AnonymousOxide
-
Posts
211 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Never
Posts posted by AnonymousOxide
-
-
I hate this thread.
-
So you didn't even read the post then? I specifically mentioned 'camera rotation' several times.Originally posted by Panzer Leader:Camera rotation? I thought we were talking about camera HEIGHT! Whoops, put me down for a pair o' them red-faced little heads.
Here's another one:
-
You're first post wasn't the friendliest in the world, and I took it as flame.Originally posted by Vader's Jester:AO,
I'm not trying to attack you.
anyway, whatever, end of "discussion".
-
Yes, he wants to kiss and make love to it every night </font>Originally posted by Vader's Jester:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Captain Wacky:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by AnonymousOxide:
Do you have some sort of obsession with the the 'roll eyes' smiley?
-
Do you have some sort of obsession with the the 'roll eyes' smiley?
Anyway, I don't read the forums all the time, so I'm not always hip to what's going on.
-
Oh I'm sorry, I could have sworn that after having payed 50+ dollars for this game that I'd be allowed to post my opinions about it. -Or does BTS hold a "pay up and shutup" policy that I'm not aware of?Originally posted by Vader's Jester:They are not going to change this! If you want diffrent camera control, go play Brittney's Dance Beat!
Good god. Talk about beating a dead horse.
All I want to do is improve the game for everyone, I don't see what's so wrong about that. I'm not the only one that likes the CMBO camera control more after all. And really, I'd like to hear BTS's stance on the issue, not yours.
-
Yeah, the games great.Originally posted by Panzer Leader:Do you EVER have anything good to say?
-
I can go on-and-on about this issue of CMBO camera rotation versus CMBB camera rotation all year, mainly because I just don't see, even after 15+ games of CMBB, why the change was made in the first place (and in a half-arsed way no-less).
Why CMBB camera rotation is inferior:
1)Unlike CMBO, you can't reverse (or backup) the camera AND turn, you can only go back in a straight line. You can, however, rotate and go FORWARD. In CMBO you could go forward and back while rotating.
2)It's totally illogical for "circular rotation" [rotation around a point] to be on the top half of the screen, and side-to-side movement on the bottom. Even If it were visa-versa, then problem number 1 [above] would still not be solved since I would then be unable to rotate the camera while moving forward. Essentially the situation is switched, and nothing has been fixed (except, ofcourse, the camera rotation is logical)
Myth 3 started this absurd way of camera control and I never thought CMBB would adopt it. It's as illogical as placing the 'enter' door on the left side, and the 'exit' door on the right at a shopping center. My local Albertsons super market has this setup and to this day I always go to the wrong door.
I propose that the next patch should allow the option of having CMBO style camera control as an OPTION. I don't like the new camera control, it's simply inferior to the CMBO control.
Thank you.
-
Sod.Originally posted by Commissar:...what else should BFC include in the upcoming or latter, future patches?
-
I didn't know the stone bunkers had air-conditioning.
Anyway, yeah, good shtuff.
-
It might be due to the fact that I was one of the lucky ones with a defective disk. The install is missing a lot of .wav files.</font>Originally posted by PeterX:</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />It would not be the scenario. If something else is happening, let madmatt know and send him the move attached in an email. Charles can then look at it, and see if it a problem or bug already fixed.
Rune
-
I'm going to try it again as the Hungarians then. And yes, those tanks looked very impressive, I really like the large bolts that are used to fasten the armor on. Looks like a whole lot of tank skins aren't going to need changing anytime soon, unlike CMBO.Originally posted by Ken Talley:If you are playing "Minor Allies" against the AI, I would recommend playing as the Hungarians. I wouldn't recommend playing the Hungarians against a human player.
The one problem I had with the scenario as the Hungarians was the arrival of the reinforcements. They arrived and were immediately in the battle.
PS: The hungarian tanks really looked sharp!
-
Shutup nimrod! Why don't you... why don't you... uh... why don't you... go nim a rod or something!? :mad:Originally posted by IronChef4:WOOHOO!!! I wanna see the Nimrod!
-
Make sure that terrain elements are on then go look at the rocky ground texture. What do you see? I see "criss-crossing" of textures. That is, the rocks that stick out have two textures to them. (sorry, can't explain it right)
Anyway, the graveyard is the most noteworthy example of using the double crossing method, it looks really strange and I don't like it.
Can someone post a few pictures before I go insane? I think this is worth discussing since I feel that it just adds another burden to the CPU for absolutely no payoff.
-
I liked it, and not just because I'm Romanian and biased, or because my mom is Hungarian.
*Warning, spoiler*
I tried it with the Rumanians first, but it was too easy since the reinforcements kept coming when I didn't need them. It's frustrating having to issue orders to units that you don't need --did someone say flamethrower team?--.
When the self prepelled tank destroyers and Renaults came in, I just about went insane.
It's a good map, just too long and easy. If it's long, I want it to be hard.
-
Does everyone play 'a warm place to sleep' as the Germans? You're supposed to go at it with the Russians, the Germans are way too easy to win with on that map.Originally posted by antawar:Hi everyone,
The only battles I've been able to win are the iron roadblock and a warm place to sleep as the germans
As a rule of thumb, if the scenario says 'German attack', or anything similar to that, then you play Germans, not Russians unless otherwise noted.
-
You guys should really consider ditching anti-aliasing, it's not worth the cost in system performance and the image quality isn't as impressive as everyone makes it out to be. I have more fun with it turned off, everything just works smoother.
-
I am also addicted to online porn.Originally posted by Schrullenhaft:I guess you lucked out... I'm still addicted to online porn.
This feels like a support group.
-
I understand that, Iv'e been doing it since CMBO. But in CMBB there is a NEW feature (or bug) that lets you pause a unit while he is already traveleing on a given path.Originally posted by Michael emrys:I've paused in BB and BO. So clearly it can be done. Maybe you are misunderstanding the rule? You can't set a pause at any waypoint except the first. But, you can set a pause in each orders phase that will cause a unit in motion to hesitate at the beginning of the next action phase before it resumes movement in that turn whether it is at a waypoint or not. I hope I am being clear. If not, ask again.
Michael
Make a scenerio with one infantry squad (preferably with a platoon leader so there are no big delays). Give any order you like about 200m away. Press 'go', this will make the waypoint box red in the next turn. When you are on turn 2, press the 'p' button and cycle through the desired pause time. The Squad will now pause for X amount of seconds, then proceed further along the path which was issued on turn one. This was not possible in CMBO! And the manual clearly states that you cannot do this!
-
Pause bug:
In the manual it SPECIFICALLY states that pause orders can only be given when a movement path has just been put down [seen as a white square], and not during the actual movement of the unit along that path [seen as a red square]. The reason for this, as stated in the manual, is to limit the amount of control you have over your units. Too much control is un-realistic because you play a field commander in this game.
Actually, I find both methods of pausing to be true. For example, at turn 1 I issue a hunt move for a BT-7 fast tank at 50m away. Turn 2 he's moving, and when that turn finishes --we'll assume that he's about half-way along the path-- I'm able to issue the pause order right then-and-there. Effect? He pauses 10 seconds (or however long you chose to pause him), and then proceeds along the path again.
Bug? If not it's inconsistant with the manual. In CMBO you weren't allowed to do this.
-
*Bump*
Thanks again Moon, that wasn't common sense stuff.
-
Since the topic is armor, I got some questions: What is "plus" armor? (example: One of the Panzer IV's has 50+30 armor on its front upper-hull) Does that represent face-hardened armor? :confused: And if not, how do I know what tanks are face-hardened, and which ones are standard?
-
Oh wait, yeah I see, I knew that. You made it really complicated though.Originally posted by Snarker:Rounded armor is an advantage. Draw a circle. Then draw a series of parallel lines so they hit the circle. These line represent in coming shells. Only one line can actually hit the circle "square on". That line is the diameter of the circle if you continued it through to the other side. All the other lines hitting the circle are in effect hitting sloped armor of varying angles.
-
I'm confused. All I can picture right now is the early Panther front turret "swivel". It is curved perfectly at half a circle (look at it from the side), but it's not an advantage because it creates a 50/50 change for a round to either fling off into the sky, or fling right into the top hull below the swivel. It's a shot trap.
And I really don't have a clue what you just described Snarker... seriously.
Yup, camera rotation is inferior.
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
Anyway the reason I'm suggesting this so much is that I somehow doubt it would take "a bunch of time" to do it. Then again, I don't know anything about hard coding and programming, so maybe it's not even possible.