markshot
-
Posts
869 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
5
Posts posted by markshot
-
-
Thank you, MOS!
-
At the end of 120 seconds, I finally saw someone toss something and smoke. I guess I am impatient.
Is there are limit on smoke? I see they have 20 grenades, but nothing is mentioned for smoke. One shot and then the smoke button goes dead?
Thanks.
-
These guys were given a pop smoke order last turn (WEGO). Nothing happened during the turn (I mean smoke wise). What am I missing? Do I misunderstand the mechanics?
Thanks.
PS: Currently working through the various tutorials.
-
I had bought GTMF on release during my last days of GTOS although no expert. I fired it up last night and took it for a basic spin.
I can say it was obvious that much work has gone into the UI since GTOS. It was far more intuitive, cleaned up, better structured, and clearly an effort had been made for English speakers. With that said, it is improved, but by no means obvious and anyone Russian or not is going to have to invest in a major learning curve.
I guess there is a big market in Russia for the Great Patriotic War. I was a member of a French company, AGEOD, the only non-French member (FYI I was born NYC/USA 3rd generation). Our first 2 games were the American revolution and American civil war. Despite being French, it was clear to us that the market for PC games was in the USA. Thus, our target.
I don't know about the current generation today. In fact, a whole generation has grown up since the WTC came down (my generation's Pearl Harbor). But for most Americans WWII is the USA. It is only here on the BFC forums, you will find people aware that the ball game was really won or lost in The East ... US deaths were a drop in the bucket compared to the USSR. But if you want to make money off WWII, you are going to do the USA in the West.
It is pity that so few know any history. I have spent the last three years on 500 BCE - 500 CE (not just games, but maybe 12 classes). (It seems writing BC/AD would date me.) Rome is long gone, but casts a shadow maybe far greater than WWII ... construction (arch, concrete), legal system, government (republics), languages (root words from Latin), spread of Christianity, ...
-
Landser,
You mention Jane's. Boy, did learning to fly a helo give me trouble.
I miss teaching/flying my Spit9 more than any other. G_d, teaching people how do slow motion scissors and barrel rolls on the very edge of the envelope.
75% of the community were air show fighters ... quick aerobatic tricks. Why? It is was easy to catch the less talented. I taught energy fighting. I would gain on you in every maneuver by a fractional amount ... eventually when I had enough in the bank, I would cash in for coming around and with angles to achieve lead pursuit and fill your little plane with lead. It was a great time to enjoy a hobby that I could have only dreamed of as a kid.
-
IanL,
No, COGNOS was not involved in any racket. It was one of my professors/internship/1st CS job. But COGNOS was one three offers I had in my first search (2nd resume job). I think I would have been working building applications with their generator for clients. They were $1,000 USD beyond the others, but even then, it was not a lot of money.
I didn't so much chose Wall St. (of course, it would be 2/3s of my career), but I choose the interviewer/job. My interviewer and later manager was one of the sharpest system designers who I had ever met. I wanted to get to work with him. I learned that interviews are not just to screen applicants, but to sell the company/position.
I didn't want to work in applications, but be a systems programmer/researcher working for DEC, IBM, Data General, Stratos, Sperry ... So, how did I end up on Wall S?. In every tech cycle, the start of the loop begins with custom systems software. The use of super-minis on Wall St. was experiencing that. So, I did a lot of work in assembly, F77, and C working on building proprietary DB, queuing systems, logging/recovery, screen generators, communication links ... (Marriage forced me out of academia, but it was an amazing job for Wall St.) It was a time when HW was expensive and people were cheap, and brokerage companies had the cash to reinvent the wheel every few years if it gave them a competitive edge.
-
I had for many years been a participant of Panther Games (one of the best AIs).
MIUS/GTOS remind me of Panther. You craft the fight in broad strokes and let the mechanics do its thing. That is not to say that proper sighting of some ATGs can be critical.
I think it is easier to pickup MIUS/GTOS from CMx1/CMx2 than the other way around. Why? I think CM teaches terrain, weapons systems, and combined arms to allow you to step up a level or two. I definitely understood PGs RDOA/HTTR/COTA/BFTB/CMDOPS better having played CM.
---
Mord,
Thanks for that thread. It was a good read.
-
This was the major impediment I had with GTOS and still concerns me with GTMF:
QuoteДля начала нужно четко понимать, что во-первых игры Graviteam являются серьезными тактическими варгеймами, а не простой стратегией в реальном времени, и в них очень большое внимание уделяется реалистичному отображению военных действий во всех аспектах; во-вторых действие основной части игр происходит в период Второй Мировой Войны, на который пришелся рассвет в развитии военной и конструкторской мысли в развитии танковых войск, именно в эти годы вырабатывались основные принципы применения танков на поле боя, и соответственно меры противодействия им, так же в эти годы активно развивалась и сама конструкторская мысль, отрабатывалось множество вариантов конструкций танков, и их вооружения, и именно тогда танки начали приобретать классический вид, в военный период были набраны высочайшие темпы освоения в производстве танков совершенно новых типов, конструкций и ТТХ. Виду чего в этот временной период еще не было выработано универсальных решений и средств для борьбы с танками, а те решения, которые ещё вчера были эффективны и достаточны, на следующий день становились совершенно бесполезны, и с этим вам придется считаться в игре.
-
4 hours ago, landser said:
Are you the same Markshot from Combatsim and Shoot to Kill fame?
You do go back, way back!
Yes, Falcon3, Flanker, and the Spit9 all had guides and/or online students/classes. Got to the top of the Compuserve Falcon3 ladder in '94. Remember modems and a time before the Internet? I even remember PONG, the first mass computer game.
-
LanL,
An interesting list. Pity that many of the links are broken.
COGNOS? My first professional position was a racket arrange by one of my school professors (department head). We had to do an internship program, but he siphoned off the best students to his personal company. But getting paid, getting an A+ without submitting anything, and being 30 minutes from school was worthwhile. My first professional offer after school (CUNY-BC) ... one of three was COGNOS in the early 80's. However, I choose to do systems programming work on Wall St. instead.
I have bookmarked your site. Thanks.
-
I have generally hated TBS games with a passion. I only ended up with FOG2 (didn't even know it existed), since it was bundled with FOGE. I am a former member of AGEOD and friends with the primary developer.
But after I purchased FOG2, I fell in love with it. First, although it is TBS it is far richer than any of the uber TW mods (RTW1/RS3, RTW1/EB1, MTW2/EB2, RTW2/DEI). Second, it can be configured to be one very fast moving TBS game due to a superb UI design.
Yes, I have FOGE, because I worked with Philippe Malacher and Philippe Thibaut, since they released Birth of America around 2005 or so. I love AJE and I plan to later play both ACW titles.
FOGE has quite a bit that makes it unique. You win by culture vs decadence and not painting the map. It may turn out to be the first grand strategy game where the snowball affect is negated. In TW, they try to negate it by having everyone turn on you by mid-game. It is neither TW nor Paradox. FOGE introduces that nations progress through life cycles. This isn't totally new. Philippe Thibaut introduced this maybe 20 years ago in Great Invasions (set post collapse of the Western Roman Empire). But FOGE fleshes it out much better. Also, FOGE as grand strategy, is not TBS, but WEGO. Another thing fairly unique about FOGE is that buildings aren't just a tech tree, they are part of a whole sophisticated trading dynamic. You probably know you can auto-resolve battles like the old AGE engine (this is built on Slitherine's Archon) or export to FOGE. Another thing which is special is that many factions are truly unique; not just graphically unique (like TW and Paradox out of the box). Pocus has a reputation of patching to perfection. The first ACW game has something like 16 patches.
About the only thing that I am not excited about is warfare. A turn is a year with every 4th year being like Winter, because the game is 500 turns. I enjoy AJE where a turn is one month. Playing the civil war between Caesar and Pompeus one must consider economy, revolts, cut grain shipments to Italy, army supply/size, weather, and the campaigning season. Great fun.
I hope that helps.
-
I have CMBN/CMFI/CMRT/CMFB and mission packs.
For the moment, I have just two combat interests. The ancient world (like Alea Jacta Est and FOG2 ... and some heavily modded TW (for the Roman period) and WWII (probably CM and MIUS).
-
-
I tried renaming my V3 directories, but it wanted me to activate and I did not want to screw up my account. So, I don't know if the problem was there as well.
I will go do the tutorials in the other games instead.
-
Landser,
That was my fear looking at how long the games have been out and the relatively limited third party content.
Yes, QB maps do have basic plans, but given the hundreds that there are and variability under which they are used, there is no way they can rival the packaged hand crafted scenarios.
I know for those who are CM grogs; only PBEM counts. (yet I just don't)
I have reached the age where I will happily invested 1 year in learning everything about CM, but I will be very unhappy if after another year I am out of content. Neither BFC or third parties or putting out content that fast for someone who is retired and takes CM to be their main hobby.
The game and what it simulates looks fantastic, but I want to still be playing in 2021. One of my hopes is that the large and huge scenarios will be amenable to almost a campaign style approach where you can approach them with multiple solutions.
-
Training campaign does not have two mortars or ammo carriers. I am checking now (reloading V3) to see if they were also missing.
-
Yes. That was pretty slapstick. Thanks.
-
No. I mainly was requesting links of interest. You need to go back and read the original post. (There is another post on this board with all types WWII training materials. Simply because someone asked.)
If you paint, then comparative painting is an interesting topic. If you engineer bridges, then comparative bridge engineering is an interesting topic. If you are a software engineer who plays games, then comparative game design is an interesting topic.
Neither of the games discussed are tic-tac-toe, they amount to small scale systems. I think they represent many interesting decisions as I alluded to Steve's discuss of the core engine concept differences behind CMx1 and CMx2.
Sometimes, people just need to lighten up and realize that systems design and games are an art form. And learn how to appreciate art and its intrinsic beauty. The title reflected the sad nature of gamers being unable to do that.
-
Pelican,
Given what I have seen from playing GTOS and watching GTMF on YouTube, I think you have covered the issues well.
I remember when I first played GTOS. I had the style all wrong, positioning each unit and gun while painstakingly check LOS. (Because I was playing CMx1/2 from inside GTOS.) But later it did dawn on me that it is a broad strokes game. One YouTube video I was watching made a good point ... campaigns are not won or lost in tactical battles, but on the campaign map. I heard that they added WEGO to the campaign options. I do remember getting myself out of a pickle a few times by the sequence I resolved battles in GTOS. Not anymore ...
I love the CM movies. They are very immersive. And they allow immersion, since you aren't failing to command while enjoying them. Also, one could argue that you need a more solid system with CM-WEGO than GTMF-RTS, because one can analyze the next minute's orders for 30 minutes. Although you can pause GTOS/GTMF, you really aren't going to analyze for 30 minutes before revising orders.
I am not sure how I feel about tanks bounding ahead of the infantry. It seems from watching the game, shaped charge propelled anti-tank weapons had yet to arrive on the scene. So, with great sacrifice and bravery, you might knock off a track. Even then, if you held the field, the tank would be recovered and put back into service.
-
I previously raised the issue of replayability (scripted scenarios and QB). I own GTOS and GTMF, but have only dabbled. I really have played and do know CMx1 and CMx2. Part of my GT problems was simply in the early days for complete and clear help you needed to speak Russian. However, I do not believe that is true for Mius.
I don't want to start a contentious debate here. Rather I wanted to request links to some well considered threads that compare and contrast the games/systems in a thoughtful and analytic way. I am tired of google searches that turn up heated threads that look like "politics" as opposed to careful analysis.
So, if anyone has some good articles or discussions, I would be happy to read them. I am a connoisseur of games and software. I like to read what goes on inside game engines and the assumptions that developers made. There was a brilliant discussion by Steve (I believe here a few years back) that CMx1 was an effects based simulation where as CMx1 is an object/mechanism simulation. The advantages and disadvantages of both approaches were discussed with BFC selecting for CMx2 based on advances in computing power leading to higher real world fidelity.
So, please don't flame my question. Software is my thing ... I am not married to any company or game or system. Thanks.
-
I did get many years out of CMx1. Although I didn't PBEM, given my age and 6,000 scenarios ... by the time, I recycled those scenarios, I had well forgotten where ATGs and tigers and other key assets were located. Sometimes senescence can be just as powerful a tool as dynamic AI.
-
My background is systems although my exposure to AI is more rule based/heuristics and narrow AI like chess engines ... not neural nets.
We are in an era where games like CM can be learned and played at better than human levels by the most powerful neural nets (like Googles LC0). But given Moore's law ... in 10-15 years, your phone will be able to PBEM you to total defeat.
Although I don't really want to build what is supposed to be a quick surprise game for me, I do appreciate that a human can see in 30 minutes, what weeks of programming fails to find. (But, of course, like traditional chess engine programming has gone on for 30 years. Last year Google's LC0 neural net beat the best programmed engine in the world with 8 hours of practice against itself.)
I will definitely try QB after going through the stock scenarios/campaigns.
I had not considered that it was the improvement in QBs that reduced the number of 3rd party scenarios.
-
Actually, I tried them out.
But in the end came to that conclusion.
Elsewhere, it was said that the beauty of CM is the WEGO/Movie. I usually play with many things on. But often watch the movies with much turned off. As I have programmable game controls, I flip this with one key stroke.
I think being able to see into trees is more important in RT games where you don't have the above luxury.
-
Yes, I found (google) a lot of criticism of the QB. I just went in to the editor to take a look. They are filtered and they do have at least an AI plan which may not be more than an axis of advance and identification of good terrain.
Artillery fire mission tab & units?
in Combat Mission - General Discussion
Posted
When I select a fire mission, how can I know which unit I am selecting to perform a mission? They all have the same description, and I will not get the lines connecting spotter, command, and unit until after I have confirmed the mission. I think at that point I can cancel it, but it is not like canceling direct small arms/heavy weapons fire. Because everyone does not reset, but is now busy.
I think there are valid reasons to want to know who is going to service your fire mission. How many rounds do they still have? Are they likely to be at the forward edge of battle soon ... then, I want their rounds down range before I lose their impact on the fight.
So, how can I know which market reflects which unit?
Thanks.