Cameroon

I wish I could but I don't think BAD content is a suitable replacement for NO content Hrmph.

I was playing my brother a while back, myself as the Allies and he as the Axis. I had Stuarts, Fireflys and some vanilla shermans (I think). In any case, I had three stuarts on a slight rise -- hidden from everything but the infantry they were firing at -- when up pops a Tiger I ready to wallop them. But HA HA! Luck (or something) was with me. My stuarts started a frantic reverse and one popped off a round, frontal Tiger KO at weak point. That was one happy crew, I'll tell ya.

I'll be 23 on Friday. I quite enjoy having my birthday be the same as George Washington's. Oh, location-wise I'm over in western PA so not all that far from Cincinnati (damn Bengals... ) [ February 19, 2002, 03:52 PM: Message edited by: Cameroon ]

Yup, I play against the AI all the time. "Why?" you ask? Well because at x hour of the day when I happen to need a CM fix, it's the simplest, quickest method and it doesn't impede other's use of the phone (such as a TCP/IP game would).

I'm afraid all I can offer is enthusiasm for the project. I really hope it takes off. I'd love to be able to provide more concrete assistance filling one of the positions, unfortunately I'm not even close to qualifying for the topics that would be covered by the journal. Luckily for me there are a bunch of people on this board who I think could do a fantastic job (time permitting).

I recall reading (though God knows where on this forum) that the Move command is a vehicle speed suited to coordinated movement with infantry. If that is the case then Move is the speed you are looking for in order to keep everyone together.

That would be a gun tractor.

Don't worry newlife, I understand what you're describing. AAR generation that another program could process would be pretty straightforward I would think. Doesn't open any internals either so in that respect it's safe. The crux of the problem lies in starting. The reason is that one either has to tell people how to write the map-file format (not going to happen) or create a "generation syntax" which also isn't going to happen (lotta work). If one had the AAR report, however, one could go a long way to simplifying the campaign GM's life (well, with the proper tools processing it anyway). Your upper level tools would have the starting unit list, do their magic with the AAR, and then tell the GM what's what. Then the GM can take that and go edit what needs editing.

I can answer that question. Many applications use "temporary memory" which is counted as part of the System's memory rather than the application's. Try it some time with Internet Explorer running after you load a big (or a number of) pages. The "reported" memory use of the OS goes up. Not because the OS is itself using more memory, but because other applications are using temporary memory. Just FYI, the reason they use temporary memory is because the application can ask for temporary memory without having the user adjust their memory settings by using "Get Info". Photoshop, Internet Explorer and probably Go Live almost certainly use temporary memory.

Hadn't thought of that possibility (corrupt res file), you can also ask resedit to verify a file (checks the resource fork). I don't know if resedit does this when it opens a file automatically, but its another bit of info if you need it.

Here's an off the top of my head thought, but one that might yield you some results. Type 2 errors are memory related and lately I've been running into two "common" reasons for it (not on my own machine). One is bad RAM and the other is overheating. I find it unlikely that you've got bad ram because you didn't mention other problems. However, graphics cards get hot and get hotter as they are more heavily taxed. And newer cards are running hotter than older cards. So with the high res mods the card is heating up more than with the low res mods (I'm not just making that up). I would imagine this is normally not a problem, but perhaps for some reason (bad location, dust, something else) your machine isn't getting enough air flow to keep it cool. My girlfriend's machine (not running CM ) was having a similar problem and so was my father's. When they moved their machines to get better air flow, their problems went away. Maybe you recently moved your computer to a more enclosed area or it has gotten dusty? In any case, I hope you figure out what the problem is soon. Best of luck, Chris

ciks, I think what you're seeing is an artifact of the browser you're using more than the page layout itself. In IE 5.1 (Mac) I get behavior like you describe, but in OmniWeb (Mac, OS X) it renders as it should, i.e. long topic start field.

Actually, if you've got a Mac you can do this pretty easily with Snapz Pro (see Ambrosia Software) and probably QuickTime Pro (just register QT, it's like $30). You'd only need Snapz for taking the movie but you'd probably need QT Pro to do splicing and such. Of course, if you want to get really fancy you start racking up the bucks. HTH, Chris

Ok, so this could quickly get bumped to the general forum. Oh well, here goes. I'm a Mac user and as such have access to Sherlock so I wrote a couple of Sherlock plugins to search the CM portions of the message board. I thought it might be nice if fellow Mac CMers (and Windows users too, I think there are a couple of Sherlock-compatible apps out there) had access to them. However, I don't want to be stepping on toes and thought I'd ask if it was ok to distribute them and actually ask if they should be hosted here (for those not familiar, they'r real small text files). Then I couldn't decide who to e-mail And since they are CM only (though it would be trivial to add the other boards too), I figured I'd just throw this out here.

I've been falling down on the job with that recently, too many hobbies and not enough time Not to mention being utterly spoiled by programming in OS X, it is actually painful to go back to pre-X software development. And since CM doesn't work in X... I really hate to think I won't be able to do the project, hopefully it won't come to that. I'll try to be better about letting people know what's going on too.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Teggy: OK, a possible breakthrough! But it will require more testing. First, I updated OpenGL, although I don't believe it had anything to do with it, because the first test after the update failed like all the others. Then, as much as I hated doing it, I tried sending a file to myself with Outlook Express instead of Eudora (5.1, by the way). It wasn't zipped, just plain text, and sure enough, it worked. The thing that baffles me, though, is how if Eudora is indeed the culprit, how it could corrupt a file that's been zipped? Seems kind of unlikely, but if it's a matter of getting PBEM to work, I'll believe anything. Schrullenhaft , would you mind re-sending the file you sent yesterday, so this time I can download it using Outlook Express and see what happens? thanks...<hr></blockquote> If there is any decompression software in the "decompress chain" that is "translating linefeeds" (i.e. translating end of line characters to be mac end of line characters) then it will seriously destroy the uncompressed file. Check all your prefs in Eudora AND in Stuffit Expander to see if either have "translate linefeeds" on. Make sure they are off, then try again. Outlook may be telling the stuffit engine to not translate linefeeds ever, causing it to work, or Eudora may be telling the stuffit engine to translate when it should not. That would explain why one works and the other does not.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Shadow 1st Hussars: As I said before there is NO change in textures for any ground condition other than snow. You were probably looking at pavement <hr></blockquote> The texture is the same, but Offwhite's right, CM modifies the texture to be darker in wet weather. Regarding the desired purpose; well pulling the normal dirt road bmps would get you dirt roads but they wouldn't be the mud color you want unless you modified them yourself. [ 01-07-2002: Message edited by: Cameroon ]</p>

This may be far off base, but something to think about. The "white bar" syndrome _might_ be a font problem. I don't know what font CM uses, but you could try reinstalling all of them or otherwise checking to see if one or more has gotten corrupted. This is something that updating wouldn't fix unless it was installing a newer version of the font. Hope you get the problem corrected.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by Lord Dragon: try plotting your turns in very small arcing waypoints instead of a 90 degree angle etc. might help!<hr></blockquote> From what I can tell this does actually work though I suppose it could be objective. If the degree of the turn gets too large, the vehicle has to stop to make the turn (though I don't know what the limiting angle is). If you use the arc method and make the changes small enough, then the vehicle will slow down but not have to stop. I suppose it isn't Grand Turismo 3's driving model, but it seems to be reasonable good

Vet American Rifle Squad on the attack, caused 23 casualties, took out a pillbox 75 as well as taking 4 casualities themselves. I wanted them in my next battle. I think they've been my most effective unit, relatively speaking.

I find hunt to be useful when you have a good idea of what your hunting vehicle will find. Especially if you're using it to peek out of cover at one target, like from behind a building. That way as little as possible of your tank will be hanging out (with luck). Also, regarding it finding hull down positions, it does not actively seek a hull down position. Rather, it is up to you to plot a line of movement that will hopefully let the AFV stop while hull down if it spots an enemy.

{Sorry if people see this twice, somehow I can search for the post I made and find it, but it doesn't show up in the forum so I posted again.} Ok, this really bothered me quite a bit. I was playing this scenario (won't say which, I'd be giving something away). I had a vet 251/9 w/ 44 he rounds. The game was at night. I told it to area target a house that was well in view and holding a flamethrower that was holding my entire advance up. The 251/9 couldn't see the flamethrower, no one could except when it stopped hiding. But like I said, I targeted the house not the unit. So what did it do? Sit there, for THREE turns. Finally, the flamethrower peeked his head up enough times that it was killed by MG fire. Has anyone had this happen? It didn't switch targets or lose its target or anything, it just would not fire. And it was so very very annoying.

Ok, this really bothered me quite a bit. I was playing this scenario (won't say which, I'd be giving something away). I had a vet 251/9 w/ 44 he rounds. The game was at night. I told it to area target a house that was well in view and holding a flamethrower that was holding my entire advance up. The 251/9 couldn't see the flamethrower, no one could except when it stopped hiding. But like I said, I targeted the house not the unit. So what did it do? Sit there, for THREE turns. Finally, the flamethrower peeked his head up enough times that it was killed by MG fire. Has anyone had this happen? It didn't switch targets or lose its target or anything, it just would not fire. And it was so very very annoying.

Nice job Tanks, now I won't have to do my own (and dontcha hate this...) I know the tree bases are yours based off comments made in other threads, but how 'bout that rough? So far I haven't seen any rough I really like but that looks good.

<blockquote>quote:</font><hr>Originally posted by SlowMotion: What about some special units NOT aiming, no matter what you order? In one of my PBEM games I told my sniper to kill a bazooka unit some 15 meters away. For several turns nothing happened, then an enemy crew comes along and kills my sniper without him firing one single bullet! I do understand that normally snipers prefer targets that are far away, but if they are specifically told to shoot the only target at sight, how come nothing happens???<hr></blockquote> Actually there is a minimum distance at which snipers can engage. I don't know what it is off-hand, but I know it's been discussed on the boards before. This includes stories like "my sniper and an enemy sniper were sharing the same foxhole and wouldn't (couldn't) fire at each other".