Tarquelne
-
Posts
1,045 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Tarquelne
-
-
"agrue"?Let's both calm down, this is really not a big issue to agrue about. If you need any help, please let me know.[/QB]I don't think you should post until you stop showing such contempt for the language, history and pets of the posters here. Please edit-out all your posts.
-
Not long ago I found a bunch of old jars the farmhouse basement (well "pit") filled with what I'll charitably call grime. I might be able to disinter them (there's some "grime" around the outside of the jars too) and send them to you CMMOS guys.Originally posted by WineCape:[QB]Gordon,
It's time that you and your CMMOS friends take up my offer on a case of wine for your continous effort. How about it? Come now, don't be shy, forward me your address details...
Charl's got some wine and is a generous guy... and I really wouldn't mind being able to think that the jars I found are a looooong way from me. Either accept the wine, or the jars - c'mon, chose _one_.
[ October 29, 2002, 12:19 PM: Message edited by: Tarqulene ]
-
I was kidding, guys.But it's best to but ZIPs inside a RAR and then package the whole thing inside a self-extracting ACE file..... or maybe not.
Again, just kidding.And as far as the naming thing goes (KV1.zip vrs. mrnoobiekv1.zip) I just assumed that MrNoobie is making a bid to take over the modding world... ALL mods are MrNoobie mods, and so the naming convnetions of the pre-noobite era aren't necessary.
-
Yes.Originally posted by MrNoobie:[QB]wait i can put a zip within a zip?
But it's best to but ZIPs inside a RAR and then package the whole thing inside a self-extracting ACE file..... or maybe not.
And as far as the naming thing goes (KV1.zip vrs. mrnoobiekv1.zip) I just assumed that MrNoobie is making a bid to take over the modding world... ALL mods are MrNoobie mods, and so the naming convnetions of the pre-noobite era aren't necessary.
Or maybe not.
-
Was Variable Rarity on? The battlefield.ru website certainly makes them sounds pretty rare... did that article say only 133 of the Zis-4 57mm guns were produced? Did some T-34/57s use US/Brit. guns?Originally posted by Silvio Manuel:Thanks MikeyD. There are some scattered mentions of a tiny # that were employed in combat- but I'm sure it must have been higher b/c I've seen T34/57 listed as zero rarity % change in CMBB.
-
I find it's most fun to view portions of the action at view 1 or 2, "over the shoulders" of either my units or my opponents, with all the graphics-goodies on high (except maybe trees, which can get in the way)
For a quick and dirty look at the action - SHIFT-T to turn off trees, and SHIFT-C (IIRC) a few times to "magnify" the units, then pull back to 4 or more. This makes it very easy for you (as opposed to your troops) to spot any enemy units and see what you're guys are up to.
I usually watch the turn somewhere in between those extremes.
It has been advocated that the best - most realistic, and most entertaining - way to play CM is to use _only_ view 1. (With some exceptions, I imagine.) I've never tried it... sounds interesting, though.
-
HUGE IMPORTANT ERROR!!!
Well, OK, not really.
Speaking of "For Soviet Moldavia!", Suvorov was best known for his campagins against the Ottoman Empire (Turkey), and not as a "napoleonic general". He died in 1800... while he fought the French in Italy in 1799 I suppose he could be called a "French Revolutionary Wars General", but he pretty much pre-dated that big Napoleonic Thing.
Fearsome commander - tough, hard hitting, you never knew where he might turn up. Great slogan for a tank, I hope to see it in mods! (Or I'll have to get off my butt sometime and do it myself.)
Thanks for the article!
[ October 27, 2002, 03:08 PM: Message edited by: Tarqulene ]
-
So, you're an Operation Flashpoint fan, are you?What about tanks colliding with other tanks? Talk about the ultimate demolition derby![/QB]
-
How about a random element in a unit's delay times? The less expereinced the unit, the larger the random element. (In-command squads/vehicles often use the same random number?) So, even in the absence of enemy fire a Green company would show close co-ordination only if you're lucky, but you could pretty much count on Crack troops executing both halves of a "pincer" movement at the same time...Unfortunately, because the player controls all units all the time, this is absolutely impossible to account for. All wargames suffer from excessive ability to over coordinate.(Hmm... and have all delay times, and all random elements in those times, increase slightly as the distance from Co. and Batt. commanders increases...)
Oh yeah, another way to put Steve's question: How do you get the _computer_ to distinguish between a simple order ("Move along the edge of the woods and go into the nearest house.") and a complex order ("Walk _here_, then walk over _there_, then in this curve... "Watch me not the sky, Corporal!", then go into _that_ house.)
BTW: If I had my druthers I'd see increases in the "cumulative" delay times for Green/Conscript troops (at least after the 4th waypoint or so) and decreased times for Crack+ troops. (The theory here being that you tell Crack+ troops "Go take Berlin." they go do it. Well, OK, _fail_ to go do it in this case, but they don't need you to explain at length exactly how they should go about it. The "complex" waypoint path needed is something that they come up with, so little "cumulative" delay is appropriate.)
Keep in mind, btw, that these opinions are based on a few weeks of casual play.
[ October 27, 2002, 11:38 AM: Message edited by: Tarqulene ]
-
It doesn't work with SS squads, though - they'd be shot for snuggling.The Book Of All Wisdom clearly states that Split Squads will recombine if you get them to Snuggle Up next to each other at the end of a turn. ISTR that Snuggling occurs at less than ten meters.Yes, it works too- I've made it happen. Useful.
Eden[/QB]
-
Reading over my post I realized that I wasn't at all clear on this point:Perhaps. But Steve said it was the over-effectiveness of low quality troops in CMBO that necessitated the change in CMBB. That's why I think the comparison to CMBO is valid.It's very true that your chart seems to contradict Steve's point on exactly why the change was made. But I doubt that "Green troops were too effective" is the whole story.
Anyway... a comparison between CMBO and CMBB isn't really relevent to the effects of the new system (more waypoints = more delays) on troops of varying experience levels in CMBB. Your chart shows that CMBB Regulars took a 45% "hit" to thier delay times. That certainly shows that Regulars suffered compared to Greens (27% increase) in CMBB, but I'm don't think it really says much about the new waypoint system - just that troop experience is expressed differently in CMBB even when the new system isn't considered.
Yeah, that was (IIRC) 8 or 9 waypoints in my test.The delay times don't even out until you reach the 3 minute delay limit.
Yeah, I wonder just what he meant - I took that to mean that experinced units got some of the first few waypoints for "free". It's true that the delay time increase for a Crack squad for 2 waypoints is only about 1/2 the increase for a Green squad (in my test), but "1/2 the delay" seems pretty far off from units being "allowed" waypoints before a delay.What you will see, once you play around with this a bit more, is that the number of waypoints a unit is allowed before the delays increase depends on the quality of the unit.It's interesting because it doesn't work that way./Erroneous pragraph removed/
(Personally, I'm perfectly satisfied with the new system (or what I thought it was, at the very least) but I'd certainly like to understand what's going on and why!)
[ October 26, 2002, 04:16 PM: Message edited by: Tarqulene ]
-
The amount of delay increase between CMBO and CMBB troops might not be important - maybe the Regulars were too good in CMBO? The more waypoints given the more the delay times diverge. For example:
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;">WPts. Reg. Grn. Difference
1 21 31 10 sec
2 27 40 13 sec
3 36 52 16 sec
4 46 67 21 sec
5 69 88 28 sec</pre>
-
A little real "memory" for the AI? WOW, does that open up some possibilities! That'd be great!Bottom line is... can't do anything about this stuff now, but we can for the engine rewrite.If it'd help (and it probably won't) picture me slavering over the thought of such an improvement to CM's AI.
Just got CMBB and (assuming you can fit it in) I've already got an "If it's the only improvement I'd buy it." feature for the next CM game. Nifty.
Hmm... you mentioned that bandwidth requirements made such a scheme impossible (ie, impractical) previously for multiplayer CM games: How about having players send you all their CM saved games of the next few years and compile a player-behavior database? Then, for the next CM, you can just have your new AI _simulate_ various living players. Hey, you could do the same thing and make a simulated BFC forum. Computer grog heaven - no need to interact with other people at all!
-
Oh, surely not!I made it, so I might be biased.
WWB[/QB]
I'll give it a try, thanks.
-
Quite possibly this is just the novelty of the CMBB improvements, but I've been enjoying CMBB scenarios a great deal even when (maybe because of luck, maybe because I'm "In the zone.") the scenario isn't challenging.CMBB scenarios, by contrast, are challenging even against the AI.Maybe it's just that the little Pz38s are soooo cute!
-
Number...2 Is down!guess I was in a Operation Flashpoint moment[/QB]Number...3 Is down!
Number...6 Is down!
Sorry, what is it were you talking about?
Oh yeah. I've been playing some early war stuff (no T-72s.) 37mm pazers vrs. T-34: Rush t38s out of cover, immobilize t-34, drive away! Sneak infantry up, throw grenades, panzerwurferwhatever, run away! Bite nails... wait to see if tank is dead.
Great game.
-
Gosh, guys. This has all been covered before. Is there, like, some reason you can't hang out here all the time or obsessively search through past topics, or something?For more details ask Rexford...
[/QB]FYI - Some of the info might be in the CMBO forum.
-
How about the good 'ol saved game trick? Package a clear-weather Turn 1 with the op?Originally posted by wwb_99:Only way about it is to tell the player to restart it until they get clear weather.
WWB
-
...Merry Xmas at Hemroulle?
Merry Xmas at Hemroulle is one of the favorite CMBO scenarios of a friend of mine, and I'd like to show her CMBB using a CMBB scenario like MXaH.
(CMBO spoilers)
If you don't remember MXaH, it involves a couple of platoons of German tanks about a Co. of infantry with quite a bit of artillery attacking an American (Airborne?) position.
I think the Americans have a couple of Shermans (76 Easy Eights?), some Hellcats (I remember it as _too many Hellcats_.) and around a half dozen howitzers(75mm?), not AT guns. Infantry was just some bazookas, MGs and few (or no?) rifle squads. Americans have some arty, but not as much as the Germans. (I never played as the Americans, so this could easily be wrong.)
Oh yeah. I just remembered why I lost a Panther one game - there's a Jabo around, too.
Terrain was somewhat hilly. The American position was well wooded (and in a small village). Little of the cover available for the Germans was from trees - some usefull hills, though.
-
Wild minks.Originally posted by Michael emrys:That gets the most original guess of the day award.
Michael
One of the major rocket factories would sometimes get rabid minks in the tubes. (They'd come in from the forest near the factory and space-out on propellents.) The minks would often hibernate within the tubes, but the act of loading could wake a frenzied killing machine. Crews didn't remove rockets from the shipping containers untill right before they were loaded, so any minks wouldn't have time to become fully roused before firing.
Rocket crews had more casualties from rabies than any other cause.
-
I'm trying to decide between "cool", and "excellent" or possibly "brilliant!"That sounds really cool and is exactly the type of thing I was talking about... -
We (my LAN group) use bidding fairly often in games. It's _great_. Generally we focus on force types and battle conditions - but "Please, no more g*ddamn StuGs!" could work too.a bidding mechanism?
-
Where I think players who are competative AND enjoy some historical accuracy have a problem with Rarity is that, even with Variable Rarity, a player is often either getting units at fewer points than they're worth, or more. (A ladder player's nightmare would be to buy a significant number of units with an added Rarity cost while his opponent buys units with a discount.) Over multiple games everything should even out... but I think it understandable that for some players that won't be much of a comfort.FWIW, I'd still like to see some effort made to curtail 'gameyness' in force selection whether by points (apparently not), availability, or some other factor. Point cost was just an obvious, accessible target.Sure, you can turn off Rarity - but (unless you cobble together some other rules) "Hello, gamyness!" Or you can use computer force selection... which does seem better in CMBB than in CMBO, but you still get some pretty bizzare, unbalanced forces. And choosing forces yourself is often fun.
I'm hoping that the next CM game will have something in between Rarity (Variable or Fixed) and computer selection: Have the computer "filter" the available forces by Rarity, so some units aren't avaialbe and (hopefully) some units are available only in limited numbers. The player could put together his own force, and still be limited by Rarity, AND still pay for the full combat effectiveness of each unit. (And there's the fun of seeing what the computer makes available.)
[QUTOE]
Then you must aslo accept that much of the case being made for change here is done without addressing any of the main counter arguments.[/QUTOE]
Well, now that we've had a peek into the Game Developer Glossary it's much easier understand some of those arguments.
Unless we all share terms, it's IMPOSSIBLE to understand anything others say. -
Yeah, the Big B. said "no realistic way" not "it's impossible."Originally posted by Battlefront.com:[QB]Berli wrote something so profoundly simple and straight to the heart of the "blinders" problem exhibited here in this (and the other) thread that it deserves to be repeated:
"There is no realistic way to do situation values,"
[/QB]
Battlefront do something! (T34,IS2, KT)
in Combat Mission Archive #4 (2002)
Posted
I'm interested in this issue.... but I've seen it discussed better elsewhere. I suggest that this thread be boycotted. We can try again in a New Topic.