murpes

Is it? I just made a 1503 tile that was solid blue and it didn't show up. I can't figure out how CMBB is handling this. Anyone know for sure?

That is Ed "Tanks A Lot" Kinney's excellent tree mod. I really like it for two reasons: It looks great, and the trees are "higher" than the default ones. You can play will full trees on and still see your units. You can find it at the CM Mod DB looking under Tanks A Lot as the designer.

That bright green was driving me nuts. At the CM Databse.

I don't know why, but that picture reminded me of this one:

I thought the new camera controls sucked hard when I played the CMBB demo, but now I love them. I played CMBO a bit this morning and I really missed being able to push the map around - suddenly having to reach for the shift key seemed annoying.

Damn, very nice! [ November 24, 2002, 12:46 PM: Message edited by: murpes ]

Doesn't require a magician, it's a pretty simple thing to do. I forget what it's called in Win 9X, but in XP there is a sound recorder under Accessories/Entertainment by default. Use it to open up any wav file in CMBB. Sound Recorder has a "decrease volume" under the Effects menu. Save the file when you're happy with it and you're done. I'm sure Macs have something similar.

If I launch the game and forget to put the CD in, it'd be nice to not have to exit the enitre program just to put the disc in. A "retry" button would be nice. Yes, I know it sounds preposterous to use my cd drive for anything but a CMBB holder, but on occasion it does happen. [ November 24, 2002, 12:45 AM: Message edited by: murpes ]

This just kind of make you sound, I dunno, codger-like. Damn kids!

*sigh* (with more exasperation than your sigh) Anway, sighs aside, I always thought they were supposed to be distant guns - ambient sounds of battles going on someplace else. It's kind of hard to discuss "realism" during the suspension of time - I wouldn't really expect to hear the guns on the battlefield that I'm on during the suspension. But I guess I wouldn't hear distant guns or birds either.

It sounds quite accurate to me - reminds me of the first day of hunting season with distant gunfire. And trust me - the first day in Pennsylvania sounds like a war.

bump, because DD's return is the best news I've heard all week.

Depends where you're coming from - if all you've played up to now is Unreal and Tomb Raider then yes, they're similar. As everyone has mentioned before, Close Combat is real time like War Craft and Combat Mission uses the invovative wego method ... download the demo and try it. CM is also in 3D and a hell of a lot more fun. That wasn't a bust about the Unreal and Tomb Raider crowd - I'm pretty much one of them. I tried CC after CM, hoping CC would be more like CM. I was very disappointed. CM strives to be very realist, probably more so than CC, however the CM engine is flexible enough that you don't have to be a champion military stragist to play it either - I'm certainly not. Although some would argue that CMBO is more forgiving than CMBB for the novices.

We can only hope that Panzertruppen is working on them right now and releases them the same day as DD's mods and then everything will be right in the world.

I second this - the only one who can make a better grass and terrain is God himself.

Nippy, have you looked at Arx Fatalis yet? Arx Fatalis Website

People often say that, but I think very few people really mean it. Granted, good graphics can't mask a poor game, but poor graphics can hurt and otherwise great game. I remember reading an article in some magazine or web site, where a game reviewer finally admitted that the quality of graphics has bearing on the fun factor. I admired that he had the balls to publically admit who many of us secretly think. Every now and then I'll get an inkling to re-install some old game - one that I really loved playing at the time (mostly rpgs). Hey, it was a good game then, should be a good game now right? I'll be honest, often it's hard to get past the presentation. It takes a little bit more to get past my suspension of disbelief these days, especially now that I'm used to it. Perhaps these games are better served as good memories, I dunno, they looked fantastic at the time. Having said that, my experience with war gamers has been quite different ... they are quite tolerant of un-flashy graphics. I mean, I say that but it seems that ones that barrier is crossed - from icon to 3D models - graphics become pretty important. At least that would partial explanation for the mod community. But the Combat Mission games, like it or not, are very much cross-over games and as such the graphics are going to be held against mainstream titles. While the graphics in CM are very good, there's some GREAT looking games out there. I can't think of a another contempoary 3D engine that uses sprites the way CM does.

I don't know if it's the patch or me paying carefull attention to tactics in these forum - or a combination of both - but I played a most enjoyable game last night. Lots of infantry advances without the loss of control I've felt in games past. There was a decent amount of cover though, haven't tried a game with wide open spaces yet. I played the scenario in a way I never would have playe CMBO - very stealthily. I still feel like I'm pressed for time playing this way, but the + turns seem to take care of that. I just need to remember they're there before making final drastic moves.

Someone please explain to me what I'm doing up at 2AM? I have to *work* tomorrow. But things just got too exciting at the end of "Hill 312," and then my pbem showed up ...

And, one would assume, mod-able. Dunno why you'd want to tho.

I wouldn't necessairly advocate a watering down of the game for those of us that are having troubles with the increased "sim-ness." But there does seem to be a gap between those of us that play PC games that happen to be a combat sim, and those of us looking for a combat sim that happens to be a PC game. For someone to roll thier eyes and say, like an anrgy comic-book store guy not believing you don't know Bruce Wayne's middle name, "well, DUH, the reason you're troops are panicing is because you're advancing when you should be assaulting blah blah blah." Fine. Where in the manual does it explain this? Which tutorial? How am I supposed to know the difference between a Stug III and IV without even so much as a quick reference card to pull from? Yeah, I know, "it's on the 'net." But the fact of the matter is it's overwhelming, and often assumes a certain point of reference to start from. I bought a piece of software here, not a lifestyle. I'm not advocating that it's BTS role to provide all this either - I'm just outlining what I see as the sources of my frustration with the game sometimes. And I'm learning ... slowly. But I look at other games which main purpose was simulation and realism, and as the games evolved (along with the processing power of the computer mostly), so has the tutorials and the ability to adjust "sim-ness." I can't be the only one coming from the Sudden Strike arena (and really, I've never played that one. I like the rpgs mostly, so I'm worse off!). Here's a simplified scenario: I buy CMBB. A couple of tutorials gets me used to the commands. And then that's it - kinda stranded. I'm faced with either trying to develop my own strategies (heh), or learn "real" ones from fragmented posts on the forums or digging through military documentation, which really I've never been that successful at finding anyway. Now I for one am willing to keep trying and digging and reading - I think because the game's subject matter has sparked an interest, and because I'm impressed by the power of the CM engine. And not to mention that fact that the game is FUN and satisfying. But I can easily see someone else in my shoes saying "screw it" and moving onto the next game. Maybe that's the way it's meant to be - but where will that ultimately get us? Eventually the game will evolve to the point where a few guys at West Point are the only ones who can play it, and this breakout game is back into the niche market. I think a one size fits all game is do-able here, but not but dumbing down the game but by smart-ing up the player. Better documentation (I can't believe I'm saying this about the best game documentation I've seen in YEARS, but you know what I mean - accessable reference materials) and by graduated tutorials.

Dunno about hedges, but I'm sure a search in the forums will reveal something. My understanding is that walls will provide cover - it is just like any other piece of 3D terrain. However, the complexities of the logic in recognizing it as cover is beyond what the AI is designed to do. Rather than just "get behind a wall" it would have to determine a safe side and a dangerous side, and then factor in the length of the wall etc ... so it basically sees it as open ground.

Take a screenshot of the mod in action, convert it to jpg, and "announce" it here and include the pic if you want. The Combat Mission Mod Database has an easy-to-use upload section, where you can also post your screenshot. It's getting very popular and is a good place to get your mod exposed. Good luck, I'm looking forward to seeing what you've done!

Yeah, I have backups too - mostly because I like to play at work somtimes, but damned if I'm gonna cart my good CDs around in my pack. Probably a violation of the EULA or something, but not with any sort of malicious intent. I use a no-cd crack for CMBO and a duped disk for BB. Generally I understand the need for copy protection, but with a game like this is it necessary? How in the world would you play this game without a manual - both for learning and for reference. Releasing a pdf was one of the worse things they could have done. But I'll be the first to admit, I don't know what the hell I'm talking about. I'm just an outsider looking in applying simple logic to an industry I know nothing about.

The ways some "discussions" go around here I'm afraid it would degrenerate into a fist fight.