Scipio

I just wonder, why was the difference between sneak and crawl skipped in CMBB??

I'm not 100% sure, but I believe the winter tree bases are always the same for light & heavy woods. Anyway, I have not changed them. Hard to make them looking good withboth my light snow grass and the deep white snow.

Your wish is my order...now available a package with brown grass (pic see above)

<div align="center">Hi folks, here is my x-mas present for you. Download it at WarfareHQ </div> [ December 24, 2002, 07:54 AM: Message edited by: Scipio ]

Thanks a lot

Can somebody please tell me which BMPs are used for the summer & winter BMPs for the cupola of a church? Thanks.

Is there any chance to get winterized rubble? Looks a bit odd to fight in Stalingrad and all rubble is so dark and fresh. Unfortunatly, the +50000 method doesn't work for terraine.

bump

You are wrong, because a fire correction given on a target that's already out of LOS is very likly to go to the wrong place. Anyway, I can understand your critics, except the delay. I order a correction 50m with LOS, delay ~20 seconds. When I add a single meter, so the the FO lost the LOS, I have a 3 min delay. That's really stupid.

Good to know this...some money I can spare!

I just wonder, I think the BTS folks are the only who can know it. I have noticed (already in CMBO) that vehicel movement increases the size of PBEM files VERY much - in CMBB also ski troops. I just wonder what the reason for this may be!? What difference makes it for the engine to move a infantry squad or a tank?

Situation : I give an artillery order to a point with LOS. The order is executed after the normal delay. I give a correction order over ~50m with LOS. The delay is (example) ~20 seconds. I give a correction order over ~50m without LOS. The delay is ~3 minutes. The fire comes down somewhere else, but not on the sheduled target area. a) Why the longer delay? A correction is a correction, or not? Why does the fire come down to the wrong place? The reality (taken from my own experience in miltary service, 120mm mortar platoon): The FO give his correction orders (simplified) like this: plus 100m distance, 50 to the left. An example, the FO want to have the barrage into a wood - usually he can only see it's edge. So he can zero in the fire to the edge and then order +50 distance (for example) without the need to zero in again. The battery gets the order from the command post which calculates (simplified) into something like + .5 degrees up, + .2 degrees left. Now back to the game : I think it would make sense if correction order would work like this: I give an artillery order to a point with LOS. The order is executed after the normal delay. I give a correction order over ~50m with LOS. The delay is ~20 seconds. I give a correction order over ~50m without LOS. The delay is ~20 seconds. The fire comes down to the sheduled place. I give a second correction order over ~50m without LOS. The delay is ~20 seconds, but it is possible that the fire comes down to the wrong place.

About the German FOs, taken from 'Handbuch der deutschen Infanterie' (Handbook of German infantry), Alex Buchner The fire of a battery was guided by the 'Hauptbeobachtungsstelle' - Haupt-B-Stelle, (Main observing post), if necessary with help of sub observing posts (B-Stelle). The B-Stelle was the 'eyes' of the battery, used for reconnaissance of the terraine, the position of enemy and the own forces. The Haupt-B-Stelle also gave the orders to FOs (it could be one or more FO teams). The FO teams consisted of the FO itself, a radio team leader and a radio operator or a field telephone team with a team leader, two telephone talkers, one horse leader and one horse with the cable. The FO were at the front together with the combat troops to report targets and distances, guide the zero in and control the fire missions. BTW, if the cable was carried by the horse, why do FOs without radios tire so fast?

a) Have I said somewhere there's no eye-candy? Can somebody please hang the laywers? . I don't want some smoke puffs PRIMARY to differ between the dead and the living, it just would be a welcome side effect. c) I really don't see a difference between a knocked-out and an abandoned tank. AFAIK, not even the game makes a difference except in the status line.

Oh CMPLayer, please read the headline again! Write down 1000 times : Unit bases are NOT eye candy.

Dear Santa Claus, there is a small thing in CM that annoys me since long time. It's the way how sad and boring a killed tank is looking (except a burning tank, of course). I wonder if it aint possible to give a killed, but not burning vehicel a little trail of white smoke. Not just because it's looking nice - I also spend always so much time to distinguish between the dead and the living... And another nice thing would be if the tank can explode some time after it was KOed/abandoned. Cheers Your little Pete [ December 12, 2002, 04:17 PM: Message edited by: Scipio ]

Well folks, the question is, what could be realized with a patch for CMBB, and what is an issue for CM3? As I said before (based on my limited knowledge about the coding issues), I believe the artillery model could be changed to use the things I proposed. Counter artillery goes far beyond that. I just wonder, do you think my idea makes any sense, is realistic and generally is something we want to see?

When I think about it - if the 'Delay Command' we use for fireplans would be available during the whole battle & all battle types, it would do exactly the same. Maybe it would be a good idea, too, if we could in this case order to fire only spotting rounds and hold back the barrage until we need it. [ December 07, 2002, 10:45 AM: Message edited by: Scipio ]

Oh, I see. Well wouldn't it make in this case sense to make the briefing screne available to player one, too, before he makes his purchase? SASWDNTHT (Speaking As Someone Who Doesn't Need To Hardcode That), this doesn't sounds too difficult.

I'm also missing informations about weather and ground conditions. I guess this infos are important to know before the purchase. I already posted about it some time ago. Madmatt once said he would check this, but at least it has not made it into the 1.01

Technically this is right, Andreas, cause each target coordinate would be 'saved' in the target reference book. I just thought it could cause a problem with the correction orders, cause it would produce a lot of TRPs close together. Bedside that, keep in mind the long delays for Soviet artillery - I don't think that we would have time to define many TRPs. I can't of course speak about the coding problems, but it looks to me like most of the basic princips are modeled in the game already.

Why is the artillery delay command only available for preparation barrages in attack/defense battles? Maybe somebody with more knowledge about artillery can share his wisom with me. I really don't know if WWII artillery was already that flexible. Okay what we have now : in a attack/def. battle, I can order a fire plan in turn one, this will be executed without delay and always on target, because the target preparation were done before the battle. I can also order a fixed delay for the fire plan. Similar for TRPs, without fixed time of course. Now I wonder if this is realistic (with WWII equipment, of course): I order artillery fire. Two preparations shells (usually) come down to get the fire to the right place. (Let's assume we have an extra 'Prepare Target' command). This defines (in princip) a TRP during the battle. The TRP exists only until the FO keeps the target tracer to it (similar to the 'Ambush' spot in CMBO). Now I can order the barrage whenever I want to with the delay for 'normal' TRPs. A critic that could rise : artillery units are not 'locked' to my small part of the frontline, they also have to support other units. This is right, but a once defined target coordinate is written down in a target reference book (at least we did it that way in my mortar platoon during my military service), so they can (in princip) serve different units with small effort.

Scipio, my grandfather only got trained on the IG, he never got to use it, because he ended up in a counter-battery unit. I'll ask him anyway over Christmas. Your point about the horses in the Jaeger platoon, that should be easy enough. I would expect them to stay behind the frontline far enough to not get hurt (probably BN CP). Basically the same place where the trucks in motorised units would be. Out of harm's way I have a very detailed study of the attack of 101. Jaeger into the Soviet bridgehead near Barvenkovo May 1942 - no mention of horses there IIRC.</font>

I don't think so. A platoon has no kitchen. But horses.

According to my grandfather (who is one of the guys in the first picture), you could do this for at most 100m (when you are fit, healthy, and on decent ground), and then you would break down exhausted. The second picture was an official postcard, I leave it up to the viewer to judge how 'real' it was. The slow movement in the game is due to the abstraction of carrying the ammunition back and forth. It is heavily abstracted in game, and I hope it will be looked at for the engine rewrite.</font>