Erwin

There is a program to convert CM1 maps from one version to another eg: CMBB to CMAK. But, it will all depend on how different CMSF will be from CMSF2.

Congrats. And after Streety's repeated scary admonishings that "it's all at my own risk" etc. I decided to live with the 3:4 ratio thank you...

I have repeatedly experienced that CM2 buttoned tanks spot infantry easily in the dark with smoke drifting around. There is something that clearly needs fixing. Not sure why it's controversial.

Looking forward to this. The only downside is that we may have had our fill of Ardennes before BF gets to do their Ardennes module.

Interesting. I tend to blow holes where there is a gap thinking it would result in a better gap for vehicles. However, as I said b4, this worked if the wall/hedge is perpendicular to a map edge, but not at all well when it is at an angle.

"...the building bug where tanks can't go down roads with diagonal building edges on either side." They also have a problem going down a diagonal road with any kind of obstruction on each side (hedges in my case). They do it, but with massive time-wasting stops and starts. And yes, with a diagonal I realized it's too easy to make the hole with a little bit of hedge in between. Must blow holes on in perfectly perpendicular hedges if at all possible.

I have really enjoyed this campaign. Am up to battle 7 right now. But, this AAR makes me want to replay from the start. I'd forgotten how much fun it is.

These look really good. Any ETA on release?

Yes, "sometimes" and sometimes on can use only one charge (which I love cos there are rarely enough). My questions is whether there is a difference in the hole that is made if the hedge/wall whatever is at right angles to a map edge as opposed to being at 45 degrees. My experience above is that it is MUCH easier to drive thru a one charge hole in a hedge that is perpendicular, and almost impossible to drive through a hedge that is at an angle.

I have noticed that my guns will often fire at enemy units I can't and are not even identified. So, my AI is doing work for me. Conversely, when I do see the mysterious enemy he's been firing at, it's very common that I can't get LOS or TARGET to that unit. The LOS issues are one of the most serious negative issues that mitigates against fun gameplay.

+1 We really have to keep asking BF to include this sort of data once again.

LLF: You have done some of the most amazing CM2 projects that must have taken unknown hours/weeks/months... Actually it's art. But, you have been ahead of your (computer power) time. We have to wait for the computers to catch up. I hope this can be imported into CMSF2. However, with all the new CMSF2 features and terrain I am sure it will have, I have my doubts that it will be an easy or even possible thing to do.

So you saying that for certain operations like invasions, casualty rates could be very high. But, what about later day to day combat? I don't know where I got my 10% figure from but I always understood that was an approx. assessment regarding whether a unit was considered unfit for future combat. In most CM2 game scenarios my internal victory assessment is that I do not deserve a major or decisive battle if I lose 15%-20% or more... maybe tactical at best - regardless of objectives. Otherwise one gets into the mindset of fighting to the last man just to get the final objective. This of course is why campaigns are far more satisfying as one has to think ahead to the next battles as well as take into account logistics, ammo resupply and reinforcement levels (if any). I agree that for most games, designers should enact more penalties for friendly casualties to avoid the "fight to the last man" phenomenon. The other intriguing idea mentioned is to play almost exclusively with Green troops.

We're so used to movie war scenes that RL sounds don't sounds "realistic" or at least not exciting enuff. I read that most armor kills did not result in explosions or fire. just a dead tank with a hole in it so it was hard to tell if it was in fact dead. But, we love our fire and explosion FX.

Those are BOSE sound cancelling headsets aren't they? Need to protect one's hearing.

There seems to be a difference in effect when you blow a hedge that is perpendicular to a map edge vs a hedge at an angle. I find it only takes one charge to make a hole large enough in a perpendicular hedge for all sizes of vehicles to transit (so long as they are carefully lined up to transit at 90 degrees to the gap). However, I just spent around 10 WEGO turns failing to get vehicles to transit a blown gap in a hedge that is at an angle to the map edge, even when the vehicles are lined up perfectly. Actually, after many tries I was able to get a halftrack and PzII through but have no idea how or why... since I cannot get a small kulbelwagon through, let alone anything bigger. Is this a known issue, or is there a trick to transiting?

Glad I got up at 2am this morning...

It would be interesting to compare a well-modded CM1 with CM2. I find that at height levels 3 and above, a well-modded CM1 can start to look quite similar. Of course close up there is no comparison.

"No duplicates, if you want more grey uniform just delete some camo files, but don't forget that you must have no number missing in file names, for example - smod_german_smock_soldier_uniform 2, smod_german_smock_soldier_uniform 3, smod_german_smock_soldier_uniform 4, etc." Since there are no duplicates I can delete (I love variety so don't want to delete any of your super mods), I will simple dupe up some of your grey uniforms (adding extra extension numbers of course). I think the way the system chooses what uniform mods to show is random. So, the more grey options the fewer camo options will be selected (I hope).

contact tech support?

Looks really good, J! I would like to adjust them so there are more grey uniforms and maybe only a couple camo'd in the mix. I am assuming there are some of the camo'd files that are duplicates(?). I am hoping that there are some duped files, so it is it as simple as deleting a few extra duped ones so the system selects more of the grey. If there are no camo duplicates (I looked and could not easily tell), then presumably one can simply make dupes of the grey uniforms and they will get selected more frequently by the random selection system employed by the game.

"we used standard 16 mm film, flipping the reels over after the first run though. But it had the same perforation pattern as any 16 mm film, i.e. a single row down each side" That is not 8mm. Maybe it just works cos the camera could access the holes even though they were further apart? The quote came from Wikipedia I think. But, I grew up with this stuff, used 8mm as a kid and was then professionally trained on 16mm and 35mm.

Thanks for the info...

If the sounds can be discernibly better, then that would be good. My only caveat is that we now have SO many sound mods that sound different... some shots sound a bit more distant, other sound like they are a few feet away, some are more booming, others... They all "sound good" so it's impossible for folks like me to know which is actually the best improved sound.

They usually used smaller wind-up cameras that contained maybe 50-100 feet of film tops. That's approx 1.25-2.5 minutes at 24 frames/sec. And that's why we see so much "jerky" footage shot at 18 frames/sec. Coupled with its rarity and expense (exposed film had to be returned to labs for processing and printing etc)