c3k

Woot! Hmmm "sooner rather than later"? Obviously a BONE!!! Javelins will be UNacquired with the CMUK module/patch! Pass it on! Okay, seriously; glad to hear it's on a list to get done. (It's nice that this game is at the point that only the relatively niggling bits are left to touch up!) Regards, Ken

Other Means, , oh, yes, as a someone who actually has an Aeronautical Engineering degree, that drag equation is something that has dear memories to me. It seems simple at first, but then the diabolical professors always had an evil twist waiting... Ballistics are fun: the flip side of looking at drag on a bullet is its Ballistics Coefficient. Or, how close does the bullet behave as if there were no drag? The BC of the .50 BMG is quite good. Boat tail, heavy, nice ogive, etc. all minimize the Cd in the above equation. Or, in shooter's parlance, increase BC. I included the muzzle velocities, not to show Kinetic Energy at impact (since the velocities will change differently for each round), but rather to show how similar the muzzle velocities of the two weapon systems are, and to highlight that, indeed, the mass difference of the rounds is quite large. So, using Force of Drag and F=ma, you get the deceleration, a, as a=F/m. Hence, the mass of the round has an effect on the rate of deceleration, therefore it carries more velocity longer for a heavier round. The bigger bullet hits harder, longer. Thanks, Ken

Er, how do I say this? I know, I'll use a formula.... Kinetic Energy = 1/2 * Mass * Velocity^2 So while Mass does have a large place in determining Kinetic Energy, the Velocity is really where the money is, what with squaring it and all... Now, that says NOTHING about terminal effects on a target. Obviously a .50 will do more damage than a 5.56. (5.56 M855 or SS109 weighs 62 grains and has a muzzle velocity of approximately 3,000 ft/sec. The .50 cal. has a wide variety of ammo. Most of it has a mass of 620-750 grains, 10 times that of the 5.56. Additionally, the .50 muzzle velocity is right there near 3,000 ft/sec. ) I am most definitely NOT trying to make a statement about which has more "impact" on a target; Kinetic Energy, Momentum, or other characteristics. This is just a happy math/physics reminder. Now, get back to work! Thanks, Ken

I was of the opinion (with NO empirical reasoning) that a breech loading 120mm direct-fire mortar would've been better than the 105mm on the MGS. Common round, MUCH less recoil energy, MUCH more HE capacity on the target. Doesn't someone have an autoloading 120mm? Ken

Ditto. Fun... (Er, thought provoking in a disturbing way, as well...) Thanks for the link Ken

Secondbrooks, Thanks for the post; I actually followed it, somewhat, until this part: Er, "really never didn't"? I may need to submit that for translation up at the local college's English Faculty meeting. Ken

Hmmm, wouldn't it be cool to be able to scroll that list? AND, wouldn't it be even MORE cool if you could hover your cursor over one of the items and right click it to get some info? Like, in the pictures above, "Commander's Video"; right click and it would open a small window with information like: "The T-90 incorporates a 9" LCD screen at the commander's position which displays the gunner's IR image. The commander can use this screen, and a small joystick, to override the gunner's control of the main gun. If loaded, the commander can then fire on the target on his screen." (Hey, I just made all that up! I have NO clue what his video does.) Maybe add a game function; "In game, this screen increases the ability of a Veteran or higher tank crew to spot enemy infantry and vehicles out to 750 meters." Just an idea or two... Ken

Most likely, or most hopefully? Any word? Thanks, Ken

Exactly. CAS is not run by the seat of their pants. There are procedures. One of those procedures is for the CAS aircraft to tell the ground controller what ordnance they are carrying as well as how long they can stay on station. I'm glad to hear that BF.C is going to allow that information to be seen by the player. Thanks, Ken

I recall a vivid description of the first use of chemical munitions in WWI. I have forgotten the title of the book. In the description, the Germans used Chlorine gas delivered in cannisters. The Germans opened the cannisters and allowed the prevailing winds to drift the cloud towards the defending Canadians. The cloud was described as 20' tall, with a blue tint. (The rest of the story; the Germans initially broke through the Canadians' trenches. However, their success was so far beyond their expectations that they did not have enough reserves positioned. The counter-attacking Canadians retook their trenches. They found their compatriots dead. Some had shoved handfuls of mud down their throats to ease their pain. All the exposed metal surfaces were discolored. Very nasty.) I am not sure where this particular attack falls in the spectrum of gas concentrations. It may be a high-end outlier. It may not be. Regardless, the survivors reported the color of the gas cloud. Regards, Ken

Oh, my. Hmmm, I think you need to do a forum search under "c3k" and "User Interface". There, you'll find several threads devoted to issues such as these. None of them have the information you seek. We (the royal "we") can only hope that this information will become available to the player in future iterations of the game. Good luck, Ken

Hmmm, colorless? Mustard gas? Chlorine?

Absolutely, re: chemical warfare. Volumetric smoke could be, er, improved in CMx2. A little more "volumee". I'd like to see gaseous behavior which portrays the physical characteristics of real gasses. Tight, dense, columnar WP. Initially dense, black, petrochemical fueled smoke which disperses as it rises, but stops rising as it cools. Fog which creeps along the low ground. Chlorine, phosgene, and mustard gasses which have the appropriate color. (The otherworldly green of a slowly drifting bank of gas would be a bowel loosening experience.) The ability to have gas pockets in low ground, such as shellholes and trenches, etc. I foresee a new game: Combat Mission: Gas Generator. Regards, Ken

Nah, you guys are all wrong. It wasn't June 6th which was an important date for the WWII title, it's going to be June 22nd! Yeah, you know what that means.... Those guys at BF.C have pulled a quick one. They made us think it'd be Shermans in the bocage when it will really be Tigers on the steppes. Woot. Ken

I agree with Webwing. It's a strong testament to the faith I have in the CMx2 engine that I think it could simulate a WWI action and make it interesting. I've never been much of a fan of WWI games, but using CMx2 could make for some tough tactical situations. Imagine a night-time trench raid to get prisoners with flares, pockets of gas in the bottom of shellholes, hand to hand fighting, etc. Ken

Hmmm, This probably doesn't help, but I've got Vista64 Ultimate and I run UAC. My CMSF runs fine. Although, I did change its install directory. I initially installed it off the physical disk I received from BF.C, using all defaults. Part of the wonders of Vista is that it split the install into two different folders. The game worked fine. I used it this way for the better part of a year. Later, I noticed my savegames were not where I expected. A bit of file searching turned them up in the Vista-assigned mystery folder. (Post if you want more info.) Not being satisfied with that state of affairs, I deleted CMSF and reinstalled. This time, I did not use the default options, but instead, I explicitly created a new folder for the game on the root directory. Again, I left my anti-virus (Kaspersky) and the UAC running. All was, and continues to be, running as expected. So, it is possible to install and play CMSF on a Vista64 machine with UAC and antivirus enabled. Regards, Ken

Steve, Hey, man, you've got a lot on your plate. Look, to help out, send me that list of fixes and I'll go ahead and break out all the new v1.2 fixes and then mail it back to you. Or, I could just post it here. Let me know if you want my help... Ken

Gordon...Thank you for all you've done for us through the years. Your mods have been a great benefit to us all. Thanks, Ken

Gents, Here's an old post: (copied from this thread: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=74868 ) In a scenario, playing WEGO vs the AI, I started the next turn when I noticed that 2 of my units had taken casualties. They were in what I thought was a quiet sector. (Well done scenario designer and BF.C!) Unfortunately I have no friggin' clue what happened! I hadn't noticed them getting hit before I hit the (tiny) "DONE" button. Arrrggghhhh! Was it an RPG? Maybe small arms? A mortar shell? Or did a tank roll over them? I have no friggin clue, despite 4 vehicles, and 9 dismounted survivors being RIGHT THERE. "Sergeant! What the hell just happened here?" "Sir, I'm not sure. We had assumed a tactical position here, oriented on the objective, when I noticed Jenkins there get a red circle and over that way Smitty turned a bit yellow." Now, I'm all for ambushes, etc. But, as a player, I'd like to know when my units take hits. I'm not looking for the cause, but the timing of it. That way I can use the replay feature as needed. ******************* There's more at: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=84655&highlight=what+just+happened The gist of the idea is that the unit icon should reflect a change in the unit's status. If a Good Order blue squad takes incoming fire and becomes suppressed (the suppression meter increases in value), the player should know about it. (The player takes the role of squad leader, platoon leader, company commander, battalion commander throughout the game. You move the squad - you are the squad leader.) So, the squad icon should change to bring the player's attention to it. Say the blue circle gains a flashing yellow ring. If the squad takes a casualty, the blue circle (perhaps with a flashing yellow ring) then flashes yellow. The color of the flash would change to red or brown depending on how many or how severe the casualties are. If a squad is getting fired upon enough to get it to open fire on the enemy, how about adding a bullet icon under or over the squad icon? These ideas are meant to let the game flow more easily in multi-company engagements. If there's just a platoon in action it is pretty easy to keep track of everything. But, once you have multiple companies of mechanized troops with support elements, the book-keeping gets onerous. The two threads linked above have more detailed explanations of these ideas. Thoughts? Regards, Ken

I'm another player who would like to offer thanks for the incredible resource that CMMODs represented. Thank you. Ken

Adding my experience here. I, too, have had the "error 14" crash. It is a rare occurrance, but once it happens, it will continue to happen until I reboot my machine. I am running Vista64, Ultimate edition. 8800GTX card with 182.06 drivers. (I am running RivaTuner v2.22 for fan control: the latest, v2.24, requires an INF file tweak to allow it to coexist with the lates nvidia 185.85 driver, hence no updated drivers for me.) My video card is at stock settings, for whatever that's worth. It seems like a lot of us with this issue are running a version of Vista 64 whilst operating a video card based on the 88 series; true? Again, this issue is rare for me, and it is reliably cured by a reboot. Thanks, Ken

Good God! What about early war armored trains? How about Russian Front partisans ambushing trains? White/Red Russian Civil War battles? And how, in the name of all that's holy in modding, could we have "Von Ryan's Express" without trains??? Obviously BF.C will always be relegated to being regarded as a minor player in the war simulations software world until, and unless, trains are adequately modelled. (Equally obvious would be the need for correct modelling of rail gauge, engine, rolling stock, tunnelling methodology, track metallurgy, etc., etc.) Choo, choo Ken

Ahh, please disregard the above. I just did search using "Javelin" and my username as poster and found the thread. It is here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=86316&highlight=javelin The last post is by Steve, commenting on its status. Please continue... Thanks, Ken

Steve, As alluded to in this thread, as well as in other threads, there is a "undocumented feature" with Javelins impacting approximately 47 meters in front of the firing unit. This occurs with a frequency which does not correlate with a term such as "rarely". I do not remember the status of this issue. (There were several savegames posted and made available to the Betas.) Has this been addressed? Thanks, Ken

Wow. Thanks for the work moving CMMODs over. I mean, really, "Thank you"! Regards, Ken