Hpt. Lisse

It all depends on your vid card/CPU and how many buildings/trees you're displaying on the battlefield. Trying a higher level of AA/AF won't hurt anything, you'll just notice a framerate slowdown when panning the battlefield.

Yeah, ATI makes a great product these days. CM is my primary game, so I've actually kept the Nvidia train going just to have fog on the battlefield. Sad but true.

Well, a 128MB FX5900 non-Ultra can be had for $185 on pricewatch.com. Sports all of the good stuff, 256 bit pipeline, etc. and is only slightly slower than the Ultra (but much cheaper). I would think the card would OC very close to Ultra specs, if need be. The ability to render fog in CM is what has kept me on the Nvidia train the past couple years. Pretty sad. Oh yeah, I didn't realize when I bought it that the FX series vid cards will not run on pre 40's series drivers, so the 'ol standbys (30.87) were no longer accessable to me. Do'h! Apache - win XP will allow you to roll back drivers if you don't like the new one. I suggest installing it, see how CM plays with them, and benching them using 3DMark to see what performance gains (if any) you experience. You'll need 3DMark2001 SE (330 build) if you are running DirectX 8, or 3DMark2003 for DX9. Sound like a plan? [ February 19, 2004, 04:38 PM: Message edited by: Hpt. Lisse ]

GJK, what you are suffering IS the AA/AF bug - missing text within boxes when AA is enabled. That should no longer occur with the 56.55 driver, which (as stated earlier in this thread) is available from NVplanet. Snarker's commentary comes from 3dGuru's site. If Unreal Tournament 2004 is high on your wish list (I sorta doubt it is for most wargamers), you may want to wait a couple of weeks. I haven't seen any problems with any other applications on my box. Follow Schrullenhaft's instructions on how to properly install any video driver, also located in this thread.

Really Bone_Vulture? I was getting no love from the 53.03's with a FX5900 non-ultra. What vid card do you have? Note the actual 56.55 driver comes from NVplanet, not 3DGuru - I haven't seen any other problems with other games, and Unreal Tournament 2004 isn't high on this wargamers' list. [ February 19, 2004, 10:32 AM: Message edited by: Hpt. Lisse ]

Apologies - this is more of a Tech Support item, but wanted to post about the new 56.55 drivers that correctly enable AA/AF without the Alt-Tab bullocks. Please reference the "new Nvidia driver @ 3DGuru" thread at the Combat Mission - Tech Support section. Finally. They've only been busted since, what, the 30.82's? Hpt. Lisse

Schrullenhaft can walk ya through it. From the sounds of it, you have an Nvidia NForce chipset motherboard - so the display driver is the only one you want to change.

Confirmed, the 56.55 driver does (finally) fix the AA Alt-Tab problem with CMAK. I run XP Pro with a eVGA FX5900 (non-ultra). It seems a tad slower perhaps, but very hard to tell - the 56.55 seems to be a keeper. Hpt. Lisse

No question, CPU speed/FSB is the hurdle, with Athlon systems winning out (their Floating Point integer calculations are superior to Pentium models, though recently Intel has closed that gap). Back in the day, I once did a monster CMBO battle, defending as Axis in a long valley map against a British assault. My rig at the time was a 450 Mhz AMD K6-2, and the longest turns took approximately 16 minutes to render. I couldn't believe that thing didn't crash out. On a side note, your video card is a dog. Get yourself an early birthday present in the form of a FX5900 non-ultra or a 9600XT. Hpt. Lisse [ February 11, 2004, 12:22 AM: Message edited by: Hpt. Lisse ]

Read all about it. http://www.achtungpanzer.com/hetzer.htm It was a successful and well-liked tank destroyer, built off of a Pz 38(t) chassis. The Swiss used them into the 70's... Hpt. Lisse

The power buy of the month is eVGA' non-Ultra FX5900, which goes for under $200 on pricewatch. I've had this card for the past two months, and love it - it's a big step up from the 5200/5600 family, with it's 256 bit pipeline. Please note that older non-FX drivers don't really work with these cards, so the 30.82 and 30.87 drivers are out of reach. Of course, Alt-Tab once at the beginning of any battle isn't vexing me too much, either. Hpt. Lisse

Interesting - Charles programs on a Mac platform? Hpt. Lisse

Not a great card, but you should list the rest of your system specs so that we can troubleshoot the problem. What graphics card did you have in previously - did it work okay? Change anything else recently? What motherboard are you running, does it support AGP X4 or X8? Are you overclocking your system? Hpt. Lisse

Two items. First of all, I just wanted to thank you for your tireless Tech Support efforts on behalf of all the CM games. You've truly become an invaluable resource to this board, and I wanted you to know that many of us are greatly indebted to your efforts. Secondly, I heard some time ago that the CMX2 engine was going to use OpenGL instead of Direct3D. Has this decision been made? Hpt. Lisse

Don't forget that a DIMM slot in the mobo itself can be the culprit in rare instances. Switch off memory sticks, and see if the suspect module runs okay in slot O. If there are no problems under these conditions, it could be the slot itself. Hpt. Lisse

I agree with Salkin - I think we're talking about having full squads (w/correct weapons) represented and performing basic animations - not maneuvering realistically. A hotkey would turn this off for slower systems, or it could be POV dependent (breaks into 12 men when close enough). Remember, too, that implementing such details is also a product of efficient & optimized code - a good example of this is 1C/Maddox IL-2 flight sim - which provides good detail without requiring the latest Alienware to play smoothly. I like the idea of half squads routing/breaking off - what I would love to see is Sgt. Penn of 3 Sqd, 1st Plt. getting killed and Cpl. Numbnuts assuming command. This should hold true for HQ units, etc. - the highest ranking officer should be able to get knocked off. (In fact, they would be preferred targets for snipers...) There are several great ideas for the campaign elements in this and other threads - the afforementioned Total War methodology should be the absolute minimum for CMX2. Speaking of 1C/Maddox, it will be interesting to see how their upcoming Wartime Command turns out - better than EYSA no doubt, but legit strategy game or wanton clickfest? We shall see. By the way, did Charles indeed choose to go with OpenGL instead of Direct3D for the CMX2 engine? Hpt. Lisse

My Ti4600 Asylum always served me well... I use it in my second rig now, where it continues to perform. Primary rig now uses a eVGA FX5900 (non-ultra), which now goes for under $190 on Pricewatch. The non-Ultra doesn't give up much to it's higher-clocked sibling, as you can see here. Yeah, the whole Nvidia thing is solely to get fog in Combat Mission. http://www6.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030714/index.html Hpt. Lisse

Yeah, I see it in the CMAK folder. Sorry 'bout that, expected it on the disc. Hpt. Lisse

Let's forget for a moment the insanely long time it takes for my competent rig to "read" the disc (other games of equivalent size don't do this... wierd) in either my straight 52X CD-ROM or my brand-new Lite-On 52x32x52x CD-RW drive. I don't see the PDF manual anywhere on the disc. And I mean anywhere. As an experienced CMBO/CMBB player, it's not imperative, but I'm telling you that I cannot find it on any subfolder on this CD that contains a PDF file.. I have the newest version of Adobe reader (6.0). Hpt. Lisse Anyone? [ December 12, 2003, 10:14 PM: Message edited by: Hpt. Lisse ]

I think CMAK looks great, and will put my pre-order in post-haste. However - There are a few issues. A) The "captured" modeling needed a gentle nudge forward, not a huge leap - I've watched veteran squads in HQ range with only one or two casualties suddenly give up the ghost under modest pressure. IMO, this needs to be re-thought. As has happened in the past, a full regular Axis squad within a heavy house refuses (in 4 turns!) to employ their Panzerfaust 30's at a Green M4A3 at 25 meters. They were not under small arms fire (i.e. pinned), and did not fire even when the tank rotated around, presenting its vulnerable rear quater to the squad. C) As listed previously, the Grant's 75mm inability to target heavier AFV's, choosing to use it's 37mm instead. I'm sure the boys at Battlefront are hard at work, and look forward with great anticipation to CMAK for X-mas. Hpt. Lisse

I just got a 19" NEC Multisync 97F and am fairly happy - it stacks up well against other lower-end flat CRT's, and with a $60 rebate, it set me back $200. I'm still not liking LCD's yet. You can get a non-Ultra eVGA FX5900 128MB for about $220 now. It's got all the horsepower you'll ever need, (well, for awhile anyway) and would probably overclock close to an Ultra's specs. It was my understanding that the vid card's memory controller, having to split it's duties between two 128MB banks, is what slowed the 256 cards down a hair. Hpt. Lisse

If memory serves... When drilled by the British for analysis, certain parts of the Tiger's frontal turret armor were actually slightly thicker than 100mm. Production variance, perhaps. The armor quality rating has to do with production flaws in the steel itself - as Germany's late-war steel lowered in quality, so did it's armor rating. Yes, that means 100mm of armor at 95% quality is roughly equivalent to 95mm at full quality. Penetrations at weak points simulate driver's binoculars, etc., other areas of the surface that weren't homogenous with the steel plate. No, there's no such thing as a "dead cert" penetration in CMBO or CMBB, just like real life. While the range isn't a real factor for HC rounds, what was the angle? While a Tiger I's frontal armor isn't really sloped, was your vehicle on a hill? Did the shell "lob" in a up and down arc, instead of a relatively flat trajectory, giving the impact more angle? 'Cause it all gets measured, my friend. So now, it's a 20 degree angle (I speculate, of course, but you understand) on a Tiger I's thickess section of armor, which might be 105, 108mm. While disappointed (did the beast get ya?), I wouldn't be crying technical foul. It's a borderline call, and you simply lost that particular roll of the randomized dice. Hpt. Lisse [ October 01, 2003, 11:38 AM: Message edited by: Hpt. Lisse ]

Interesting comments about the FX5600 - Your rig is similar to my home away from home rig, Steiner14, but it has a Ti4600 in it. My brother currently has the new FX5600 card in our pool of computers, and I think I'll be swapping the cards around - he needs the extra horsepower of the 4600(Dark Age of Camelot, etc) and as long as CMBO & CMBB run okay with the FX5600, then that's all I require. Phil buddy, whaddya got, cash to burn?!? I just got a eVGA FX5900 (non-Ultra) for my primary rig, and it runs great - Yes, fog in CM was the only reason I didn't go ATI. (And I have told ATI that on several occassions). But esp. with AA or AF on, the 5900 does pretty well - here's a link to Tom's Hardware where you can see them tested against each other. http://www.tomshardware.com/graphic/20030714/index.html While there's no doubt that the 9800 Pro kicks butt, I'm surprised you'd dump a FX5900 for it. MadMatt - Our Gainward 64MB GF3 just got handed down to my 70 year old father - gotta keep his MS Train Simulator runnin' spiffy. It, too, has served us well for a couple of years now. I can only pray that Battlefront goes ahead with the plan to DUMP Direct X and encodes CMX2 in OpenGL, as the rumor implies. Any news on that, MM? Hpt. Lisse [ September 29, 2003, 08:05 PM: Message edited by: Hpt. Lisse ]

Just wonderin'. Although the FX5900 I just got yesterday will leave me in Nvidia land for another year. Quite a price to pay for fog table support. Hpt. Lisse

I hafta throw in with that chorus. I just re-loaded CMBO last week, and the rubble is indeed flat and featureless. Help us, MikeyD! Hpt. Lisse