El Cid_Cagi

As for Spanish terrain, that great scenario artist called Wayne Rutledge (which has never been around this thread, and most surely will never be ) has done some great renderings of spanish-like terrain in their scenarios, especially the one called "Raid on Madrid". Only Don Quixote and some windmills are missing I think that it's most the composition of terrain elements that would make the feel for spanish land, more than the terrain elements themselves. The depictions given by Caid should be most helpful for scenario designers. The layout and general aspect of houses and such should be more like the forthcoming CMAK italian buildings, but for the most part the CMBB buildings will do the job About Escuadron111, the Falcon 4.0 spanish modders, I'm currently playing a CMBB PBEM game with one of these fellows (Mandra). I will call his attention over this thread

I guess it may have been asked before (for russian partisans, for example) but... is it possible to make female infantry models? Anarchist and communist militia had many women in their ranks. This would add not only colour but some volume to the uniform mods About the speech recording: any tips about where and how to make the recordings? The italian speech files in CMBB, for example, sound very artificial, something like the man speaking from behind a closed door It could be made even separated voice sets for the nationalists and the republicans, especially regarding encouraging voices. The republicans would say "camaradas!" or "compañeros!" where the nationalist would say "legionarios!" or "soldados!", for example; since it's a mod regarding a civil war, some political mottos could be appropriate too

(otherwise known as Chema-Cagi) Reporting. Sounds like a helluva good idea. I will launch a massive call to arms in the spanish forums. As for the speech files, I think it could be done if someone tells how to...we can have some fun time recording all that shouting First contribution could be a new 00005010 .wav file (the splash screen background music): either the precious "Ay! Carmela" or the "Cara al Sol" fascist hymn There are some spanish modders out there, other than Fernando Carrera, and I guess they could be interested. As Wayne/Hans has said, there was a great and colourful mix of uniforms. They could look great.

Just before someone rightfully says "hey! this is an english forum!" just a reminder: the spanish CDV edition of CMBB shares the curious printed-PDF mixed format of other european editions BUT...the PDF section has been left completely in english, thus giving spanish players only a half effective game manual...

ASSAULT is slower than MOVE from the start, even before the unit starts tiring (that happens quite soon) Ace Pilot I did compare MOVE for vehicles with some infantry in the middle: yes, they advance at the same speed...MOVE AFVs and MOVE infantry advance exactly at the same pace The images will follow today (once I answer all the PBEM battles; first thing first )

Some more tests done. I've to prepare the images and so, but these are some preliminary conclusions: Tracked vehicles with MOVE command over open ground, dirt and paved roads and pavement move at the same speed It seems that the difference (a great difference indeed) comes with the FAST command Tracked vehicles with HUNT and MOVE to CONTACT orders move slightly faster than MOVE AFVs SEEK HULL DOWN position is the slower speed setting Having covered arcs doesn't affect movement speed for turreted vehicles at all PINNED infantry (with no binoculars) even in the open is surprisingly (at least to me) blind. Even a running squad can advance from 150 to 100 meters in the open and they don't see it While moving under fire, the speed results from the previous experiment go more or less the same, as long as there are no casualties and/or sizeable incoming fire MOVE infantry doesn't even return fire, at least at >100 mts enemies ADVANCE infantry keep moving and shoots twice per turn RUN infantry really ignores enemy fire as long as they have no casualties; they don't fire back, though (they ignore enemy fire and the enemies themselves) Will post some images and a detailed result later

Maybe I had to post it elsewhere, but after reading this excellent FAQ I decided to do a little experiment regarding the differences in speed of the infantry movement commands. The results can be seen in graphical form in this thread Thank you for this excellent FAQ PS: please feel free to add the images to the FAQ if you think it would be useful

Being intrigued by the differences between the infantry movement commands, I decided to do this little experiment. Over a flat open ground terrain in summer, dry, cold conditions, several infantry platoons with same experience, command, etc are given the different movement orders. The Withdraw squad starts running almost immediately. The rest of the squads start moving after the normal command pause (equal for them all) After a 2 minute race, the positions are like this: Withdraw squad has becomed pinned after being panicked a while during the first minute (soon after they got out of command) Note how the Move and Move to Contact squads have moved the same distance and remain rested, while the Advance squad is only slightly behind but starts tiring Run squad is the absolute winner, but they are tired Assault squad is notably behind and tired And finally, Sneak squad won't go to the playoffs. They have moved a third of Move distance, and are in ready condition (starting to tiring) Note a second Move squad. It was placed there for control purposes only (all the squads are rifle squads, the second Move one is a german Jäger group) Further tests would eventually include the mysterious human wave command, and a comparison between move over different types of terrain, as well as an enemy LMG far ahead firing here and there (a race under the stress of being fired upon...) [ February 04, 2003, 06:50 PM: Message edited by: El Cid_Cagi ]

I did not contact anyone from Der Kessel, since the link at The Depot brings you to B&T, and there is where people will go to get the pack from the Depot. I didn't think at that moment about the joint effort B&T-Kessel, apart from the fact that I have met Terry "CDIC" before, so I send the e-mail from the page referred at the Depot. Sorry for not thinking in Der Kessel at that time Furthermore, the Chrono-Pack was actually the "SP Lite" pack, but with the scenarios renamed in the intended chronological order, as a kind of campaign mode (example SP01-Into the Void, SP02-When Worlds Collide, etc.; so they will be showing in the scenario selection screen) and what I offered is either to send them the pack or hosting it from my site. No scenarios where added or removed And in any case, there's no "chrono-pack" anymore (apart from my HD; it's the "campaign" I'm curently playing in solitaire), so why do you ask? I'm sorry for not having though in Der Kessel as another place to ask. In any case, I've had enough of this. I will contact the forum webmaster in order to resign from my membership to this forum. I was not as older as a member like you, Dan, but fairly enough PS: It's not for your message, hope it's evident . Bye.

You're losing the point by far, apart from being offensive and there's no need to be so. I've removed the packs, and offered my apologies As I've said before, we will never agree about this issue. After reading your last messages, I don't have the interest to agree with you about anything. Bye, Mr. Dorosh, keep feeling happy with your 700+ downloads

Andreas "Germanboy" Biermann, I suppose . Yes, the issue of the scenario packs did affect you, there were many of the scenarios from Der Kessel, since they are some of the favorites of the community, as seen in the Depot ratings. "Bure", "TF Butler", etc., to name a few. "To The Last Man" is one of the highest rated for more people in the Depot; TF Butler was one of the highest rated at CMHQ, at the time I did the old "PBEM Packs" 2 years ago...(that, btw, was also announced in this forum and did not bring such "flame war"; maybe everyone was younger ) I did go to your site, read the descriptions, the reviews in the Depot, and signaled several of them with the "insulting" $ in the filename (the most outrageous modification I did to any scenario) And yes, I can understand the reasons given by many of you, scenario designers, but I'm very far from sharing that same point of view. You should see it from the gamer's point of view, which, after all, is the intended target of all your works, unless you keep your scenarios in your own hard disk If I had done any modification, editing of the briefings or the scenarios themselves,or as Franko says, adding some Tigers in a 1941 scenario, etc., in a word, altered your works, I should be battered to death But the fact of "relocating" or made it easier for the average gamer to get classified scenarios, maybe it hurts the hearts of the artists, but from the point of view of the players, it helps them to play the scenario they want to play Furthermore, the fact of having your scenarios downloaded one-by-one from the Depot, B&T or Der Kessel does not prevent at all the risk that someone, somewhere, could maliciously modify them. It don't gives the maker any control at all about the final destiny of their works And then the issue of the "player feedback" and such...Well, you should be conscious that users don't give feedback as a general rule, apart from some exceptions. I cannot but disagree with Michael on that point. In my experience, even so I'd given my e-email address, links to discussion threads, etc hoping to have some interesting opinions...I've seen some documents dowloaded thousands of times while receiving only ten, maybe twelve suggestions (as an example, WWB...he kindly mentioned how he gone through my EU2 aids, but until now, I had only evidence from scarcely 20 people that they have found useful any of my EU2 guides -the so-called "positive feedback"-. Now, they are scarcely 21 people ) Since I've done quite an extensive work of gaming aids, playing guides, and such, and I run my own website (for which I have to pay, as said above), I'm very respectful of your position, guys, but I would find myself ridiculous if I had to complain because someone has placed one of these playing aids in his own website (wheter he asked me before or not), as long as they keep my name into it and not modify anything Should another site delete my name (denying my authorship) from a guide or erasing my portrait in a 1419 worldmap (even so I'm rather ugly), I would kill him ( :cool: especially if erasing my portrait) But since I've done such things with the intention that other gamers could read them, the fact that they read it directly from my page or from other site is completely irrelevant to me: the more people that find it useful, the better, with or without my permission, as long as they keep the documents as they were conceived I have not modified, denied authorship (the briefings and accompanying readme -if any- were preserved) nor degraded anything. Furthermore, I came here (to the scenario designer's den) and innocently announced the scenario packs, a feasible proof of my goodwill And then this unpleasant issue of the you should have asked before arose... I'm very sorry since I did it with all my respect to the dedicated work of admired scenario designers, and this has triggered a mostly disgusting situation We are talking of different positions and attitudes, and most surely we will not agree ever The fact of the "you should have asked before" seems very important to some of you, while I find it quite irrelevant for my own works and, above all, for the gamers, which are the final objective of scenarios, gaming aids and such extra work done for free for so many people. And I don't think that we could agree on this Anyway, I'm sorry that we have come to this discussion since my last intention was to make angry anyone of the scenario designers out there [ January 06, 2003, 06:14 PM: Message edited by: El Cid_Cagi ]

Don't worry, your message has been received. I understand you since I'm also the lazy man type, so I have left my CM page as it was, only removed the links to the packs, and everyone is happy again ( as can be seen here) Just try to overcome your laziness in the future, go to the Depot (it's the best scenario site) and give some feedback here and there [ January 05, 2003, 07:33 PM: Message edited by: El Cid_Cagi ]

Thanks for your offer, Rune, I really have enjoyed your "runepaks", but there will be no more scenario packs on my own Contacting all scenario designers will make the scenario packs themselves outdated when finished, and as I have said I have already all the scenarios I want in my hard disk, separated in different folders I though it was a good idea to share that with other gamers, but I was wrong. End of the history.

Thanks for the suggestion and the offer for the scenario reviews, but I don't see the difference between puting a link to my favorite scenarios (as Michael suggested) or doing reviews of my preferred ones, since it would be an "arbitrary linking" that will not give any "download feedback" to the scenarios not mentioned Furthermore, at this very time I have no mood or intention of doing any more work in my CM section, other than keeping and mantaining the so-called CM Big Oracle, thanks to the helpful and friendly support from Markshot (maybe until someone comes and says that he don't wants to have their forum messages hosted elsewhere or that the content of these forums are copyrighted and such, a thing that most surely is a matter of time) Personally, as said before, having had my EU2 Beginner's Guide in four languages and downloaded from my page at least twenty thousand of times, being hosted in (at least AFAIK) 5 or 6 more sites, I just cannot understand the positions shown by some scenario designers here: I do all my gaming aid work just for pure love to the hobby, the fact of having the "feedback" of the download counter is irrelevant. But that's only my position.

Well, I think that I have made clear that I didn't wanted to offend anyone (and everyone at least agrees on this) Some points have arisen in this discussion. After all, maybe this was not an empty effort: 1. Scenario designers should add a description line when finishing their scenarios, so every gamer out there can identify what kind of scenario they are looking to play from the Scenario Selection screen. In fact, should this be an universally accepted rule, I'd never done the scenario packs (my intention was more to separate solo from 2P oriented scenarios; the importance of ratings was to make reasonably sized files and a reasonable number of scenarios 2. I should have asked every scenario author before...well, in my experience when preparing documents, files, etc for other games, 75% of the time scenario designers, FAQ-makers and such simply don't reply to messages, or the referred e-mail address is too old, or wrong or who knows what (a thing mostly difficult to understand to me, since I do answer all enquiries and the more strange questions about the games I have my page dedicated) I had contacted Boots&Tracks about the so-called "Stalingrad Chrono pack", for example. An e-mail was sent to Kevin and CC to CapitalistDogInChina (a former and fond playmate ). Terry gently answered me for a salute, but Kevin did not say nothing (the Chrono pack are simply the scenarios renamed to be playable in the described chronological order. The readme includes all the debited credit, the website link and an invitation to visit the great B&T site...) But no answer yet (almost a month has passed) So the second conclusion is that people should answer inquiries from others, or this tends to create the impression that none answers nothing... A similar history about some of the rare broken links in the depot (broken because the referred website is no more): none of the e-mails was answered. On the other side, Wayne Rutledge gently replied in a pair of hours about a scenario not yet linked from the Depot Collecting all the scenarios, reading all the descriptions and available reviews to identify 2-player suitable games (although not designed for that purpose), or the contrary, to identify not-so-PBEM-suitable scenarios requires already a lot of time Sending hundreds of e-mails and waiting for their response would make the whole thing and adventure. Furthermore, asking if it's possible to make available to gamers a scenario that is already available to gamers, but in a more comfortable way (from the gamer's point of view) And here comes the third: 3. As pointed above, every scenario designer should add in the future a readme with a disclaimer: "I don't want my scenarios hosted elsewhere", like the FS mods and scenery files 4. I'm glad my EU2 section helped you, WBB . And I'm thankful that in the end you accepted to have your scenarios included in the packs. And surely many gamers will be thankful so But having them in a mood like "for this time, you can, but don't do it ever more" is not the way I like to have things available at my page 5. I'd though that gamers making scenarios, playing aids, help maps, FAQs and everything that adds more enjoyment to others to their favorite games are doing it for pure love for these games and the gaming hobby, and they would prefer to have their work the more widespread, the better (given that the most elemental credits are preserved, of course) Unfortunately, the world is not as beatiful as I'd though, and the wargaming community from time to time has still that smell of purism and elitism I don't want to keep removing, zipping a new file and uploading it every time that over the next weeks another scenario designer comes and claim their right to have their scenarios removed from the packs, so I have just removed all of them. After all, I started the whole work to my own enjoyment, I have all the scenarios I want in my hard disk, and that's what I'll be playing So the ill-advised move is finished. Over and out. Edit: updated my signature [ January 05, 2003, 02:04 PM: Message edited by: El Cid_Cagi ]