WWB

Hey DD, drop me an email. I would be glad to host your preview pics (sorry, cant handle the actual mod traffic) @ The 3d Wargamer. WWB

Because you dont get that option when you tourney save a battle. Nothing we could do about it. WWB

I have tried making nice, combined arms, wide open steppe type battles. They really were boring affairs to play. Troops getting supressed by MGs at 700m. Long range shootouts between tanks with lots of pings & misses. Till everyone ran out of ammo with little change in position. I try and avoid making boring battles. WWB

I disagree. There are huge amounts of luck in CMBB already without considering variable endings. Should we not use battles with ground conditions other than "dry" so people will not bog? Should we not use armor, since penetration is really a luck thing now? What about cover? Spotting units is quite tied to the random number generator. You can't take all the luck out of the game. WWB

Just did a few tests that bear out the fact that some varation up always happens. This is a fact I kept in mind in most battles I designed. That begs the question: why not have variable endings since they are truly variable. Should we turn off the variable penetration model as well, to make it one hit, one kill? WWB

4xS did not work for me (GeForce Ti4400). Are you using DirectX 9 by any chance? What AF setting are you using? WWB

What was the terrain? If it was deep mud, that makes sense. WWB

Actually, I would not mind seeing this myself. From a designers perspective it would let one check some basic things, such as reinforcement locations and timings, without a time-costly hotseat session. WWB

Bingo. Problem is now it is just as important as map design or playability, not to mention briefings. Really, it is a yes/no question, not a numerical rating. Looking over this thread here I think it is clear there is a general agreement tha there needs to be some sort of "Fun Factor" rating that should be weighed very heavily, for that is the be-all, end-all when it comes down to it. Add that and change the way the total rating is calculated, either by weighting or just forgetting the idea altogether and one will have a much more accurate system than we have now. WWB

Bump so steve might see my blabberings. WWB

Hmm, one can get magnetic mines in CM and grenade bundeles or satchel charges are a good substitute for all the 'splodey things germans used to take out T34s. WWB

Way to fix it is to zip the files. While redwolf will come in here and go off on a tangent about how the files actually end up being larger for some mail protocol BS that is really immaterial, zipping works in most cases. WWB

Gee, guys, really makes someone want to do scenarios for your tourney. Not to mention ruining what little FOW does exist. I would hope the above authors will delete their above posts or at least post a big spoiler alert. For the record, in our initial communications, we were told, since both players were going to be playing both sides, to make the battles heavily reinforcement based. So we were following Cyberfox's request as I understand thing, not trying to ruin the tournament for you. WWB

Bump because the account is damn good. WWB

Steve, I must say I like your thinking. The last thing I wanted to see CMII scenario design was was an AI scripting exercise. But, while we have your attention, I think there are a few other factors that shoudl not be forgotten: A) Ingame factors: 1) One thing that has not been mentioned yet is the need for some kind of events system. Events could be things such as one side taking a certain position, crossing a line, a random time factor, a certain unit getting destroyed, etc. These event triggers could then kick in effects such as reinfrocements, point bonuses and more. Moreover, these events could have a set time where they could be triggered. After which they become irrelevant. 2) Multiple Versions in one file: What I mean by this is letting one use the same map and generate 3 different battles for multiplayer and each side vs the AI. Well, maybe more considering the expanded multiplayer aspects to CMII. 3) Debriefings dispalyed only after the battle has been finished. 4) More metadata for scenario listing, letting people search for the types of battles they want to play. Editor issues: 1) Cut & Paste! Especially if I am making 3mx3m tiles, it will be real handy. 2) More hotkeys. 3) Setup the editor as a separate, windows (or normal mac OS) friendly program running in a window rather than locked into fullscreen mode. This would be real handy as most editing I do ends up being a long string of alt-tabbing between an on-screen source and the editor. WWB

****************SPOILERS************************** * * * * * * * * * * I should add that I have caught some flak on 2 of the historical battles I did on the CD: 1) Balkovzy Surprise: there have been several comments about how the map is boring. Well, tell that to the guy who hand-drew the map of Balkvozy (you can find it in The Chronicle of 7 Kompanie, I.SS LAH). In fact, I spiced it up a bit for CM. In any case, the map works very well for the battle from most accounts. 2) A Morning at the Zoo: I have seen several comments saying that it does not look much like a zoo. Try to make a zoo in CMBB. Anyhow, I could make it look much more like a Zoo than I could make it look like 8 story apartment blocks in downtown Kharkov. 3) Katukov Strikes Back: There have been several gripes about the padlocked units. Well, to this I say, read the briefings. The tanks on the hill had just retreated, and the units at the bottom of the hill I am certain where they were sited based on written accounts and the very good map I had in my possession. Regarding the Depots ratings, I think there needs to be a significant adjustment. That said I do like the atomized system we have now to some extent. There definitely needs to be a "fun factor" rating and the replayability rating should be dropped entirely. It really does not apply, and in any case should not be weighted the same as far more important factors like map designes or playability. As for the whole balance issue, why not add separate 3 separate balance ratings: axis vs AI, allies vs AI and multiplayer. In any case, the current system is not an accurate measure. [rant] One comment on balance: I am willing to admit that no scenario can be perfectly balanced. I shoot for winnable from both sides in a PBEM game myself. But oftentimes one side might be a bit easier. If you want perfectly balanced make a mirrored map and buy a whole bunch of T34s/captured T34s and rifle squads and have a go at it. If you want real flavor, go for scenarios. [/rant] Before I go I should say that I thank Kieth tremendously for what he has put together. But like most massive, multiuser IT projects it takes a first build before you realize what is actually needed. WWB

Do what rune says. Also, are you running the Asus probe program that came on the CD with the motherboard? It is a very good temperature & fan monitor that will power down the machine if it goes past threshold. If you are running it, start a history graph so you can see what happens after the reboot. If you are not running it, install it and look at it to see if temperature is shooting too high or fans are failing. I would also run a memory test program to see if the RAM is bad. Lastly, I would look at the system event log (right click on My computer, choose manage, then look at logs and alerts). See what warnings and errors you are getting. Lastly, if nothing is making sense and you have not yet moved all your data over or can back it up I would advise a clean windows reinstall (with disk format). Sometimes it will install successfully but uncleanly leading to wierd stability issues. WWB

Also, check the event log, it might indicate what hardware error you were suffering before meltdown. WWB

With GeForce 4s, the nVidia drivers alone do not give you the ability to tune A-Filtering under DirectX. WWB

ADSL (DirecTV DSL, formerly Telocity). Pretty sweet--Static IP, running at more than double advertised speeds (getting 1500/700 on a 768/128 line). WWB

ROFL 'Fish. Just remember, I, for the record, am not Wild Bill Wilder. Anyhow, all those nickel click thrus Jeff mentioned will let me pay more money and get a real webhost rather than the crappy one I have now. Page is very small bandwith wise, but it has a whole lot of PHP action behind the scenes so it takes a minute for the site to render. WWB

Hmm, there might be a way around this issue. Pretty simple really. Add an option for a 640 pixel wide menu. It dont need to be pretty, and it will clearly not have all the information on the real menu, but it should allow for play in software rendering mode. WWB

Bumped for late lunchtime surfing. WWB

Go to Boots & Tracks and download the Seelow operation. I think Warphead listed some sources there. WWB

Possibly a heat issue. Do you have any temperature monitors running? WWB