Steiner14

No submenu necessary: 4 different color coded rows instead of one. A submenu needs one additional aiming with the mouse - not so a one page menu.

You don't get it. Cid250 thinks he were a computer expert. and now he believes, that the AI would be better, if there were no graphics to display when the AI had finished it's calculations. I guess the only one capable to help him, after things were explained from different sides to him already, including Steve, is a good doctor.

Sue ATI. The damage is already there and i think it is the only language big companies understand.

You could upload it to a free webservice and post the link here. A scenario forum would be good.

Vanishing as abstraction imo is more realistic, because nobody runs away in reality.

IMO it is quite unrealistic how it is handled in CMx1 - although not bad abstracted. It just works. But panicking soldiers do not jump up into the bullet shower and run. They eat dirt, they crawl torwards the next corner and don't move. So the way CMSF seems to handle it, seems a very good step forward to me. The only negative side effect i see, is that disappearing units can't be taken as prisoners (in CMx1 it works very well to encircle units and force them to surrender - does not only reduce the duration of the fight, spares ammo and lives, but gives additional points, too; that seems not to be possible anymore, is it?). [ August 03, 2007, 04:09 PM: Message edited by: Steiner14 ]

I really hope it will be added with one of the coming patches.

Since i can't check it myself yet: and does the absent borg-spotting finally give well placed AT-weapons their power they deserve?

Cid250 Do you have any insight into the game mechanics? I think you don't even have a clue about programming. From what i have observed, the AI in CMx1 is only active for a very short period at the beginning of turn calculation and it is the StratAI. The moving blue bar was only the calculation of the plotted turns - no StratAI anymore involved, only TacAI parallel to the gaphics calculation. Now to the aspect, that there would be not enough time, or less time for the AI in CMSF: How do you think such things are coded? Even in chess things are the same: the functions are called as long as they are allowed to. Restricted by a counter or by time. The level of chess game is determinded by shortening the calculation time artificially and then the best of the found moves are taken. In CMSF things are defiunately a bit different, siunce it is raltime capable, but not to much: the AI acts, whenever something happens that triggers a necessity for it to do something. This function continues, either until it has finsished, or until a timeout interrupts it. Simply increasing the timeout would already give better results. But i'm sure, the AI calculations are not restricted due to a simple conclusion: the AI is not superior to the player. You restrict it only - like in chess - to make it weaker. So i'm sure, the AI has all the time it needs to calculate. Now to the aspect, that in WEGO it were in principle better. Also an assumption that doesn't hold. In 60s WEGO the AI has the same problem as a human player: looking 60s into the future. Much worse for the AI. And i'm sure, it didn't even look into the future. I'm sure, the StratAI in CMx1 used an analyzation of the current situation only. And then calculated it's moves for roughly 60+ seconds. But what happens, when the StratAI-calcs are done in CMx1? Then the blue bar starts to move! And then the battle is solved - not in realtime, but much faster - the difference to CMSF? Not a big one i guess, except that in CMSF things are slowed down to realtime. So in CMx1 the TacAI reacts exactly the same way, as it does in CMSF: whenever something happens, that calls it, it will do something. Be i within the moving blue bar in CMx1 or in RT. So the only difference that stays is the StratAI. And that was removed and is part of scenario design, since the StratAI in CMx1 sucked big time anyway. You see, WEGO in CMx1 is nothing else, then WEGO in CMSF: in CMx1 the TacAI calculates at the moment things happen on the battlefield, in CMSF the AI calculates at the moment things happen - in CMx1 there is no realtime clock and therefore things are calculated much faster and the blue bar rushes, in CMSF things are calculated with the progression of time or even slower.

May I have permission to post that in my blog? </font>

Why is there no WEGO?

Steve, may i ask out of interest, what the problem in more detail is? Is it a normal OpenGL function-call Charles uses, but this function-call leads to the crash?

Hammer, if you open the computer, you will find a data-sheet on the power supply. How much Ampere can it deliver on the 12V and on the 5V chain and how high is it's nominal output in conjunction with the CPU and the graphics card you have?

Running away right during combat? Shouldn't happen often and i could live very well with it in CMx1 as abstraction of a panicked or routed unit - but with 1:1 modeling? Let the panicked soldier crawl into the next corner or only eat dirt and let him ignore all commands is enough IMO (if one among 20 stands up and tries to flee, that seems better to me, than fleeing as sandard procedure during heavy enemy fire like in CMx1).

Oh, i get it now. It was only a factual statement about the different weights of publications. Sorry! Forget my rant.

:eek: This was the worst post from someone affiliated with BFC i've ever read. Are you gone completely crazy? Do you think all BFC customers believe in this myth? It's not a good idea at all, to bring such topics into a company's forum - be it if you believe the earth were flat, or not. Only one word from BFC, that they only want politically correct customers, and i'm away and send my game back, which is finally on it's way. I'm definately not willing to support a company, that treats me as idiot, only because i don't share their political opinion. But i'm quite sure, you don't have the permission from Steve to take BFC into your captivity making unfounded and rediculously political comparisons. The biggest lies can be found in the biggest media, Mr. Weapons Of Mass Destruction! Following this ecellent logic, how much less important must be the words of forum members... I'm wondering why Steve and the others are even reading the forum... Incredible. [ August 02, 2007, 02:37 AM: Message edited by: Steiner14 ]

I think if you left click a unit, the program crashes.

Please, could someone ban this person? Patience is a virtue, but accepting that kind of attiude is already close to masochism. I don't know how much from his barely 30 posts are nothing else than extremely stupid, destructive whining without showing any will and respect to the efforts already taken.

From what i've read so far, these things should be in: fixed ATI left-click problems hotkeys for selecting tabs improved TacAI (most probably regarding self preservation) reduced LOS/LOF problems through walls

The only response about maxed graphics and good performance i have read so far, was IIRC from Mikoyan: Radeon X1950Pro.

In case you actually start playing the game someday, instead of bitching about every single aspect of it: there are more OPTIONS to chose from than your mouse has buttons. This may be a strange concept to you. How about playing some Desktop Tower Defense for your wargame fix instead. Really good game. Only one mousebutton and 4 keys needed, too. </font>

Excellent news! That means, the game is officially not considered finished by BFC and the distributor. I find that a good decision, because it will give the community the confidence back, that things will definately get better, but also for the reviewing press, that is able to update their reviews and mention what happened and changed.

Great! A solution could have been color coding of commands that are part of one group.

It seems the member Bonxa was the idiot: http://www.battlefront.com/discuss/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=52;t=002128#000014

I can't judge that, since i haven't played it yet, but: Aren't there tab-independent hotkeys? Or are the tabs not switchable by keys? In general my impression is, that there are peaople very loud about things in the UI, that do not work as they expect it. And i have the impression, they are not even willing to get used to the new system - they always played with the mouse only, so that's how a UI has to be. :eek: For example from music-production: one of the most productive and best sequencers available, has the steepest learning curve you can imagine. NOTHING works intuitively. But once you get used to it - and you will need the manual ALWAYS for several weeks - once you've leaned the key-commands, this thing flows like no other. And now guess, what is the major complaint of newbies? The UI! I don't say, that the UI of CMSF is good or bad. I can't judge that, yet. But from reading the posts i have the impression, that there are people uncapable or unwilling to learn a new UI that way it should be used. Instead they keep their old behaviours and are wondering, why things don't work as efficiently as expected.