Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

WWB

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    1,959

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by WWB

    Please Respond! Do you support this proposal for new Scenario Depot?

    in Combat Mission - Scenario Talk

    Posted

    Originally posted by GJK:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by WWB:

    Sounds great.

    One suggestion which I think has been very effective over at B&T:

    Add a category/tagging system. And allow searches on that.

    For example, Joe visits B&T. He wants to play something TCP with Bob which has mechanized forces. So he searches for battles that have two tags: TCP and Mechanized forces.

    If properly structured this can be a very handy and extensibile system. GJK, drop me an email for full technobabble . . .

    Thanks Wyatt.

    I already have the "Mechanized Forces" available for scenario searches on TPG (under Allies forces type and Axis forces type), so that will be available at TSD (among many other variables).

    The TCP thing I have tied in via a search for "Best played as (Axis vs AI, Allies vs AI, two player)". So I think that I have that covered already. </font>

    0

    Please Respond! Do you support this proposal for new Scenario Depot?

    in Combat Mission - Scenario Talk

    Posted

    Sounds great.

    One suggestion which I think has been very effective over at B&T:

    Add a category/tagging system. And allow searches on that.

    For example, Joe visits B&T. He wants to play something TCP with Bob which has mechanized forces. So he searches for battles that have two tags: TCP and Mechanized forces.

    If properly structured this can be a very handy and extensibile system. GJK, drop me an email for full technobabble . . .

    0

    Knifefight at Cecina LAR

    in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps

    Posted

    Originally posted by 752ndTank:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />RawRecruit is now doing his own Knifefight at Cecina LAR.

    Enjoyed seeing this interpretation of the Cecina Tiger vs. Sherman engagement. For anyone interested, the accurate historical details that RawRecruit based his cartoon on can be found on my web page:

    http://www.752ndtank.com/cecina.html

    This page now includes some new Signal Corps film footage of GIs inspecting the wreck of Tiger 221 a few days after the battle.

    Bob </font>

    0

    Scenario Depot Blues

    in Combat Mission - Scenario Talk

    Posted

    Originally posted by GJK:

    </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Soddball:

    What about a file included with the scenario that you download. It saves to your computer, and when you've played the scenario you just fill in the info and it sends itself off to the depot?

    Might work with some email systems, might not. I don't know, it's just a thought.

    I've chatted with Keith about something similar - a way to export scenario playtest discussions/reviews from TPG over to TSD easily. I had thought of a small, encrypted text file that you could attach to a form post when adding your scenario to TSD but security is an issue here. You're really opening yourself up if you allow outside appends to your database like that (obviously) and having Keith manually do all those appends or merges isn't going to work either. There just doesn't seem to be a way to have it automated -safely. </font>
    0

    Ridiculous reinforcement locations!

    in Combat Mission - Scenario Talk

    Posted

    The designer has no control over the formation of reionforcements. About the only thing one can do is to try and break up the groups so that they don't get too jumbled.

    Furthermore, as indicated above, one can make every attempt to put them in an area where they are not arriving under fire. This is all easily disturbed by the act of playing the game. Players might well have troops where they are not 'supposed to.'

    That said, an honest effort should be made to bring them in behind some sort of full masking cover.

    0

    Points Info for ea. Scenario/Operation

    in Combat Mission - Scenario Talk

    Posted

    Originally posted by Stefan Wennerberg:

    Emer mentioned judgeing battles by size (i.e., small, medium, large, huge). All that tells you is the size of the map (which is very useful to know). For all you know you could have a "huge" scenario pitting one sniper versus another. The "size" of the scenario is only the map size. That's why I like to see the points (or rough aproximates to preserve FOW) mentioned somewhere. The point system is not perfect but along with the scenario write-up it gives a pretty good idea of what type of units, no. of units etc. that are involved. Without point totals I often have no idea if the scenario is 2 or three battialians in size or if it is one company in size).

    No info on point totals combined with general/vague scenario write-ups such as:

    "German battle group opposes Russian Guards Infantary Division near Minsk."

    provides little information in regards to scale.

    Quite, quite wrong. It tells a count of the units. Note that this, too, can be skewed, since things like trenches count as units. So a company with an extensive trench system can rank as a "false" huge.

    WWB

    0

    Too many roads and buildings?

    in Combat Mission - Scenario Talk

    Posted

    A few points:

    1) WWII era, low-scale maps are hard to come by, especially if one is not willing to spend serious cash.

    2) Unfortunately, CM has nothing in the way of terrain types between unpaved roads and open ground. So many designers use upaved roads to represent, say, cart trails.

    3) What maps I do have (thanks to the US Library of Congress captured docs collections) indicate that there was a fair amount of habitiation in Russia. Especially where fighting was taking place.

    4) Fighting tended to revolve around highways and rail lines, which tended to have more population. Battles are begat by logistics, and if you cannot feed and arm your men there is little point in fighting over isolated hamlets and large tracts of forest.

    So, I dont think the problem is as pronounced as you indicate. Main issue is that the quality of roads is a bit too high due to engine limitations.

    WWB

    0

    Testers needed for map converter

    in Combat Mission - Scenario Talk

    Posted

    Originally posted by Pyewacket:

    I wrote a programm and I am curious if it runs on other pc's. Is there anybody interested in testing an app (around 100 KB)?

    The app should be able to convert CMAK maps in CMBB maps or battle in scenario maps and vice versa.

    If there's someone interested I would like to email the exe file.

    Thanks in advance.

    Sounds awesome, please send to wwb@3dwargamer.net.

    BTW, you would not happen to need a place to host said application?

    WWB

    0

    Interior layout of Hetzer

    in Combat Mission: Afrika Korps

    Posted

    I was actually in said hetzer with Matt. It was a bit tight for him, but not completely unreasonable, but there were only two of us. I doubt if they had any drivers over 5'6". As an aside, we were in it for maybe 5 minutes before our combined body heat made us seek an exit.

    Regarding that layout, it is completely wrong. If anything was to the right of the gun, it was either squshed about in inch wide between the breech and the hull, or outside of the fighting compartment. Working from memory, commander would be in the back left, with loader to his right by the breach. Driver in front left, gunner beside him. Or something like that.

    WWB

    [for kicks, <a href="http://www.combatmission.com/Patton/pages/IM002812.htm" target="_blank">

    piccie of matt</a> in the hetzer's driver's seat.]

    0
×
×
  • Create New...