perspective. I was in Desert Storm, Bosnia, and Haiti. Does that make me an expert? Perhaps, but only from a very narrow focus as it pertains to my job in the military. Even though I was there and saw many things the history books don't always include, that doesn't really qualify me as an expert on the subject. A true historian would be far more knowledgeable on many aspects of the fighting than I am. Although a soldier has a very unique perspective, it is almost always a very narrow perspective. I wouldn't worry too much about a cantankerous veteran. No one has more respect for the accomplishments and sacrifice of my fellow soldiers than I do, but also understand that old soldiers are a grouchy bunch. You will never make them happy no matter what you do. Old soldiers are always critical of younger soldiers and anyone who wasn't "actually there." Except for a few very rare examples, most soldiers are not experts on the techical complexity of a battle as a whole. They just think they are! By the way, this veteran must not be totally aginst wargames. He was reading a copy of Computer Gaming World wasn't he... Don

I love it when oppenents give each other the old Blitz salute! Sounds like Round 2 is going to be interesting. Yes indeed Wild Bill and his boys did an outstanding job. I certainly hope they will continue to support us during Round 3 and 4. Thanks guys. Don

I'm glad to hear most people are enjoying the buildings. For me, that made all the hard work worth it. The textures were created on a Pentium II 400mhz, 128 meg RAM, Geforce 2. That system will be upgraded to an Athlon 900mhz, 256 meg RAM early next week. Can hardly wait. I have heard a few comments about the buildings being somewhat dark. That may be. It's hard for me to tell. With the way my gamma settings and video card are configured they look just right on my system, but I can't tell how they appear for others. It is quite well known that there is usually quite a difference between the way 3dfx based cards and Nvidia based cards display. 3dfx drivers tend to be far "brighter." Of course someone could always use Paint Shop Pro or some other utility to lighten or darken them a little. It's a good point, but I'm not sure I could solve it to everyone's satisfaction. Don

That's correct - the problem is related to Zippit. Tom_W and I had a terrible time trying to figure out what the problem was when he hosted the original Rural Building Mod. The only thing I can figure is that that particular utility is only 99% reliable at converting files. I even resaved certain files and then emailed them to him. Same problem, same files. We then tried sending them posted inside an email (not as an attachment. That didn't work either. The problem is not with the file, but with the conversion process. I don't have time right now, but someone could post those two images on this forum. Then the people who need them could just copy and paste. Hope this helps. Don [This message has been edited by Panzertruppen (edited 12-02-2000).]

Thanks for the interest gentlemen. I am happy to announce that both the "city" buildings and the full winter version are now 100% complete. I have broken them down into two files - a summer zip and a winter zip. The summer contains all rural buildings, the two story buildings, the city buildings, the church and a stone wall. The winter version contains the full set as well. I sure hope everyone enjoys them. What program did you use to make these buildings? All the building textures were created with Paint Shop Pro 5. I use the same methods that designers use to create textures for 1st person shooters such as Quake and Half-Life. I would create a brick texture, a concrete texture, wood, etc. Then I would past them together as needed, add detail, and then weather the whole building. After that the battle damage was added, and then shadow effects. Very time consuming, but I think it was worth it. Can you give an approximation of when they may be released? I'm not trying to tease you, but the buildings are not quite ready to download yet. There will be an announcement on the forum when they are. I don't know the exact time, but it will be very soon. What's next after the buildings are complete? Vehicles? Terrain? Not quite sure. I'll probably take a break for a few days. There are about 45 textures in each set. As each was originally created at 1024x768, that a whole lot of textures to airbrush! To be honest, I glad it's finished. I may go after the pillbox and perhaps some of the lesser vehicles. Let me think about it. Thanks for all the kind remarks gentlemen. I doubt I would have made this whole conversion for just myself. Here is another sneak preview: </p> </p> </p> Don Panzertruppen Maddox

Thanks for the support! It's cool to know that a few people are looking forward to this mod. We're getting warm now. I finished half of the third city building today. It took a long time because I spent a day and a half on a texture that I had to discard. I hate it when that happens! I really wish you guys could see these buildings at the resoulution I'm seeing them. In some cases they look truly lifelike. If only CM supported dynamic shadow effects... Oh well, enough of that. I hope to complete that third building within 24 hrs. After that I need to do the winter version (that should only take a few hours for three buildings). I'll keep you posted. Don Panzertruppen Maddox CM Custodian Blitzkrieg Wargaming Club

Just thought I would give you an update on my progress. The winter version of my rural building mod is nearly complete. I expect to have them done this weekend. I had several false starts with the city buildings though. They didn't turn out quite the way I wanted, but I think I'm on the right track now. The only problem I encountered is that I miscounted the number of city buildings. There are actually only three (I thought there were more). With only three available buildings, things are goings to get a little repetitive no matter how clever I try to get with the artwork. What can I say? The CM mission engine simulates small villages quite well, but visually, towns have some drawbacks. I guess it's something we just have to live with until CM2 or a future patch. Anyway, here is a first look. </p> </p> </p>

<DIV>Don, </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>This is absolutely correct and Adrian should advance. He neglected to eliminate my de clawed panther at the end and it cost him a victory, (My panther chose to target infantry attacking from the rear instead of the Chaffee in front and took a gun hit. <G> ) but that was just one of the quirks in combat mission. I've had games where I or my opponent have held a victory objective with a less than a half dozen panicked troops when the opposing troops were in the flag range with a full platoon. Overall he played an excellent game and deserves to move on. I noticed on the CM discussion board that you had asked about the scenario balance and there was a little grumbling that it favored the Germans. I had agreed on playing this scenario till I read some of the comments. 1) There was the bogging question, Adrian ran my flanks and caught me with too many areas to cover. I had played for the bog by covering all the roads to the center and right hoping to tag a vehicle coming up the road or force him off the road. He moved off the road early before my ambush and as soon as I saw my opponent was moving well through the mud on my right , I realized I had played the scenario wrong. His greyhound actually made it up the slope behind the right hedgerow and tried to attack from the rear but got cut down. I can't say bogging was an important factor here 2)There was also a mention of green troops. My troops had a tendency to break under fire easily even under clear command control. I had a couple of full squads break after suffering 1-2 casualties and one panicked after being fired upon. The funniest was my schreck bolting from an ambush position behind a forward building when Adrian' s jeep drove up the hill at fast speed. The schreck bolted before even taking fire. <G> So I'd have to say the troops experience was not a major factor in our game. Earlier I had thought the scenario was pro-German to a degree because of time constraints, until I saw the ground traversed by Adrian in the time allotted. So after seeing another close score and with the way my troops behaved and given that my opponent could drive my flanks, I doubt the scenario was imbalanced toward the Germans any longer. I do think my opponent could have made short work of me by driving the center under a cloud of smoke but that will be a possible result unexplored. Now earlier I had asked about a loser's tourney. The sudden death is great for competition but also can leave some sore losers due to the nature of CM. I think Sudden Death is more fitting for the CC system. In CM, while good field tactics are essential to the game, the element of chance still plays a role and because it is a point based game, results can be inconclusive. I'm thinking here of the message on the board where a result was decided by one point. I also know that a few of the tourney members are not very experienced in CM. I've just completed a game with one tourney member and that was his first PBEM game. My last reason is though competition is admirable, it can sometimes lead to those sore feelings. Playing double-blind mirrored games or a set number of double/blind games with several tourney members round robin style can be less cutthroat and more telling in a game like CM in my opinion. is it possible to add a loser's tourney for us less competitive, more fun loving players. I don't think the work would be overdemanding if double-blind QB's were used with set points and conditions. I also think some club members would volunteer some help and instead of using a web page like the St Lo's updates could be posted on the message board. Is it feasible? Also Adrian is playing me in another and said he needed a boot game. Can the tournament game be counted toward the ladder as his boot game? Sam Moon </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thanks for the speedy reply.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>All tournament games also count as regular ladder games. You don't need to report it again, I'll take care of updating both the ladder, and the tournament page.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Sounds like you guys had a fairly interesting battle. I totally agree that sudden-death can be a frustrating experience, especially since the opponents were randomly matched. The only reason I decided to run the tournament that way is the length of CM PBEM games. In CS you could finish a PBEM in a few days if both sides put in the effort. In CM it takes a long time to finish a game because of the huge amount of emails necessarry for each turn. As it is the tournament is only four games, but will take almost four months to complete! If I had done mirror games we wouldn't be finished until late next year. I just don't think most players would be able to commit to such a long process. Although the sudden process isn't as fair as we would all like, I think it may be the lesser of two evils. Now if we had a reliable TCP/IP system...well, that would change things quite a bit. That may not be too far in the future.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Of course there will be other CM tournaments at the Blitz. This is just the first one. The Blitz has a long history of tournament play among its members so I'm looking forward to having several others before too long.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Don Panzertruppen Maddox</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>CM Deputy Custodian</FONT></DIV> [This message has been edited by Panzertruppen (edited 11-18-2000).]