Cameroon

I also had no trouble (other than being on a 56k modem...) downloading and unpacking the Mac demo. I don't think Stuffit 7.01 (which is the "latest") uses a different format, but you could give that a shot. It's a MUCH smaller download, at least

Sure, but that doesn't tell you how fast its going while you're actually playing. Unless you're trying to lose.

Well, I would definitely appreciate being able to get a PBEM turn out while in OS X. I guess that's a vote for yes

You know, I've wished for just such an item almost every time I watch a vehicle move

Panzer Leader, if he's playing a game where he's carrying troops over from a previous battle that haven't been resupplied, then he'd have to create a map in the editor and those troops should be imported with the ammo loads as set in the editor. I suppose one possibility would be to have the ammo load of a unit resupplied at every start, but limit the resupply to the "max ammount" the unit had to start with. So if a tank came in with 12 HE shells, every time it was re-imported it could only have 12 HE shells.

I think you're missing the point, we want to be able to give it HINTS through scripts (or whatever you want to call them). In fact, I think everyone here is quite impressed with what the AI in CM can do. What people are asking for is the ability to provide some external direction, not to gut the AI. My own personal suggestion is to be able to provide hints to the AI and set the strength of those hints. Thus providing a way for the AI to determine how important a given directive/hint is and if it should abandon or ignore a given hint. Read the thread again, no one wants the AI to lose what it has now.

I'm with you and Emrys, that sounds like something I'd definitely get a kick out of. Given that there are hints of multi-multiplayer (i.e. more than one person on each side in control of a portion of the force), I would think we might have a fair shot at getting this They could even use the same interface, just allow us to substitue a computer player for a human. Oooh, now I'm excited.

Yeah, I've seen this, too. I posted a screenshot awhile back (awhile before 1.01) and was asking if it as a bug. Since the unit is now using area target, I'm pretty sure it will keep firing unless you cancel it. It'd be super easy to overlook while playing and have a squad lose a ton of ammo.

Unlike Lt. Bull, I play almost exclusively vs the AI for various reasons. I play the occasional PBEM, but mostly I just like to play a quick game when I've got the time. I don't think there's any research concluding that there are more or less of either variety (that is, mostly solo or mostly multiplayer), thus there's every reason to believe I'd not purchase CM without its solo play . Of course, I don't believe even for a second that BFC would head that direction. It seems that there is a focus on the AI being "one or the other" as either scripted or on its own. Personally I don't see why both can't be used together. Allow the designers to provide hints and set the flexibility of those hints (such as, "Might be a good idea" and "Do this or else!") but don't force the designers to do so. Sure, one could build bad scenarios that way, but one could build bad scenarios anyway

The only time the 'wacky movement' lines thing bothers me is when the waypoints are underground, and thus unselectable. I'm definitely going to remember the next time it happens so I can send a savegame.

Well, to be one of the guys who says "I don't think so"... I don't think so The new engine is NOT CM3, but CM3 will use the new engine. So re-writing the engine and creating CM3 can be done at the same time without it meaning that CM3 is being built on some other engine. Guess time, or BFC, will tell.

Well, I'm no where close to 100% positive, but I think it's a chance to surrender. If so, then it just kept "rolling" numbers that said don't surrender. I'd say consider it a fluke On the other hand, could you have inflicted about 12% casualities on that last turn?

They are...{ahem}...burning with desire...</font>

It isn't that LOS was reduced, it was that a bug that was NOT accounting for LOS through light terrain was fixed. In other words, in 1.0 there is a bug that can allow light terrain to have no impact on LOS. This is contrary to the manual, even, which notes that even over open ground LOS is not infinite (well, it is in 1.0 ). In 1.0.1 the above bug was fixed. And to actually post with relevance to the topic... I haven't a clue [ November 23, 2002, 11:18 PM: Message edited by: Cameroon ]

Cannister is a short-range ammo. Think of it like a shotgun, at ranges over 100 meters or so, it isn't very effective.

Sounds like you are asking if the Advance command is quiet method of movement when no enemy is around. Since it makes better use of cover than Run or Move does (and thereby makes it harder to be seen by the enemy, it stands to reason), might Advance be a stealthy means of movement when enemy contact has not yet been made? My understanding is that in CMBO, the Run command ignored the difficulty of putting rounds on target while sprinting. In short, it allowed all the men in a squad to sprint while simultaneously engaging the enemy. So, in CMBB, the firepower output of the Run command was toned down considerably, and the Advance command was introduced to simulate some members of the squad getting down in the dirt and firing while others moved. In short, the Advance command has a higher probability of engaging the enemy than the Run command does. I don’t believe this means that there is firing going on when there is no targeting line from the Advancing unit. Hopefully, someone can back me up on this.</font>

It depends largely on the unit's experience level. The more experienced, the less likely they'll do something like that. It seems that threat can sometimes cause that to happen as well.

I'm pretty sure that's fixed, check the Patch Update thread. Imported units aren't subject to the random experience fluctuation.

I really like the way you've done the winterizing on this mod. I think I might have been someone, somewhere saying that less perfect whitewashes would be great, and I got my wish Now I just have to play with some Hungarian forces, heh

Yes, you can save the map. Any saved game can be used to import the map. So save the game under the name you want to remember it by, move the file into the "Quick Battle Maps" folder and there you go While you aren't concerned with importing troops at this time, the only time you'll have the option to import troops from a game is with the final autosave (when the AAR comes up).

Yes, you can save the map. Any saved game can be used to import the map. So save the game under the name you want to remember it by, move the file into the "Quick Battle Maps" folder and there you go While you aren't concerned with importing troops at this time, the only time you'll have the option to import troops from a game is with the final autosave (when the AAR comes up).

Heh, this is a long and oft-discussed topic on this board. Check the both this forum and the CMBO forum, do a search for "Sniper" and you should find some rather long threads. What it comes down to is the intention of BFC and the scale of CM. In both BO and BB, sharpshooters are, as Splinty said, intended to represent above average shooters who are just regular infantry.

Want to move to Melbourne, Australia? Big demand for Lotus Notes/Domino programmers/developers. Mace</font>

Joques, The quote above from JonS correctly summarizes a greatly complicated matter but is of no use to you unless you already understand that g.c. matter. You might search using keyword 'spotting' on previous threads. A perfect example is the Mysterious Ostrich-Like Pillbox. A concealed enemy pillbox opens fire on you, continues tearing your guys apart for a couple of turns, then seems to stick its head in some magic sand and disappear! You cannot even trace an LOS to the generic unit marker it leaves behind! AT guns, infantry in foxholes, all kinds of nonmoving things (I know...they CAN move, but that's not how they are pulling off this magic trick) get to decloak, deliver substantial fire, then cloak again. You think of this, quite reasonably, as an LOS issue. On this board it usually is referred to as a spotting issue. You will be amazed and astonished to discover it has many defenders! Or maybe you won't. I seem to be amazed and astonished at most everything that befalls me in this game. -- Lt. Kije</font>

I'm picky, I want white-washed but not so perfectly. It has always seemed to me that repainting ends up being less than perfect, especially when done in the field. There was a post in a thread describing how the hasty repainting to sandy colors in Desert Storm looked... wish I could remember the thread or the poster. That's actually the reason I haven't installed any of the winter mods yet, they are too perfect. I wanna see the old camo colors beneath that coat of white-wash!