Peter Cairns

One way to achieve the stop on sight effect would be to introsuce "Site Points" (SP) like "way Points (WP). When plotting a line of way points you could "control Click" or something on the last one to change it from a WP to a SP. When you left the WP before the SP you would move as if you were heading towards a WP but instead of going all the way to it you would spot when it came in to site. This way by placing a SP at the edge of the wood you would stop before you reached it, or by putting a SP on a building on the other side of a hill, your unit would stop just this side of the ridge, without you having to estimate it. In terms of coding I think this would be an easier option to incorporate, though thats one for Steve. As to making all you can't see dark, I think that would be a non starter, because it would mean doing a LOS calculation for very point in a 360deg arc, and that would use ahuge amount of calculation power. Relative spotting for every unit, for every targey is hard enough, LOS for everywhere might slow the game to a standstill. Peter.

If it is put in even as an option, then it should be able to give random, no warning false results. That way every now and then when you move your Stryker to a concealed position it will take a side shot from a T-55 that wasn't supposed to be able to see it. Which if nothing else will teach you not to become dependant on technology at the expense of the basics. Peter.

Meanwhile back on Taiwan... BBC News 8th Feb 2006. Peter.

Neutrino 123, According to the CIA world book Taiwan was Chinese before 1895 when Japan occupied it, but China got it back in 1945. Wikipedia states that it's been Chinese more or less constantly since before the 15th century, so i don't know how you can't claim it as traditionallly part of China. Wikipedia taiwan

Are you people blind.... What you see from the various camera heights and angles, is pretty much what you would see if you were there, probably more, if you can't do it with that what do you want. The answer seems to be some sort of magical capability that real life commanders just wouldn't have. Sure you can get all kinds of digital aids, but people don't rely on them. they make decisions on a mix of information and judgement, not slide rule calculations. The game makes you do the same. Older, particularly map based, games have things like LOS checks (or rules in board games), because you can't see in 3D to make a judgement. Hell why not go all the way and just make the game AI v AI and have everything done for you. Planning an attack is a difficult and inprecise activity, get used to it, if you want to play a realistic simulation. Peter.

Bigduke6, i tend to agree credibility would be a big factor in the uS decision making process. In Kosovo Tony Blair made one of the reasons for taking action, "Nato's Credibility", in that it didn't act people would question it's resolve. This lead to the bizarre situation of an alliance established to protect it's members territory by collective response from external attack, attacking an external territory to prove it was defensive..... However going back to 1 to 5, the issue isn't whether you think there will be a conflict ( which I agree is unlikely), but what you think it would be like, and what would make the best game. I'd like to here Steves view, but I can understand that he might think it would be seen as some kind of committment of BF's part. Peter.

As Michael says it's about realism. The precision this kind of tool gives you isn't realistic, even if it simulates digital maps or GPS. As I've pointed out before,elsewhere, my house backs on to a field, which looks like a gentle slope from distance, and has few variations from that on a 1:25,000 map with a 10m VI for contours. But when you walk across it you find that it is full of dips and bumps that can easily hide a squad if not a prone platoon. Peter.

And just how would a commander do this in real life, have an out of body experience and have his soul float over to have a look around. Relative spotting will give you a good idea of what you can see, and going to the units head height and doing a 360 lets you see what they see, as they would. It's no one elses fault if you can't translate that in to a plan. You might want to stick to World of Warcraft if you like being a ghost.... Peter.

I ment TRACE, I really must learn to preview my posts. Peter.

I just want to be able to accurately tarce maps, is that too much to ask for. Peter.

Kurtz, Max Thanks for the posts, I am a BBABB man too., Oh and I've edited the post. Peter.

URC, But hitting a moving target depends on the vector, as an M1A2 driving straight towards you, in relative terms isn't moving at all as you don't need to track it. From the combat perspective, that means slowing them down, and forcing them in to areas that make them esy to track and target, and avoiding an open manouvering battle. Like people having been saying from the start, from the Syrian perspective, eleiminate your enemies strengths and exploit his weaknesses, or put simply, don't try to take the M1A2's on in a straight fight in the open. Peter.

Bruce, I am not sure about the grey scale import part for CM:SF, as it means some form of "software solution" that reads and scans the image and interprets it. As I was most interested in recreating real terrain, for historical or real life scenarios ( I must have made about half a dozen versions of the 1km2 around my own house), then having the start point as an imported map, rather than just a green grid was all I wanted. As you moved along the roads or contours, box by box the underlieing map would be replaced by game feature, till you had nothing left. Doing the process a sceond time so that you could use a photoe to get the vegitation density and colours right, might not be possible, but on google maps you can create a Hybrid of the two so it might be easier to combine them before you start. Peter.

Actually from the point of view of movies, It might just be possible or even easier to achieve the same thing another way. If you added a "record" button to the play back they you could save "scenes" as you go, and that way, make your "movie" afterwards. If you lacked "footage", you could always sart a "QB" afterwards and use it to fake scenes for Close ups etc, Like the Close shot of the FACV, saying "here come the A-1O'S". If we have multiplayer with relative spotting then you could exchange sitched together moviesw from the other guys perspective, which would let you compile the final "movie" from a series of perspectives. I know there are people using things like the Doom engine to make movies, so this would be a bit like that, allowing people to do something different with the game, like making there own versions of "BHD". As I use iMovie, if it could be saved as "Clips" with a single sound tarck, I could just put additional " Dialogue" on a second track to create a narrative that people could follow. I see this as being a whole different genire if you like. Peter.

Kurtz, Well That sort of makes sense, and not being american, I just picked it up wrong, but I'd agree that if anyone was showing "blind obedience" to dogma, it isn't the liberals on this forum, who seem to be more pragmatic and able to see things from the other perspective. Given that I am a great believer, in "understanding your enemy", and the dangerous of misinterpretaing your enemies motives, I don't see that as a liberal weakness, more a strength. Thanks for the link. Peter.

Meanwhile Back in Taiwan, as staarting this thread sort of makes me responsible for bringing in back on track. From the point of view of building a background story. from 1 to 5 give me your votes omn a or b , so if it's all "a's", just post A,A,A,A,A. Here goes. 1) Either China manufactures the "civil crisis" (a), or it reacts to a genuine political turmoil (. 2) The Army is split over unification (a), or It tries to put down a Civilian unification movement (. 3) China crosses in force largely unopposed along the West Coast (a), or it has to Fight ashore against the Taiwanese army in and around Taipei. 4) Indonesia, Korea and Japan, come to Taiwans aid as allies (a), or stay on the sidelines and call it an internal Chinese matter (. 5) The US responds quickly before the Chinese are intrenched with access to all it's bases (a), or the US response is slow and it is restricted to mostly carrier airpower to dislodge a prepared Chinese force (. You can I suppose answer this two ways ( oh and of course you can put in reasons for your decisions not just 5 letters), one is which you think is the most likely or realistic, and the other is (what I would say is the most important one) which would make the best game. Peter. [ February 07, 2006, 01:37 PM: Message edited by: Peter Cairns ]

Not being an american, I get a bit of a laugh from this "cool-aid" drinkers bit, as it seems to suggest that liberal americans can't drink like real men... As a Scot I find this funny because from meeting Americans who come over here you all drink like school girls. I am not a particularly hard drinker, but by US standards i'd be seen as close to Alcoholic, and as to the Fins, and Ukrainians, hell I think the further East you go from California, the worse it gets. Peter.

Bryce uses a 3D greyscale for terrain, that included the ability to import pictures and turn them in to terrain, It looks odd to fight on a hill made out of your own face. Peter.

URC, First round hit at over 500m makes it no better than late WW2, when stationary against a moving target, which I find a bit extreme. The UK Cheiftan had better than that in the sixties. Peter.

You can't really control these things, but believe me people, when I started a thread about war over Taiwan, I really didn't think we'd end up here..... Peter.

What sunny side? Peter...

J Ruddy, For me the issue is more that "terrorism" is a tactic not an enemy, so you can't exactly declare war on it. If people oppose an occupation by ambush and sabotage, in a guerilla war, like the French resistance in WW2, does that make them terrorists, it did for the Germans. The war on terror is like trying to stop small pox by attacking high fevers, it's not going to get any better if what you focus on is the symptom not the cause. Peter.

I think slow escalation is unlikely as it would focus both sides on the consequences and the costs would make them both pull back. The stumble in to war is more likely. If China decided to support the pro unity faction with forces, such as rushing what it could to Taipei to back pro unification protestors that had siezed parliament, opposed by the military, then it could kick off before the US was ready. Peter.

If we do get full replay I would like to be able to save it to something like I maovie, so that people could make there own "war Movies", where they could add dialogue etc, and then put them out as podcasts.... Peter.

MikeyD, The T-72's first round hit probability is pretty good, it's just not as good as the M1A2. If it was a gunfight on Main Street at High Noon, the better range , faster first shot and first round hit would make the M1A2 a clear winner, but real life isn't like that. As with CNBO,BB and AK, the most likely to win is the one who spots first, because he will probably fire first and more often than not hit first. Use M1A2's badly, like moving then in file in to a cross fire of covering T-72's at 1,500m and the generally inferior T-72's will make mince meat of them. By and large the US out fought and out Thought the Iraqi's. and if players in CM:SF really on their hardware not their brains they are in for a shock. Peter.