Steiner14
-
Posts
1,410 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Steiner14
-
-
Guys, don't be so focused on your personal wishes. There are driver/performance issues. Charles is working on the ATI/Vista problem, when a unit is clicked, that leads to a crash.
Then there are many Geforce 8800 users with problems.
So don't expect too much from the first patch. Otherwise you could be disappointed and the whining begins like on the first day.
Give them some time for the TacAI. The better the results will be.
-
The Beast,
don't forget, Battlefront are US.
The Yankees prefer plastic money over their worthless $. Seriously, i don't understand the business scheme, too. I don't know how much Paradox gets for each box in stores, but if Battlefront would have opened a simple bank-account in a european country, paying a small fee to the holder of the account, payment - at least for Europeans - would have been possible even without Paypal.
-
The Beast,
because you named the previous titles CM1 and CM2 i assume you are European? In that case you should find the game in stores.
But the version on CD is v1.0 and you will definately need the current version v1.01a
So make sure you have a broadband connection to download the update.
-
coda,
i don't have a multicore CPU yet, but i guess you do this in the task manager (CTRL-ALT-DEL) & selecting CMSF.exe & rightclick maybe could give the options you need
-
Stew,
thanks for remembering us about these important facts.
Indeed we need to give BFC time.
But that brings up another question for me: they knew they had an excellent brand name with Combat Mission. They also knew, they have a community not many game developers have.
What i don't understand is, if they knew how much work still needs to be done, why did they make the community believe, that a completely finished product, continuing where CMx1 stopped, will be released?
A word from Steve, that they will offer a buyable beta, because the game needs to grow over time, would have been understood by everyone and i think the majority of the old CM-players would have taken the chance to get the beta in their hands. But how they did it, could only lead to the high expectations - built on Cmx1 - they have to cope with now.
-
I can't imagine a connection between TacAI problems and CPU ressources. That would mean, stronger processors, better AI. That is ofcourse not the case: if the CPU is too slow to handle all requests within time, the framerate drops.
I'm sure the TacAI problems have nothing to do with CPU power. And compared to the necessary calculations for the graphics and physics engine, they can be neglected.
-
And i don't understand, why it wasn't made optional with a blanked screen and the famous blue progress bar.
-
That reminds me about the post, when Steve mentioned, that in CMx2 units will have a memory and therefore i.e. tanks being capable to remember where the last deadly threat was after they have broken LOS and had retreated. The imagination alone was exciting.Originally posted by M1A1TankCommander:Agreed. If TacAI in previous CM games can do this, why not in this one? Shouldnt games improve with time?
-
Nevertheless i would prefer a switchable terrain grid.
A helping workaround for high noon sun or overcast weather could be, that with the push of button, the sun/moon is placed low, in case a grid is technically not possible.
-
Mikoyan, thank you for the info. Very appreciated. Helped me to decide for the X1950Pro. I trust in BFC they will solve the problem.Originally posted by MikoyanPT:Steiner i don´t think the problem with ATI cards is performance.
My ATI X1950pro runs the game smothly with max settings and good resolution on Vista.
Has long has i don´t left click anything in the map i can watch the battle going on untill the scenario time ends and the mission concludes.
Of course it means i can´t play the game but when the left click CTD issue is solved i will have great performance.
-
:eek: :eek: :eek:Originally posted by ParaBellum:Map is almost finished:
Unglaublich. Du bist ein Künstler.
-
:eek: Please tell me the famous CM-quality isn't completely gone!Originally posted by panzermartin:I'm disappointed with these LOS/LOF problems. I can deal with tricky pathfinding but this takes away much of the fun of 1:1 presentation. CMx1 was indeed very precise in LOS presentation.
In CMSF I've seen infantry spotting and firing through walls, tanks exchanging rounds through buildings, grenade launchers firing through terrain elevations. It is frustrating because there is no possible way to be 100% sure whether you are exposed or able to fire or fired upon. Except from putting your squads in buildings there is no safe cover for them and TAC AI doesnt seem to automaticaly take advatage of los blocking obstacles. Men do not follow a formation according to the ground, they are mostly spread out in the middle of the streets hopelessly exposed most of the time.
-
Maybe it was a bit too much, with the new engine AND 1:1 representation down to each bullet. I already felt when i heard about it, that it must be an enourmous labour to do it realistically. And it seems, lots of development time was sucked into the 1:1 representation leaving not enough time for the "rest".
I.e. allowing quickbattles with purchaseable formations when the StratAI needs scripting, was not a good decision. The complaints about QBs as they are now, IMO are worse, than killing QB entirely.
Keeping the abstraction level, but with actual graphics, adding RT, and the sophisticated Arty- and Air-support would have been enough labor and IMO attractive enough for all CM-players - and more of them due to RT.
But i still trust in BFC that they will be able to fix the bugs and technical problems. Because of that i have right now ordered my new computer and CMSF.
Die Hoffnung stirbt zuletzt.
-
I think i remember Steve argueing, there will be no grid-overlay necessary because of terrain shading.
-
KnockOnWood,Originally posted by KnockOnWood:As reported above I have the exact same problem. Running Vista with an ATI-card on a AMD X2 Dualcore.
As an experiment I installed a clean copy of Windows XP on another partition and now the game runs without trouble when selecting units and performance is great...until the "teleporting units-bug" strikes after about 2 minutes. So game is still unplayable but maybe this can help narrowing down the problem?
Ok, further testing this i disabled one of the cpu's and now the game works as a charm! This is with just a clean install of Win XP, no microsoft patches or fixes, no amdcpu drivers or coreoptimizers. latest drivers for my ati x1900 from ati.com
how much frames do you get now and how are your quality and resolution settings?
-
C-key for 'cinema', right?Originally posted by Madmatt:For me, I also always play in Wide-screen angle mode (toggled with the C key) as I like to see more of the map at once and this view provides that.
OMG! That is in?! Long time ago i raised that feature wish for a far more natural wide-screen angle view with absolutely no response.
-
I didn't mention another idea, because i didn't believe it could make any difference, but with rlg85's discovery about thread priority, it could be be worth a try, too:
in WindowsXP look into
Systemeigenschaften (System Properties?)
-> Erweitert (advanced?)
-> Systemleistung (system power?)
-> Erweitert (advanced?)
-> Prozessorzeitplanung (CPU time planning?)
and set it from 'Programs' to Hintergrunddienste (background services?)
This is a recommended setting for audio-workstations and helps the audio-engines. Maybe it has a positive effect on the graphiccard drivers? Don't forget to reboot before try.
-
That's great!Originally posted by Battlefront.com:Actually Michael, we're going to releaes our "Exploder" program, which allows you to unpack the BRZ file into regular BMP and WAVs in their native structure. That's easier than trying to document the whole thing
I'd upload the one we use, but I'm pretty sure that one is for internal use only. When I have one sanctioned for distribution I'll let you know! Should be soon.And what happened to the idea of multiple texture-sets per unit? Will the game look for alternative filenumbers (similiar to the winter-sets in CMx1), or is it fixed to one texture-set/soundfile per model/effect?
-
Obviously the quality testing was a total miss. Wherever you look, everywhere are DualCores topsellers, for many months already. Multicore CPUs are the future and CMSF is the first title with a new engine, built for the future, not for the past.
Also the 8800GTS is very widespread, because there is no alternative in that range for months. And in the lower price ranges, but still advanced for gamers, the Radeon 1950s have the most entrys in pricecharts. They sell like warm rolls.
And since several months it's difficult to get new preconfigured PC without Vista. You have stubbornly to insist on XP, to get it instead of Vista.
For me it's hard to believe, that the most spread system-components nowadays were not tested.
For two days i'm waiting for a response which graphics card i should buy to get maximum performance from CMSF. That says a lot.
Before the game was released, i found it a bit strange, that there was absolutely no info to find, which components deliver maximum graphic details. And on the third day after release, it's still unkown in the whole cummunity which setup gives the best performance.
I really hope they will solve the problems soon and verified information what works best with CMSF will become available.
-
When modelling asymetrical warfare, it would be quite important to be able to give hidden, ambushing units a shoot and retreat command (for the AI during scenario design maybe even depending on strenght of the incoming fire, or numbers of wounded in the squad).
If that could be scripted with cover arcs and retreat paths torwards fallback positions (multiple fallback positions?), that could make the AI really dangerous.
-
Has nobody read that yet?!Originally posted by Battlefront.com:Here it is officially from us, if it makes Janster feel any better...
CM:SF can not support very large formations of troops under the command of someone in RealTime. That's obvious to anybody with 1/2 a brain, so I'm not sure why you think this is a relavent thing to point out. Playing a tactical WeGO battle with a division's worth of troops down to Teams isn't practical either, so does that mean WeGo is worthless? Obviously not, so again... I don't understand the point you are trying to make.
CMx2 in RealTime will only become capable of commanding forces in battalion sized engagements when we introduce CoPlay (many people playing on one side).
:cool: :cool: :cool:
:cool: :cool: :cool:That's still quite a ways off, but we have to start somewhere and we've already started.
What else could we want?Personally, I never play WeGo (as I've said many times before). It will remain an equal partner in CMx2 for the life of the game engine, so don't worry about that.
Perfect!
-
rlg85,
Ok, this can be overcome in RT (if you are fast enough), but i think it is also very annoying in RT, if the drivers of vehicles are plain blind, deaf and dumb.And yes, this has WEGO in some form, but the tacAI currently isn't nearly as good and units need more babysitting, something you cant do while you dont have control of your units for a minute.Who tells you, that the TacAI will not be improved? Steve already mentioned, it is quite high on their list.
-
Bastards,
thanks for not posting a spoiler alert! :mad:
-
Originally posted by Battlefront.com:
A much fairer fight, but now what to do about the massive HE rounds those T-72s can toss out? Have you had an infantry unit hit by a T-72's HE round? It ain't pretty. So how do you account for that.
And I'll I'm doing here is scratching the surface of the mounds of complaints YOU GUYS (generalizing, I don't remember which 100 of you kept on our asses about it
) kept poking at us.I said it before, I'd rather jamp forks in my eyes and slam my head repeatedly on the desk before I go through that experience again.
No way are we going to do this. Punto.
And what about ability weighting:
Ability against hard targets?
Ability against soft targets?
Instead of one single value, there could be several categories, someone can spend his "points": i.e. soft, hard
And each category has to stay below the chosen threshold. I.e. You have 100 points for hard target capability, 1000 for soft.
So a T72 could rate 2 against hard targets.
But 9 against soft.
A M1A2 10 against hard, 9 against soft.
And so on.
That way, if you decide to get 16 T72 to match the hard target capabilities of the oponent, you will be forced to choose less infantry or weapons with less soft target capabilities.
Would that solve th problem?
OMG! That is in?! Long time ago i raised that feature wish for a far more natural wide-screen angle view with absolutely no response.
A moment if you will, for poor Charles.
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
I feel with you, Charles.
It's hard enough, to hold a deadline in a project. But if you are forced to deliver prior, due to management deisions and you are alone, and there is no team to bear the load on several shoulders, not even a second person, that allows to rest for the one or other day, with trust, that the other person is working on it, and then, when already all power was invested to hold the deadline, a wave of additional work comes back, that should have been done best already yesterday, without any hope of a free minute for weeks, then this is hard, really hard.
I find it not ok from the management side, to put the only programmer that way under pressure with illusional deadlines. I hope this will be a lesson for upcoming releases.