SlowMotion

A PBEM turn would require sending only two files instead of current three. After the initial setup phase you would see a movie each time you receive a file!

AFAIK CMBO uses DirectX, so those OpenGL settings don't change anything.

AFAIK CMBO uses DirectX, so those OpenGL settings don't change anything.

If you're using a Geforce or other Nvidia display adapter and Windows2000 or XP, this second problem may be caused by drivers. 27.xx drivers should fix the problem.

Might be too late for CMBB, but this would be *very* useful. It would be cool if these events could last longer than just one turn, so that for example if you've told some infantry to wait for arty smoke before advancing, they would remember this order even if those smoke shells are 1 minute late.

What about this little beast that appeared in one of my PBEMs? a double decker SP gun? http://www.geocities.com/slm201slm/NewWeapon.jpg

Sometimes and scenarios only. Because you can finish a scenario so much faster...

About all this more stuff: can you imagine the extra thrill if things like exit zones and target flags could be decided and told to the player in the middle of the game, not in the beginning? The initial task could be to move your men to some area. Once arriving there (or after some number of turns) you would receive new orders and were allowed to see new flags/what_ever related to those orders.

If the number of reinforcements could be increased, what do you think about these reinforcement tweaks I suggested in this old thread? Especially the idea that the arrival time of a reinforcement could depend on the arrival turn of some earlier reinforcement. http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=018335

SlapDragon: "But you are unlikely to get a -1 applied to all Germans because they ate Bratwurst in the field and a +1 to all Russians because they were dressed in uncarded wool underwear." If the level of winter clothing had to do with how well troops could keep up their fighting condition in cold (not sure what kind of attributes BTS will be using), wouldn't the solution here be some kind optional rarity system, instead of using some hard coded number for all soldiers of same nationality? Using this in a QB you might get some units with good gear and mostly pretty bad. The opposite side might get mostly good gear. Maybe overkill, but probably closer to reality than assuming that all men even in the same battle had same quality clothing.

About that new picture at modeling contest page: it seems that default buildings will look a bit different than in CMBO

I don't know whether it's this same Swamp, but there seems to be an interesting looking new scenario called Rocky Fields by Swamp at Scenario Depot...

If those were included, then there really should be trains as well... It could be cool to have special vehicles that could only move along railroad tracks. I don't know how difficult adding that would be, but surely they would be more similar to existing things like trucks than horses. You could have scenarios where partisans would have to ambush a train. All the enemy troops would be first in the train and then jump out once the train has stopped.

certain or non-certain - why not a propability between 0 and 100 like in many other scenario editors unit arrival issues?

New info again! BTS: as you have pretty much revealed what kind of ground units will be available, what about these plane types? And will the plane shadows look different depending on the plane type?

Yet another idea for CM2: Would it be possible to make a list of units that are available when purchasing units? This restriction list could be saved to a file and later used for making restricted games that are not possible at the moment. That way you could enforce popular rules like Short-75 or Panther-76 - also when computer buys. This could be used for creating battles between rare units that are not normally bought. Many people have their favourite units that are bought again and again, but what would you buy if all your top-3 tanks are excluded?

Biltong: See each battle. the counter is after the downloadable filename.

That would be nice...

What do you think about using this idea in scenarios so that some of the forces were predefined and players could buy the rest? Then in some scenario one side might have 2000 points predefined, 1000 bought. THe other side might have 1000 predefined and could buy stuff worth 2000 points.

Finally! *All* Win2000 problems seem to be gone. Y-E-S!!!

Can you put trenches ontop of any terrain? Would it be possible to have a pavement trench connecting two houses in a city fight? Or a swamp trench? Does terrain have any effect on how far the trench can be spotted? Like if the trench was in a wheat field would that make it almost unspottable unless you're standing right next to it? What about the price of these 10 meter trench blocks?

First, I agree that CMBO is a great piece of software. THe best game I've ever played. That being said, I see it as the first game in a continuosly improving series. If CMBO is excellent and CMBB should be even better, CM2 better still - are we running out of words? If things go like BTS has planned the series should go a bit like the development we see in HW business. Display adapters or CPUs have improved sooo much in, say three years. Hopefully what what BTS is producing will look something like that. Skipping the first two myths, here's my view on the third: After playing PBEM games mostly for a long time, I've recently played some games against the AI as well. In those cases I noticed that the AI did very well as the attacker in some games, whereas in some it was easy to destroy it totally. If some of its weaknesses can be fixed, its performance would get much better - like the habit of pushing units to a place where there are lots of destroyed tanks etc already. IMO some of the real weaknesses are because human players get to read the briefing and thus know what they are supposed to do. Expressing those same things to the AI using flags only can be very difficult. It's like having a very limited vocabulary that scenario designers can use when communicating the scenario to the AI. By adding stuff to this scenario design department, much better scenarios could be made. Also to be played against human players.

You mean there would be a new command 'Play dead' and to your enemy such unit would look dead, at least from a distance? Unit status might include some number of possibly dead units - in addition to current ok and casualty counts? I think if shooting the unit would be the only way of turning possible casualties to normal casualties, units should be able to get more ammo in the middle of the battle.

Mike8g: I've also seen that fire - see my pic from: http://www.geocities.com/slm201slm/cmbo_pics.html