c3k

Okay, this is a pretty friggin' basic question, but I hate to ASSUME anything: will the Mac version be FULLY compatible with the PC version? (Imagine NOT being able to play online/email/LAN unless both players have the same kind of system.) Thanks, Ken

Yeah, the only electrical item needed on a modern diesel is the low pressure fuel pump to get the fuel from the tank to the mechanically driven high pressure pump. Now, if they'd only put the tank on the roof of the vehicle, you could even do away with that... Ken

The key statement being "...random shots into a truck...". If the distance to the truck is great enough, sure, dispersion would bring about a semi-random distribution of hits. But, as the OP stated, at 6 meters there is NOTHING random about where the shots impact. How many gunners would spray an empty truck in the windshield? To destroy a vehicle any soldier beyong basic training will fire at the engine. Game breaking? No. In need of a tweak? Yes. Ken

...the dog that DIDN'T bark just didn't bark. Again...

Daylight battles only?

jcmil, Although this is far beyond my skill level, I appreciate the work you've done. Hopefully someone can run with the ball and create a good CMSF/nvidia workaround. phil standbridge: I am about to purchase a 5850 card (regardless of CMSF). However, I am wondering if you've tried the latest 10.8 drivers? It now being September, I'm sure the 10.9's are around the corner, as well. If so, what were your results? Thanks, Ken

finalcut, I had this problem awhile ago. If you continue to search your files, you'll notice that you have TWO copies of the GAME FILES folder. One of them is exactly where Schrullenhaft noted it, the other is in the default location created by the game. My problem arose when I could not FIND saved games to delete them. (Others are far more knowledgable than I about this, but it seems like the game install creates the folders where it is supposed to create them, but then Vista decides that it is uberpowerful and tries to help out and creates EXTRA folders in a location more useful to Vista. Then there are dueling dual folders. Confusion follows.) My workaround was simple. I backed up all my saved games, etc. Then I uninstalled CMSF. I reinstalled CMSF, but NOT to the default location. I created a special folder just for CMSF. This forced both CMSF's install routine AND Vista to create folders in only one location. I then copied all my saved data into the newly created CMSF folders. No issues ever since. Best of luck! Ken

Schrullenhaft, Excellent post describing the differences between the various flavors of processors that intel is marketing these days. (Written on an intel machine so that my AMD machine doesn't get jealous.) Now let's start talking about overclocking... Ken

+1 to slugg88 and Cid250. Go ahead and look at the specs for the cards slug88 listed and compare them to that 9500GT. The cost difference is negligible, but it would future-proof your machine for years. As well, RAM is cheap. I would price out 6Gb (3 x 2GB modules) as a minimum. However, to answer the original question, the specs you list will run CMx2 very well. We can only assume that CM:N would run in a similar manner. Good luck with the new rig. Ken

I think the mast issue should be tackled sooner, rather than later. Once the mast LOS issue is solved, many other units could be easily tacked into the CMx2 engine. A quick list of these units would include, obviously, any vehicle with masted weapons/optics, tethered aerostats, UAV's, scout helicopters hiding behind obstacles with only their mast showing, dirigibles, TV crew camera booms, enraged construction crews jumping on their cranes and forklifts to engage in battle, aircraft strafing at low altitude, submarines using their periscopes (don't forget snorkels), armored infantry using jet packs, half-naked winged valkyries swooping over the battlefield (I have some mods in mind for those), and then there's the entire family of null-grav vehicles/weapons to think about. In short, by ducking the mast issue, you are unfairly crippling the entire series. Ken

I'd love to hear the bitching/compliments about AI regarding flamethrowing units. The interplay of EXPECTING a target to be flamed, neutralizing the enemy in it AND turning it into an uninhabitable location - for both sides - will cause some interesting results. The morale hit of seeing/hearing comrades being roasted, then knowing the flamer is coming for you, would really be bothersome! The tenacity with which enemy units will target the flamethrower needs to be accounted for. Personally, I'd rather take a bullet, or ten, while exposing myself to hit the flamethrower, then sit there safe in my cover while the flamethrower advances. Lots of TacAI interplay there. Not just while it's being used, but in EXPECTATION of its imminent use. Ken

Funny: every time WeGo vs. RT is brought up, I hear that the reason WeGo'ers like it so much is because the WeGo'ers are inveterate "control freaks". Yet, as you just posted, it is the opposite. You are FORCED to accept the results of your tactics while you watch the replay phase. Too bad if you told a whole squad to advance into a kill sack. Ooops. In RT, as FMB posted, you have the option of CONTROLLING every single team and vehicle at every single instant of time, through the unfettered use of the Pause function. There a pro's and con's to both styles. Kudos to BF.C for working to include BOTH in the same game. As to the original poster's question, I see no benefit to slicing the WeGo turn down to 30 seconds. (Once that is done, the same argument could - and would - be made to have an option for 15 seconds. Ad infinitum.) WeGo and MOUT; a favorite challenge. Good luck! Ken

Tangentially related, there've been several threads regarding multi-core vs. higher clocks and they seem to always come down on the side of higher Mhz (exceptions for certain games written for multi-cores, but NOT for ALL games so coded). Higher clock=better gaming (usually, IMHO, YMMV, etc.) Ken

That all presupposes that CM:N actually exists. We've heard rumors... We've been told the beta testers love it... We've been told there's some really good screenies available... BUT WE HAVEN'T HAD A BONE IN, LIKE, FOREVER!!!!

Aye, so the user interface when choosing a battle CAN be improved? If those programmers worked 16 hour days, it'd get done that much faster! Back to work! Ken

This thread has lain dormant, like a limpet mine, waiting to burst forth at an opportune time. The time is now! This is when we MUST delay CM:N until the scenario interface is improved! BF.C's weak excuse, "we only have one programmer", is no longer valid! The thin tatters of that refrain cannot cloak them now that they've hired a SECOND programmer! Here's a for anyone who's really uptight... Seriously, though, has any improvement in the scenario interface been considered? I won't repost everything, just check some of the ideas that've been posted here...2 years ago! If only I could tell which battles I have not played yet... Thanks, Ken

Very nice! Good news to see that Syrians get trucks now. Of course, that zsu-23 will be fun...for the Syrians! Thanks for the bone. Ken

No, it is due to nvidia's implementation of OpenGL in drivers after the 186 series. If you revert your nvidia to 186.xx or earlier, your OpenGL will work the way it's meant to. If you use any newer driver (currently up around 258, depending on your card) you will get the flashing/strobe effect at night. Although ATI's drivers had their issues in the past, right now there's a reason ATI has outsold nvidia. Their current driver (10.8) reportedly works fine. (I'm using 10.5 with a motherboard embedded HD4290 - very basic - solution. Next month-ish I'll be stepping up to an HD5870.) I have not seen any issues with ATI's drivers on this board. Yes, there were OTHER issues, but that's not the point. The issues, grey screen due to over-aggessive underclocking by the driver with certain OS'es, has been resolved. Or so I understand it. Enough so that I'll bet $400 on it. Ken

Which driver version do you have?

Computer number 2 (which will exceed number 1's specs), will be the first of 6 homebuilts NOT using an Nvidia card. The 460 cards look good, but not without fixed drivers. I'm switching to ATi's 5800 series. Voting with my wallet. Goodbye nvidia.... Ken

I, too, have seen the first issue but with artillery in Pbem.

The learning curve can be steep, but this game is well worth it. As Alan8325 mentions, above, the lethality of modern ATW's is huge. Keep your vehicles about 300 meters back; use the infantry to clear that zone around them. Area target, by vehicles, into suspected ambush sites. Your casualties will eventually be reduced as you learn what to do.

My enjoyment of CMx1 Ops may be tied to the fact that I almost exclusively played them against HUMAN opponents. The failures of the AI were not something that tinge my memory of them. (Of course, it may be the AI being so poor was the REASON I only played versus others. ) Good things: - Front lines for future battles based on the end-state of previous battles - Starting forces based on end-state of previous battles (adjusted for resupply and the time between fighting) - Fighting over something which results in MEANINGFUL context (if I don't capture the bridge, what happens next?) Thanks, Ken

Interesting observation. ISTR that in GW1 there were stories about M1's firing THROUGH berms to destroy the Iraqi tanks dug in behind them: successfully. Would a tank, sighting an enemy behind a wall, fire at center of mass, or at the tiny portion exposed? In regards to the original issue in "British Mettle", perhaps a test or two is in order? Anyone want to open up the editor? Ken

Add my vote (for whatever that's worth) to the TCP/IP WEGO list. Yes, with replay would be better... Ken