RockinHarry

If the demo german voices make it into the full game, then it should be no problem to replace them with something more realistic. I´ve a dozen of Heeresdruckvorschriften (german field and training regulations) that give good examples of all standard verbal orders, announcements and such. Off course there´s those voice samples left, that are just to indicate a squads "status" (pinned, routed, just sitting idle ect.), but also those can be given a more realistic and dramatic touch. If so many folks care about historically correct camo schemes, ammo penetration values, tactics ect., then I think it´s just valid to take out the last bits of Hollywood from german voices.

I too find the rubbling of solid buildings way overdone, the more if mortars are involved. Think I noticed 81 and 120mm mortars involved in this AAR on german side. Tactically they would be used agains targets in the open or with little to none overhead cover, with maybe the exception of 120mm. Knowing his scenario, Tyrspawn probably meant to plaster the GI´s in the surrounding foxholes and otherwise suppress building occupants, which could take cover in the basements, if there were any in the game.

Thanks for video AAR! Looking forward to Demo and game release! Would be nice to have no "incoming" sound for mortar shells, as there actually is none (or at least hardly audible) in RL.

Agree here with german voice acting taken from CMX1. I´d have expected new ones, that also add a bit more realism and "drama". Reference material like Frontschau, Lehrfilm, FMs shouldn´t be hard to obtain, as well as numerous volunteer (german) voice actors.

The pics look awesome, but pleeeeaaaase..no matter how you resolve the FH/Fortification issues, LEAVE OUT anything that resembles SANDBAGS!! They do not belong on WW2 european battlefields. If I see some as doodads, placed by scenario designers, then may be it so. I can avoid these. But don´t make them standard GFX for gun pits or other fortifications, nor trenches and the like. If I just see such stuff like in TOW, it just makes me sick and is reason enough, to avoid such games at all.

Beside the mentioned stuff here, I´d rather prefer to have added the necessity to shoot Mg´s through gaps between formations or overshoot when appropiate. The current CM series gives a completely wrong impression about employment of machine guns. Surely counts for other weapons in CM as well. (friendly fire) Note: I didn´t play CMSF since 1.20 (Paradox victim), so if this feature has been added since or is planned to be added for CMN, then forget about it.

I went away from recreating historical battlefields (with few exceptions) due to Mapping Mission not really working with maps, larger than 1km square. With some help of Map converter, I can patch up larger maps, but at last it became all too tedious for me. I´m now more following an artistical approach, letting the Map Generator doing some rough works and then "painting" the map to my requirements, until I´m pleased with the results. If map contours are done by the generator, the remaining things go way faster. Checking every bit of the map in 3D, do corrections, start playtesting, adjust things and so forth. Is way more fun to me, than going the hard way with google maps, all sort of overlays ect. and a good approximation of the battle area is sufficient.

I wonder noone recommends using "Martins Combat Mission Mod Manager"..in short ..."McMMM". Go to GAJs Mod Download page, log in, then make a keyword search with "Mod Managers" and it´ll pop up! 8) http://cmmods.greenasjade.net/mods

and yet some canadian resources site: http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/rep-rap/cmhqr-rqgmc-eng.asp and I do very much recommend "The victory campaign" series on the same site: http://www.cmp-cpm.forces.gc.ca/dhh-dhp/his/oh-ho/index-eng.asp

I´ve no DSL connection from home ATM and also suffering from lack of time, but I´ll start to exchange files soon again!

Not that much I´ve uploaded at CMMODS, but off course permission granted for hosting at FGM! ..and big thanks for hosting all the community treasures!

Sorry to hear about that, but understandable. Well, at least all efforts can go now into CM:N! Releasing the code as open source to volunteer programmers is quite a good thing, but it´ll surely take 1-2 years before something workable will see the light. From my past experience with the Panzer Elite Developement group, who as well received the source code for further developement and final non commercial release, it´ll very hard to step into code, that is not well documented or not at all. One can be glad if programmers leave "remark" lines in the code to help understand certain modules ect. Not an easy undertaking indeed, but this way not everything is lost. Thanks for the efforts so far! Now looking forward to CMX2: Normandy! 8)

While I understand the issue with 3D meshes and its deformation, I have more concern with the "hasty type" nature of "foxholes" (and trenches). While shell air- and tree bursts are a nice feature in CMX1, neither foxholes nor trenches offered any protection against these. Just the contrary indeed! While one can imagine sorts of "hasty" foxhole types, it´s hard to imagine a "hasty" type trench. From german field manual HDV 130/11 Fieldworks of the infantry: 1. Construction time - several hours. MG and 2 men foxholes (a "Schutzen nest"). Purpose: Protection vs. MG fire and shrapnel from HE. Simple wire obstacles. (Edit: camouflaging and clearing fields of fire all included) 2. Construction time - half a day. Elaborate construction of above mentioned positions. Shelter (overhead cover). Purpose: Protection vs. "light" high angle artillery (mortars, howitzers) and shrapnel from air and tree bursts. 3. Construction time - full day. Reinforcement of wire obstacles. Further completion of "nests", "strongpoints", connection of "nests" with shallow (crouching) trenches or (full depth) connection trenches. 4. Construction time - several days. Complete trench lines, elaborate wire obstacles, .... 5. Construction time - weeks. Complete elaborate trenchlines and dug outs.... ______________________ Conclusion: "Trenches" are not a self purpose from the beginning, they do mostly "connect" reinforced "Schutzennests" (2-3 man foxholes with overhead cover), BEFORE they convert to elaborate trenchlines, which took at least several days to weeks to get completed and combat ready. So the main focus in CMX2 should be to get the "Foxholes/nests" right, assuming the majority of (german) "foxhole" positions were NOT of a "hasty" type in Normandy. That means either two types should be introduced, a "hasty" type AND a "common" type, or just the "common" type, which should offer overhead protection vs. air/tree bursts. That IMO must not visually presented in 3D in CM Normandy. If the position of the "foxhole/nest" is tracked in the game, then maybe a switch for the foxhole occupants should enable them to go "under cover" by player command action. To present this visually, the 3D soldiers can "simply" vanish from the map, just showing the 3D mesh foxhole on the map. Just like vehicle passengers in CM1, only a direct hit by something that hits the foxhole and can (theoretically) penetrate the "overhead" cover (high angle medium/heavy HE) or grenade thrown into the foxhole can do damage to the occupants. Most likely result: All dead/out of action. _____________ RE: Making "improved positions" (shallow excavation) during the game, it should be possible if the squad given order to "improve position" is immobile during this action, does not receive "suppression" from enemy fire, time limit for chance to become succesfull and maybe other factors thinkable.... Things like that are implemented in the Steel Panthers series of games (SP:WAW) already. That too does not need to be presented in 3D. It would be just a change of state (better than just prone in good terrain cover) with accordingly better cover and concealment modifiers ingame. As soon as the soldiers abandon their "improved" postions (moving away), they loose the "improved position" modifier permanently, without leaving a mark on the 3D terrain. Well, sounds all simple, but it´s brobably not.....(coding wise)

No problem with "balancing", I don´t care about winning or loosing (basicly ) and if you have anything ready that you want to try PBEM, just send me a setup. And if it´s just something that gives me reason to play your gorgeous map! LOL I once tried to make dirty boots for germans and the result was actually quite satisfying. If I´d only know where I backupped those files to...

@ WAFFEN CAMO: If you´d like to enjoy UMLAUTs Stalingradish City look, have a look at his "City Salient" operation. It´s the best city map I´ve seen so far! 8) Too bad, it´s obviously made for vs AI play only, as otherwise I´d like to have a PBEM with it. @ Umlaut: Fully agree with the fresh out of factory looks of most textures in the game. The Marder looks just right for my taste! While most modders concentrate on how to get the best "tri camo" something looks on their vehicles, it´s oftenly forgotten, that the best camo available is plain "dirt". Also counts for the majority of infantry textures. Hate that freshsly polished boots ect.

check your private mail

WCamo, I know you mention ETO game play, what about CMBB? There´s an intersting CMBB scenario hat needs some play testing and it has some superb urban map! http://www.the-proving-grounds.com/scenario_details.html?command=search&db=scenarios.db&eqskudatarq=1518 or what about some Market Garden fighting? http://www.the-scenario-depot.com/scenario_details.html?command=search&db=scenarios.db&eqskudatarq=994 what about some ETO Normandy fighting? http://www.the-scenario-depot.com/scenario_details.html?command=search&db=scenarios.db&eqskudatarq=988

TPG and SD2 still has some good traffic. Mostly scenario testing and reviewing stuff though.

not to forget, radio equipment, crew training, tactical doctrine....

..oh, at least that would give me more time to make myself more aquainted with the CMSF editors, before I can step into CM Normandy ones! Do not dismiss CMAK for the time being, there´s a whole lot of normandy stuff in there as well.

Want a quick battle or set scenarios? I´d prefer something that needs testing from over at http://www.the-proving-grounds.com ! If you find something worthy, then let me know!

I have no doubt on that! Whatever it looks and plays like, I´ll have my Euros ready!8)

You´re right of course and I was rather referring to my past modding experiences in CM1 and as part of the now inactive Panzer Elite Development Group. The mentioned solutions (high LOD on the edges of forests and low LOD in the interior, as well as cast shadows only were really needed & appropiately built ground textures with generic/fake shadows) work pretty well there. Other case is plain top map view and one can certainly agree that the billboard objects in CM1 are sufficient for anything than flight sims and even the praised Il2 Sturmovik 3D engine uses this method to portray convincing looking large forested areas (2-3 top view billboards layerd per tree, depending upon height/range to ground). But as said, a convincing grunt level view is what counts for the overall impression.

Fully agree with the terrain, particularly larger plants and trees, as well as the ground below needs some care! While the close up looks of CMSF (and CM Normandy?) trees are ok, the far off view (billboard trees), particularly in the screenshot look quite disappointing. While billboard trees do the job well (just like in CM1), the far off view of forrested areas need more a look of some dark "mass". Depends upon lighting direction for sure, but having the option of dark terrain tiles shown below forest areas (close up and far view) and casting shadows only at those places where actually visible (single standing objects and trees) would add much to a realistic appearance IMHO. Trees inside forests (depending upon density) don´t need to cast shadows and an appropiately painted forest ground tile does the job more than good enough. Also darker tree textures for inside forest trees add to the impression of beeing inside a forest. At least having these options availble for map makers to arrange in this way, would allow to make realistic looking (otherwise resource hungry) forested areas.

Make a short hunt order at the end of the fast move. The buttoned T-34 crew might have still orientate at their new location, after the fast move and thus take their time to start normal spotting of enemies around. The T-34 commander can be left unbuttoned at this stage and dives back to his loader/gunner duties if enemies have been spotted worth to shoot at. The blue armor covered arc, as mentioned, helps as well. That should do it actually.