Hpt. Lisse

Yeah, I'm using the 9.12's with no success. I'll try the 10.1 for the hell of it, though it's a poorly rated release (2.04 out of 5 stars on the AMD forums) and does not fix the grey screen issue (which I experienced for the first time a couple days ago.)

Also experiencing the rendering error (blocks) with my Sapphire 5770 in CMAK, curious if anyone was using the latest Cats.

Alright. Quick impressions. Using CMAK v1.03, with high-res BMP's (I just cut and pasted my entire mod-heavy BMP folder from the Win XP drive.) Battle was Chianti Country. Initially, a wash-out - the monitor (1680x1050 22" Sceptre) starts to blink black frames, which rapidly degenerates into a total black screen. But recalling some of the Nvidia/ATI driver issues of yore, I force x8 Anti-Antialiasing and try again. I complete the battle, start to finish, without one hiccup. Including a 3 hour mid-battle break for dinner/family time, leaving CM up and running during that interval. And very fast/smooth, though obviously a larger battle needs to be tested. Rig is: Windows 7 RC x64 7100 build. Asus M4A79T Deluxe motherboard. Phenom II X3 720 Black Edition cpu @ 3.0 GHz. 4 gigs Mushkin 996625 DDR3 1600 memory. SB X-Fi audio. EVGA 9800GT 512 MB video card w/190.38 drivers.

Hey gents. Just curious if anyone has been playin' around with the Release Candidate - with or without the Vista patch. Willing to be a test mule, of course - skipped Vista, and just finishing the new rig when I realized my odd CM foray may be in danger...

Here's a different angle - What's the possibility of contracting an Nvidia (or recent ex-Nvidia) driver programmer to knock off a DX10 driver that obeys DX5 calls? I'm talking $5,000 over nights/weekends stuff, this sort of freelance thing happens frequently in the coding world. Who knows, maybe they could get wide-screen support rolling for a fee. Do the same for an AMD/ATI driver. Release them when CMC comes out. The kids who are pissed because it slows the frame rate of Far Cry 2 can bite the big one. If this is a legal issue, have guru3D carry the driver, they've offered 'spliced' drivers before.

Man, I have to wonder what it would take to have Nvidia & ATI just make a "slower yet compatible" driver, one that obeys all the DirectX rules properly (even if the twitch kids lose frame rates in bleeding edge titles.) There must be countless older titles that would benefit from this... Second thought - what would it cost to have a single Nvidia or ATI "contractor" (ex-driver programmer, or current one at nights) to give us a CMBB & CMAK driver like the aforementioned? And perhaps find a way to enable wide screen support? Sorry. I'll just grab another beer... (mumbles to self)

Thanks for your input - I edited the Wiki article today.

Ah, but wait... I put the same question to George Parada, at the highly regarded "Achtung Panzer!" website. His take on it was, "Hi, Germans only used 88mm Flak 36 L/56 in North Africa. George" Perhaps the Flak 41 was only used in a AA capacity at the ports of Tunis and/or Bizerte? Would a commander throw the new/experimental Flak 41 up on the front line for AT duty like that? Inquiring minds want to know... Thanks, Hpt. Lisse

While researching a WWII piece, and ran across the wiki entry for Battle of Kasserine Pass. It contained a sub-article for Battle of Sidi Bou Zid, linked below: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Sidi_Bou_Zid I believe the author incorrectly notes the usage of “…German 8.8 cm KwK 43 anti-tank guns.” In the Battle segment. It even links to the wiki listing for the 2nd gen. 88 gun. Are you aware of the use of the 88 L/71 gun during the Africa campaign? Was it even in production at that point? (Let’s see, that’d be Feb. 1943) The author quotes two articles – I took the trouble to read them. Only one of them uses the term “88mm anti-tank guns”, and that could easily be referring to the Flak 18/36’s employment as an anti-tank weapon. However, I could not find a production listing for the various 88 L/71 AT weapons by month per se while searching this afternoon. What say you? Many Thanks, Hpt. Lisse PS The well-researched TOE when QB CMAK in that time frame does NOT make the 88 l/71 available...

I find the simple confession that Battlefront is engineering ANY updates to CMBB as stunning news. If wide screen resolutions aren't too difficult a fix for the CM1 engine, that'd be pretty like...

Curious - same exact OS on both systems? So many laptops come with Vista pre-loaded now...

Dirtweasle - I suspect they're doubting CMBB - and CMC's - Vista compatibility.

Kettler - it's in the article (Wiki entry), I was trying to keep the quote on-topic (barrel wear, etc.) I believe its referred to as the "Coriolis effect".

Thought you gents would enjoy this - while researching a WWI script, I came across this info for the German Paris Gun, the 256 ton railway monster used during 1918. "The projectile reached so high that it was the first man-made object to reach the altitude of the stratosphere, thus virtually eliminating drag from air resistance, allowing the shell to achieve a range of over 130 kilometres (80 miles). The shells were propelled at such a high velocity that each successive shot wore away a considerable amount of steel from the rifled bore. Each shell was sequentially numbered according to its increasing diameter, and had to be fired in numeric order lest the projectile lodge in the bore, and the gun explode. Also, when the shell was rammed into the gun, the chamber was precisely measured to determine the difference in its length: a few inches off would cause a great variance in the velocity, and with it, the range. Then, with the variance determined, the additional quantity of propellant was calculated, and its measure taken from a special car and added to the regular charge. After 65 shells had been fired, each of progressively larger caliber to allow for wear, the barrel was sent back to Krupp and rebored to a caliber of 240 millimeters (9.4 in) with a new set of shells."

My vote goes toward (as previously mentioned) difficulties with the one-player computer AI putting up a decent fight, as opposed to interface problems with CMBB. BTW, that "vaporware sandwich" photo was beyond hilarious...

TreeTop64 - you can set your ViewSonic monitor to not "squish" non-widescreen resolutions - in the menu, it will be called "Aspect ratio" or something similar. My options are 'Native' or 'Full' - select Native, as Full forces the entire screen to be filled. My Sceptre is also 1650x1080, so I play any CM game at 1280x1024. I'd rather have a little black border on screen than that strange 'squish' effect... Also - Multi-turrets are, in fact, modeled in CMAK, it's one of the upgrades over the CMBB. There are M3's aplenty, it's a gas. Check out the product page here at Battlefront, they have several Grant screen shots. [ February 14, 2008, 12:17 PM: Message edited by: Hpt. Lisse ]

Hellmut - even with the new uber-patch, which has helped a great deal, TOW is a (narrow?) pass for any Squad Leader fan. SFox28 is correct when he says that this game just doesn't quite 'gel' yet in the manner that MTW2 or Combat Mission did. The level of micro-management required to get your troops/AFV's to be effective simply becomes more work than fun - and your efforts are often in vain. In the new Panzer Lehr campaign, where you defend against the Allied forces in Normandy, a large number of Panzer shreck/faust teams are under your control to help ward off waves of Allied armor. But those Cromwell IV's shrug off the 8.8 cm HEAT projectiles with ease (even rear hull/turret hits); blowing a track off is considered a lucky shot, whereas in Combat Mission, that AFV would be fortunate to survive a direct hit at all. Forget pause-time chores like getting the ammo carrier to drop his 'shreck rounds in the trench, move your operator over to pick them up, and then proceed to re-load the weapon... There are many elements that TOW gets right - the inf. vs. inf. small arms balancing seems about there (though remember, a rifleman could be standing on a dead light MG42 soldier, and won't pick his weapon up until told to do so.) The AFV vs. AFV is getting there (though again, a Stug IIIG that has been ordered to 'not move' won't rotate in place to defend itself from an enemy tank just outside its field of fire.) But the biggest problem is combined arms battles, which highlights the weaknesses of the game in its current state. I would even go so far as to say that some of the disappointment you hear echoing around the forum is because TOW falls JUST short of being a fun & realistic wargame. GI Combat, for example, never even came close. I suspect that TOW II in a year or two will be where you want to spend your time and money.

True, but it also sucks when you're issuing the "don't move" command to keep your Stugs put - but then they refuse to rotate to engage an allied AFV just outside their gun arc! This really needs to be addressed... I dunno, break it up into 2 different action buttons or something...

I have to agree here, this too being the first battle I've tried since the patch (playing on difficult.) The psychic air support seems a bit much, though the two Flak AA guns do a good job if you can keep them alive. Even in death the Brit flyboys get ya - second time through, I cursed as a flaming fighter crashed into an active Pak 40 gun! (Cool, though, that it can actually occur...) I also think that the damage of the Panzershreck is undermodeled... close range, rear hull hits on those Crommies, and off they scoot, unfazed. I doubt that would happen often in CM, for instance. A couple of times I've had unresolved stand-offs as well - numerous immobilized Crommies out in the field, all my AFV's DOA or can't move - but it's simply impossible to sneak up on/around those Borg-spotting mothers with my remaining 'Shrecks. Ratt-tat-tat... thud. Buuurraap... arrgghh. A WWI trench rush has more likelyhood of succeeding. Anyhoo, I look forward to seeing more of the patch improvements - if I can get past this battle. May have to suck it up and lower the difficulty to medium...

Yeah, it's a shame that didn't get fixed... the pre-uber patch version did the same thing. Near as I could figure it, my ambushing soldier gets the line-of-sight verification when he sees the front of the AFV coming around the corner... but then tries to target the center of the AFV when throwing his anti-tank grenade. Which is normally what you'd want him to do, if there wasn't a wall/building in the way...

Great news, dusting off TOW as we speak. Just a suggestion for the bandwidth altar of MM, which I've worshiped at/cursed for eight years now... something like this... Verizon FiOS Since this is your job (even if it's "part time") you get to claim this as a deduction on your tax return. I haven't paid for high-speed in 6 or 7 years now...

I found this mostly occurs when the boarding crew members discover that the AFV has no ammunition left, or all guns destroyed. Same with ATG's, crews will simply leave if there's nothing left to shoot (making last minute captures a bit problematic.)

Have not seen an arty round score a direct hit yet, or witness any AFV get damaged from grenades (not anti-tank type stuff, just normal grenades.) Nice to know it's possible. I've only just completed the French and Polish campaigns, and often finished battles without using all available arty/air cover. (The Final Solution, etc.) Fighter planes in the final French battle was great to watch, introduced both enemy ground attack German fighter-bombers to the terra firma in a most violent manner...

KiloAlpha4, I don't see any post by you in the Tech Forum - give us your machine specs and they'll help you. I, too, am having some teething issues with the control and camera placement in battles. But the more I play, the less out of hand it seems. It does, at times, come off as overwhelming. The only real CC advantage I can think of is being able to view the entire battlefield at once. It had, among other problems, terrible LOS errors (from trying to overlay a 3-D system over a 2-D graphic engine.) There's a learning curve to the commands (I would never have thought to use "Retreat," for example, as "Reverse," or how often I'd be commanding a squad to "Hold Postition.") I'm playing the Polish campaign and getting my ass kicked regularly (at the hardest setting.) I'm only on the 3rd battle, and still suffering. But not in the same way that GIC or EYSA made me suffer (played the demos, wouldn't buy the game.)

Ha! Hoo boy, that's rich. Start a TOW campaign on "realistic", my friend, and it's going to make the film Deliverence look like Disneyland.