gunnergoz

Obviously, the BTS crew doesn't have target lock on this thread yet...

I guess those screensnaps are all the excuse I need not to buy the game now...no real German unit ever fielded all those particular vehicles at once! Obviously those BTS guys are total flimflam artists and wouldn't know their butts from a waffentrager. Good thing the propaganda mask is finally lifted and we can see the ugly truth beneath! :eek:

Flesh- I have a version of it called "would-be programmer's curiosity" which prompted me in another thread to ask the BTS guys about the programming implications of relative spotting. I'm really hoping they'll reply, because I'd like to understand the concepts behind the programming, it's major principles and structures (as opposed to code itself.)

I suspect the question is about how the AI prioritiezes threats and allocates resources. I don't think it handles multiple threats very well, but I'm not sure how many PC game AI's do with that challenge, either. After all, it's a bit more complex than chess. I plan to check this out myself in future games and am curious what other folks post about it.

Flesh, I just bet you looove peeking where nice company says you shouldn't; probably wear a pair of them Adidas PantyCam Shoes too, donch'a?

Because- It's your destiny, Luke Skywalker... (heavy breathing) Because- I can't NOT buy it... Because my Russian wife and her mom will go nuts watching me pulverize Fritzes for them... Mainly because I think that Charles, Steve, MadMatt, Moon and I were actually Separated AT Birth and so, well, I gotta have it, they'r my bro's, ya know...

Thanks for the reminder, MCH, I'll set my "Forum PC Policeman" hat aside for a while then...

I'm not a programmer, but I'm still curious as to the sticky issues of programming a relative spotting AI. I assume that the current engine is set up so each unit has a data flag for visible/not visible, correct? If so, is the challenge then to program a data base that will give a given A side unit a data flag for visible/not visible as to EACH B SIDE ENEMY UNIT? Without necessarily getting too technical (unless you'd like to ), can any BTS programming guru clarify the basic issues and challenges? And no, I don't seek proprietary information...

Hello John, Yeah, I caught that about the Maxims and mortars right away. I'm specifically referring to the T-34's not responding well to having both movement and arc commands at the same time. I had a platoon of 3 that were in command radius, but did not seem to want to proceed to "hunt" as ordered because they kept dealing with Fritzes in their covered arc. They just sat there and threw co-ax fire at them. I suspect that the AI said to itself "why hunt...I've found targets and I'm engaging them now." Perhaps the tanks would have done better with a movement command coupled with covered arc: I'll try that next and it should work in that the covered arc is an implicit order to engage when targets are aquired. These new commands will be fun to work out to maximum advantage and effect. I'm stoked

No prob. Just one of a crack team of thousands of volunteer experts. :cool: </font>

Ho hum, here we go again. I hate how these troll posts always manage to suck me in... My retort: At least balance yourself out by requesting the "Schnapps fur der SS Einsatztruppen Support Brigade" for our friendly Fritzs. Fair is fair, lets sterotype each side evenly, now, kiddies. What's the value in Pointedly National/Cultural/Ethnic jibes like this, anyway? I can see this being moved to the General Forum, and rightfully so. But before it does, I'd just like to say that folks may have the right to post such stuff, but, I always wonder: what is their motive? I read such posts and must recall what another considered poster here wrote about the "signal to noise ratio" in the Forum; and so I must remind myself to chill and just: tune out the static, tune out the static, tune out the static...

I'm not so sure that early war Russian tank units will be able to exploit the utility of two commands at once, say Move to Contact coupled with Fire Arc. My limited experience to date tells me that they are almost overwhelmed with a single order to carry out at a time. Perhaps I'll learn more with the full game.

Ditto for me, I bought CMBO based upon reviews, not upon the demo (which did not impress me, I didn't give it a fair chance to...) Also, see if you can find a friend with the full version and try it at their house, and see for yourself. Good luck

Sometimes I wish life had a Demo Mode, things would be a lot easier...

Only seen in the Summer scenarious, but from what I hear, the bell tingle is done quite nicely...

Yeah, but until then, what yukks we can milk out of this pissing contest, eh?

Moon, that's my point, though I may not have said it exacly well. Imagine the Germans popping the technology at say, the Bulge...I could conceive of them laying waste to US armor in that time frame, with complete impunity. Perhaps they could have reached Antwerp, who knows. Sure, I know that you needed the big IR lights to illuminate the enemy. The Germans had plans to put them on half-tracks just for that purpose. Under the right circumstances, the IR tech might have been just the edge that the Germans needed in such a close-fought battle. Once you get the enemy running and feeling outclassed, you have the initiative. I won't go on about it, other than to say that it could have had a significant impact at some point, if introduced with intent to get maximum effect. The point is, it would have made night-time operations a viable means of offensive action and the Germans could have used that to their advantage in such a scenario, putting pressure on the US both day and night. A force multiplier, as it were, for as long as they could depend upon the edge. BTW and as you doubtless know, active IR was a widely used component of postwar Russian and western armor and it is still found on the former, especially for driving lights, to this day. It has it's (limited) place.

What, IronChef4, you plan to walk your Yak over a cliff?...damn things don't fly worth a crap, just ask any Peruvian.

Regarding the 50mm mortars...'tis well we enjoy them while we can, because they pretty much disappear from the battlefield once the initial allotments were used up in combat. The Russians began to field more 82mm and then 120mm mortars at higher levels, but the little 50mm jobs were left out of future TOE's. Too little bang for the buck, and a pressing need for trained mortarmen to be used laying down serious quantities of HE. I loved using the 50mm's in the Yelnia demo, but doubt that I used them realistically...I gave them out to the company commanders along with the maxim guns and their grouped fires suppressed Germans most effectively. Unfortunately, for the war's first battles, most low- and mid- level Red Army unit leaders were in realilty ill prepared to handle much more than 2 or three manouver elements in a fight, let alone coordinate support arms.

Very lucky for all of us (especially the Russkis) that the Germans only got that technology out in the closing days of the war. Imagine the havoc that a Wermacht that "owned the night" could have wreaked upon its opponents. This technology was literally a war-winner but came on too late to be of much impact. Granted, there are severe limitations to the use of active IR in a battle where your opponent is equipped with passive IR (at least). One could envision a whole period of several months that the Germans could have ruled the battlefields they fought on, until counter-technology could have been fielded.

It looks like a lot of the "nice to haves" will have to wait for the engine rewrite. I'm not unhappy, just eager to see what can be shoehorned into the next generation CM. BTW I don't see mine-clearing tanks as out of the scope of CM sized scenarios, but that's just me. They work a lot faster than grunt engineers/sappers at clearing a mine-free lane.

Michael, if "CM" means "Cosumer Marketing" then I agree with you. The product must be accessible to the blind, deaf and mentally challenged. The demo fails totally. For instance, I tried to simulate blindness by unplugging my monitor. To my horror, I found the game was unplayable! This is totally unacceptable. There is no Braille mod yet and I have not heard rumors of any forthcoming. This is obviously one more example of BTS blundering in an area in which they are total dimwits. So, I must concur and request to be added to your consumer action lawsuit.

OK, I'll take on a few myself... Now they tend to use camo fatigues that look a bit like our woodland pattern. I think you may be referring to a khaki garrison cap, also referred to fondly (!) in US service as a "pisscutter". Then again, I may be reading you wrong here... I suspect you'll have to go back to CMBO to hear much English spoken on the battlefield. Though perhaps someone will make an English voice mod someday, who knows... Yes, they were called "Guards" and were comprised of units that had performed especially well in prior combats. Expect a lot of veterans and a few green troops with these guys, especially as the war goes on. Excuse me as I wipe my eyes from laughing...It's not you, it's the idea that BTS went and did this nice graphic goodie for a change (as opposed to groggy detail improvements) and here someone already finds it to be kitsch...oh well, can't please 'em all! BTW, I like it myself, but then that's just me. Think of it this way...you're a grunt lost on the battlefield, and suddenly your squad leader takes some guys and goes away, leaving you alone with some sargeant who may or may not have your respect. Small unit integrity is one of the key components of morale on the battlefield. When troops get cut off from their leaders, they tend to get nervous. Amplify that tenfold for soldiers who are new to the battlefield. Well, you could hide in soft ground, all right, but you might not be able to move around much after you entered it. For example, here in San Diego a few years ago, the City lost a 30 ton bulldozer in the community landfill when it just...sank out of sight. They never did find it again. Thanks for letting me try to address some of your questions and I hope this helped a bit.

Cardinal Fang- Regarding ratios of ammo types carried, think here of what the strategic planners were anticipating when they devised basic load data for the forces in the field. This ration tells me that whoever devised it, anticipated the tank would mostly be used in an anti-infantry or anti-soft target mode, with AT fire secondary and close-in fighting against infantry as a third possibility. So I figure, they were thinking that the tanks would first be putting down suppresive fires on AT postions, Support guns and MG nests; next the tanks would engage any enemy armor that showed itself in response to the attack (don't forget armor was usually held in reserve in defensive situartions); finally, once the main line of resistance had been breached, the tanks would be dealing with remaining infantry and gun crews, reeeeely close! That's my assumption, anyway.