Becket

Chill out ... don't be so anxious ... the sooner you get a turn from me the sooner your lads will be destroyed and tears will be rolling down your face. I don't know, maybe you like that ... it's not for me to say. UNFORTUNATELY ... I can't load your turn. It gets stuck at 55% and won't advance beyond that. Please either admit your defeat or replay the turn in 1.02 and send that. Joe </font>

Paper Tiger, no one in this thread is suggesting that QBs use randomly generated maps. The suggestion on maps is that we get to directly select them. So - not really sure what your post relates to, as I never raised anything about the AI.

Don't you think the setting of the game is a gigantic flaw to overlook? I haven't purchased DropTeam or Down in Flames or any of the Barbie games either because I didn't care for those settings. The games may be the greatest things since sliced bread and I will never try any of them to find out. You're saying that CMSF's allegedly superior gameplay compensates for a setting that frankly blows chunks? </font>

Sweet! must be someonthing on my end. </font>

Sweet! must be someonthing on my end.

However, one of my current games does not seem to work. Have you had any luck getting a 1.01 PBEM file to load in 1.02?

To be fair to Yamato, it did take rather a lot to sink it. And even then, it could still be retrofitted to save Earth from the Gamilons. So there's that. </font>

el bump

I've just spent some time testing this and it appears to only happen in PBEM. In hotseat, if you give a target order, the unit starts to fire. In 1 player WE-GO, if you give a target order, the unit starts to fire. In PBEM, if you give a target order, the unit does nothing.

I've just spent some time testing this and it appears to only happen in PBEM. In hotseat, if you give a target order, the unit starts to fire. In 1 player WE-GO, if you give a target order, the unit starts to fire. In PBEM, if you give a target order, the unit does nothing.

Gold, Jerry, gold!

Cross-Posted here from the main forum: During setup, I gave most of my army the hide command. Now, I can't get them to stop hiding. I use the target commands and cover arc commands with enemies in the arc, but they keep hiding. I hit the hide command again, they keep hiding. I've tried the face command & the hunt command - anything short of actually giving them a move command (which would be suicide). Is there a command I have missed that will bring them out of hiding, or is there a bug? What is the intended behavior? I would have expected that if you gave a target order or they had an enemy in their covered arc, they would un-hide and fire. Any help appreciated or else it's going to be quite a dull match, with my army hiding the whole time.

yeah, I've seen the discussion on #3 but I'm pushing it a bit. Here's the most rudimentary possibility: The game is selecting forces; this is obvious. It must be selecting them from something - potentially a list, though I suppose maybe there's an algorithm instead. But either way, the game is making decisions, like choosing between an uncon force of all foot soldiers and one that has trucks; like choosing between an armor force that's mostly BMPs and one that has T-72s. At the most rudimentary level - assuming it's not just running a calculation - you could expose these potential, fully C&C compliant, choices to the player, and allow the players to pick. Here's the concern. Multiplayer using pre-made scenarios can be great. There's no doubt about that. But if you want to have no knowledge of your opponent's forces and be sure that they have no knowledge of yours, using pre-made scenarios doesn't work unless you involve a third party to run the game ROW style. That leaves you with QBs. Now, take an armor v armor game, for example. Not being sure what you're getting is one thing; but the potential to get BMPs when your opponent gets T-72s, or worse, Abrahms, is quite another. Without some ability to say "I want main battle tanks," you can really have an unenjoyable scenario. Just thoughts...maybe this stuff isn't anything to could even be done, were BF.C interested in doing it, until 1.05 or 1.27.

Unless something has changed, development of CM:SF modules was intended to happen at the same time as development of WW2.

Mabye, but the Russians never export the top of the line, and that's what I want to see. Plus, I want Russian infantry & specops, not Syrian formations using Russian weapons.

Anyone? Anyone? Bueller, Bueller? Put the question differently: has anyone successfully had their squads un-hide and attack in We-Go/PBEM?

I'd prefer the Russians before anything else.

CM:AK? CM:AK? There are no T-34s in CM:AK, either. :mad: :mad: :mad: IMO CMx2 is better than CMx1 in all ways except setting.

So, to distill my rambling post into a short set of concrete thoughts: 1. Allow the user to pick the specific map in the QB interface. 2. Add UI feedback when no randomly selected map meets the selected criteria. 3. Implement SNSAUSASC. Is it fair to say that most seem to like the "army list" or "cafeteria system" idea? I think this is a complex programming request, especially since it impacts PBEM, but it would be greatly appreciated. 4. Fix the setup bug.

During setup, I gave most of my army the hide command. Now, I can't get them to stop hiding. I use the target commands and cover arc commands with enemies in the arc, but they keep hiding. I hit the hide command again, they keep hiding. I've tried the face command & the hunt command - anything short of actually giving them a move command (which would be suicide). Is there a command I have missed that will bring them out of hiding, or is there a bug? What is the intended behavior? I would have expected that if you gave a target order or they had an enemy in their covered arc, they would un-hide and fire. Any help appreciated or else it's going to be quite a dull match, with my army hiding the whole time. [ August 11, 2007, 10:21 AM: Message edited by: Becket ]

Yep.

No. Last week, playing World of Warcraft, a monster that was below the world was plinking me with ranged attacks.

Hey, it's only my opinion, and although I think it's particularly apt, I could be dead wrong. -dale </font>

Hey, it's only my opinion, and although I think it's particularly apt, I could be dead wrong. -dale </font>

So. I love the game. But - I don't love the QB generator, so I thought I'd start a thread to provoke productive discussion about ways to improve the QB generator. 1. Maps. Current Implementation: maps are selected from a set of pre-made maps, based on the criteria entered by the player. No random map generation. No ability to select a specific map. No UI indication when there's no map that meets the selected criteria (the user is bumped back to the title screen). Suggestions/proposals: - Random map generation. This appears to be off the table and thus I am not going to address it. I am sure those that feel strongly about it will feel compelled to talk about it, but I am persuaded by the technical impediments that prevent its implementation in CMSF. - Map selection. The ability for the user to pick a specific map for the game, much like in CMx1, would be greatly appreciated. As it is now, you may have a great map that you want to play with new units, but you have no easy way to ensure you'll play on that map. - UI notification when there's no random map to meet the user's selected criteria. 2. Units. Current implementation: user picks from a desired nation and type of force (i.e., Mechanized, light infantry, etc.). Actual units are selected by the computer based on the game size and the parameters chosen. Suggestions: - CMx1 style free point buy. This appears to be off the table and again, I don't intend to add to the arguments for and against it. I would prefer the old system but respect the arguments from the developers against it. - Some New System that Allows Us Some Ability to See and Choose (SNSAUSASC for short ). I wonder if there might be a middle ground between the current system - no idea what you might get, no control over it - and the old system. I wonder if it might be possible to provide very high level "army lists" that the player might select, or, even better, a system that offered army "components" from a cafeteria style menu. You can get one from section A, two from Section B, and one from Section C, but if you choose any units from Section B you can't have anything from Section D - that kind of thing. I recognize that I have no idea how hard it is to code any of this. I also recognize the inherent difficulties in coming up with balanced lists. We don't need point values; we don't need to compare whether an Abrams is "worth" as much as X number of T-72s. What I'd suggest is just something that says "in a game of this size, you can have an armor force consisting of the following options: choose." 3. Bug. Currently, units in QBs are not always put into their setup zones. They are placed in other areas on the map, with more or less bad results (enemies that "spawn" in your setup zone on turn one). Worse, if your forces are affected by this bug, you can't move them back to your setup zone. I assume this has been reported and is on the list, and just added it for completeness. Caveat: maybe all of this is completely obvious, known to all, hashed to death, and will only lead to flames and tears. If that is the case, please accept my apology in advance, for I don't think that is the case.