Jump to content
Special Upgrade 4 Tech Tips

tecumseh

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    260

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Posts posted by tecumseh

    Uniform MOD Extravaganza! Big Pix Inside!

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by AndrewTF:

    Bizarre! At home I'm working on a hot-rodded 8600 with a G3 400 and 32MB Radeon PCI card. I have CMBB hi-res modded to the gills, and it looks great and runs fine. CMBB... well, enough said about that. I can always renumber the bmps to work with CMBO and then check them out there!

    It is a shame there is no option to run CMBB slow with no downsampling (my preference) or quick with some blurry textures. I even tried messing with the prefs file in a hex editor but no luck.

    Anyway, Skelly just got a 128MB titanium GF4 and complained the textures were all blurry too. So who knows? Tonight I might start a thread with some screenshots, coz this is confusing.

    0

    Uniform MOD Extravaganza! Big Pix Inside!

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by AndrewTF:

    Uh, I kinda misplaced those screenies. sort of an accident during a desktop cleaning frenzy, I'm afraid.

    OK, thanks anyway. I have CM running on a 733 G4 w/GF2MX and a 350 G4 w/rage pro, and i just compared screenshots from them both and there is a big difference in image quality. A lot more textures on the rage pro are blurred (buildings, fences etc). I guess that's to be expected, but I don't think it was the same in CMBO...the game was slower on the slower machine, but looked the same.

    Anyway, on my faster computer the sleeves, helmet, face and guns are hi-res but the torso is blurred. Doh!

    0

    Uniform MOD Extravaganza! Big Pix Inside!

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by AndrewTF:

    I'm positive that they're being downsampled. Juju was kind enough to take some screenshots of the using the beta version of this mod and there really is a difference. I think that any video card under 64 MB results in downsampling.

    That is a shame...a pity one of our best modders can't see his own work properly. And a pity I can't appreciate it fully either on my 32MB card :(smile.gif

    I am still interested to see what CMBB looks like on a good card...would you be able to post Juju's screenshots at 100% to compare and see what i'm missing?

    [ October 29, 2002, 02:53 AM: Message edited by: tecumseh ]

    0

    Uniform MOD Extravaganza! Big Pix Inside!

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by AndrewTF:

    Due to my crappy 32MB video card, you can't see all the fabulous detail here, so download them and be (slightly) amazed!

    Hey Andrew - are you sure other people with grunty cards can see more detail than you? On my computer your mods look the same as your screenshots, and I'd love to know if my infantry textures are being down-sampled at all.

    Could someone with a high spec card post a pic of the mods to compare?

    Excellent work again, BTW

    [ October 28, 2002, 07:48 PM: Message edited by: tecumseh ]

    0

    More waypoints = more delay. Realistic?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    How about every ASSAULT, ADVANCE, HUNT, AREA FIRE and DIRECT FIRE (ie not the TacAI targetting) order given in a single turn increases the delay for every unit performing that command that turn, or something smile.gif

    So co-ordinating an attack is a real mission, and requires time.

    Or for a simpler solution, how about ONLY those orders create the extra delay in CMBB, and stringing together MOVE, FAST, RUN, and REVERSE are "free"?

    [ October 27, 2002, 06:05 AM: Message edited by: tecumseh ]

    0

    More waypoints = more delay. Realistic?

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by Battlefront.com:

    Question - If you were us, how would you simulate the differences between simple orders ("Charge that House") and complex ones ("Walk 453m in a zigzagging path through dense woods, switch into a more cautious form of movement, take a windy road another 58m, crawl behind a wall you will find there for 16m, and then charge the House over 67m of open ground using zig zagging moves")?

    I believe that 90% of multi-waypoint orders are of the first type (can be summed up in a sentence or two), and 10% are of the second type (actually long-winded and complex orders). That's just my opinion, but it means I prefer the CMBO model.

    Perhaps keeping the CMBO system (ie. green troops get "flat-rate" bigger initial delay), but preventing waypoints from being movable (ala human wave) would have the desired effect? There would be fewer waypoints and no gamey waypoint abuse because of the lack of flexibility, and troops would get the delay everytime new waypoints were plotted, hence slowing the game...relative to troop quality too. I'm sure you guys tried this tho and rejected it for some valid reason.

    The REAL complex orders (the ones that should cause substantial delays) are the ones that involve to-the-second coordination of multiple units from multiple parts of the map. For example if 10 green squads all issue an ASSAULT command at the start of the same turn, the delay should be 2 minutes for each of them. If two tanks join the assault the delay should go up to 4 minutes. That sort of thing.

    Of course that kind of system is probably near impossible to implement (and may be so frustrating that the game is no longer fun), but it is the area where I think the extra delays should lie, not with individual unit waypoints.

    yada yada

    0

    Some things that need fixing in CMBB (not in 1.01)

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by Vanir Ausf B:

    Oh yeah, and for something I'm certain wont happen, I'd like the new system of increasing command delay for every waypoint plotted stripped out and returned to the way it was in CMBO. This is the one new feature in CMBB that I think actually detracts from both playability and realism.

    BFC's already reponded to this:

    More waypopints = more delay. Realstic?

    0

    Macintosh Video Card - which one should I get, and where to buy

    in Combat Mission - Tech Support

    Posted

    Originally posted by Michael emrys:

    Nope on the tracks. Vehicles actually look very good, even close up.

    On closer inspection, forget what i said about vehicles. I've just come from years with a CMBO packed to the gunnels with hi-res mods, and some of the textures in CMBB are fairly lo-res in comparision (eg the sherman above, or the land-lease scout car), so i jumped to conclusions. :rolleyes: I just need to wait for some hi res mods again. Guess i've been spoiled...
    0

    Macintosh Video Card - which one should I get, and where to buy

    in Combat Mission - Tech Support

    Posted

    Originally posted by Spacewrangler:

    Those of you who reported on the nVidia card - does it just look funny in CMBB or in both CMBO and CMBB?

    Just CMBB. I'm not sure if my CMBO skies are as good as they should be, but i've known no better so it's OK.

    However in CMBB my vehicle textures are crap - side hulls and tracks are lo res, plus textures (like soft ground) that have a lot of pink transparent areas are lo res too. This is on a 32 MB GF2MX. I think on a 16MB Rage Pro they are fine. I am going to confirm this at work today (after the 1 hour CMBB install!). If so, it has nothing to do with the card being overloaded...it's a driver issue. i'll let ya know.

    0

    Macintosh Video Card - which one should I get, and where to buy

    in Combat Mission - Tech Support

    Posted

    Originally posted by Michael emrys:

    I have a 733MHz G4 with the nVidia 2MX with 32MB and while it worked fine with BO it is obviously overstressed for BB. A lot of textures come up downsampled and while I do have transparent smoke, it doesn't look convincing—like some overlapping lacy cutouts.

    Whew, someone else has it too smile.gif:(

    Do your tank tracks look UGLY?? And your soft ground? It looks OK on my old Rage Pro at work, so I don't think the problem is the MX2 being stressed out...more likely the crap nvidia drivers, so I am nervous for you that the gf4 will not help :(

    0

    Anyone down under got it yet

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by Tianshu:

    I formally requested the shipping confirmation of MY individual order last Friday. But 5 days passed, they still could not provide it. This is ridiculously long for the customer service of an online sales company.

    Still no CMBB for me either. I was an early pre-orderer, one copy, central auckland,.... nothing.

    Though BFC can't do much to help at this stage, they did promptly confirm my order was shipped on time and admitted it was strange. So i have no complaints about their service at all. It's just bad luck.

    0

    Anyone down under got it yet

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    From my postie:

    "Unfortunately it is very difficult to trace an incoming item from an overseas address. If the parcel has arrived into New Zealand and there has been a problem with delivery, the item would get returned to USA. There is a possibility that it got into the Seamail parcel stream, and delivery for this service is 2-3 months."

    Oh gawd. The "seamail parcel stream" must be like the gulf stream, carrying my cmbb back and forth across the pacific.

    0

    Anyone down under got it yet

    in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)

    Posted

    Originally posted by Titan:

    i ordered four copies and they arrived on the 23rd.Maybe Lynfield, Auckland is a lucky place

    It is strange that I live across town from you, our packages are shipped from the US on the same day, and yet yours arrived almost a week ago and mine has not turned up. I would have thought they would have travelled together all the way.

    Never again will I mock lynfield! smile.gif

    0
×
×
  • Create New...