Cpl Steiner

Much appreciated Steve.

Thanks Steve for your detailed reply and for giving us a look "under the hood". I totally take on board what you say about foliage and LOS. However, when it comes to fields of tall crops LOS seems to degrade extremely quickly - almost as soon as it reaches the field. From your explanation, is it right to say that tall crop tiles are weighted to give a higher degradation effect on LOS than tree tiles (ignoring for the moment seasonal effects on foliage)? If so, would a possible solution to LOS being traced too far through tree foliage simply be to give such tiles a greater degradation weight? It seems to me that crops block LOS very well in the game even though by your own explanation each individual ear or husk of corn is not being taken into account. Could the game not just treat tree foliage like a field of tall crops hovering just above the ground? Perhaps it does already, in which case maybe the weighting of how much it degrades LOS needs to be increased? Just some thoughts on what might be a quick and simple solution to these sorts of issues (well, quick and simple compared to other ways of tackling it). I did mention this idea in my original post but I don't think anyone has so far responded to it. I also do accept that the example I posted might not have this issue as the trees are tall pines with foliage high off the ground, but I have definitely seen LOS traced a long way through forest canopy in various battles - far more than would be the case for a corn field.

I agree that the type of tree here is not the best for the "foliage" issue that several people have seen (me included). I believe this is because the foliage is ignored and only the 3D model of the tree is considered. Here is a proposed solution, perhaps for another iteration of the game engine a long way into the future. LOS Test Sequence (assumption: only trees considered) 1. Does LOS cross any part of a tree tile? No = End (LOS is clear, as far as trees are concerned) Yes = go to 2. 2. Does LOS intersect a tree model in any of the tree tiles crossed? Yes = End (LOS is blocked) No = go to 3. 3. Does LOS pass through an imaginary cube above the tree tile that represents the approximate location and dimensions of the tree canopy? No = End (LOS is clear) Yes = Might be blocked as LOS is going through the tree's leaves. Other factors could then be considered to determine if the LOS is actually blocked (e.g. season, distance of sighting unit from tile, distance of target from tile, etc. etc. I am not saying this is perfect but I think it would give an effect similar to what we already have for crop doodads. I am also not trying to suggest that BFC need any help from me as regards coding the game engine! I have enormous respect for what they have achieved given their limited resources but there is always room for improvement and unbelievable spotting through tree canopy would be high on my list.

As stated in my original post, I think the game only checks for where the LOS intersects a tree trunk or branch (maybe). It's as if the season is perpetually winter and all the leaves have fallen, from the game's point of view. That's one issue with trees anyway. Not sure if this particular scenario file demonstrates it that well as I think the tree foliage closest to the Germans is high enough to not intersect the LOS but I have done other tests in which it seems pretty clear that the leaves are not considered at all in LOS checks.

OK, I have replicated it as best I can and uploaded a scenario file for you to try yourself as Axis. This was the map and the forces involved in the approximate same positions going from memory. The tanks do engage on the first turn for me when I start turn one without issuing any orders. I confess there are not as many trees in the LOS as I originally stated but I still think LOS through trees is erring on the too generous side. I doubt you will agree with me but see what you think anyway. Tree LOS Issue.btt

Yes, I understand, but this sort of game event is not that difficult to replicate. I have experienced it on several occasions. LOS through trees is extremely generous. You could probably replicate it easily using the editor if you wanted to check. I did try to take a save but had already clicked "Done" after viewing the replay, so it was not possible.

Hi all, I decided to play CM:RT again yesterday after a long hiatus and chose to play a quick battle as the Germans (Axis attack, medium sized town map, human selection of forces). The game launched, and I was greeted by the inspiring sight of my Panther platoon and attached mechanised infantry in a field opposite a large forest, within or behind which I knew some Soviet SU-85 assault guns were lurking. Not wishing to advance into the obligatory turn 1 AI artillery barrage (one of my pet hates about QBs) I did not issue any orders and just clicked the start button. Within seconds, one of my Panther's was in flames - hit by an SU-85 deep within the forest. We are talking extremely deep here - hundreds of metres of dense woodland! Naturally I rage-quit immediately, having wasted a good half hour carefully purchasing the forces for each side to give the best possible battle only to see a ridiculous impossible shot take out one of my best units in the first few seconds of play. This is a bug, pure and simple. I will not be persuaded that it can be anything but a bug. I checked all the angles and the Line of Sight was clearly passing through multiple trees - not just a few; dozens and dozens. Now for some "constructive" criticism. To my mind the issue is that tree foliage is being ignored by the game engine and LOS is being calculated purely on the trunks of the trees. It might include the branches also but this is debatable given how unbelievably far this shot went through half a map's worth of dense forest. My proposed solution to this is to somehow treat foliage like crops. Fields of tall crops easily block LOS in the game at present. I can only imagine that this is because the game engine treats fields of crops "en masse" for LOS blockage, as I cannot imagine that every single husk of corn is being checked for LOS. Maybe if the LOS is a certain height over a crop tile, the game just calls it blocked. Well, if this is indeed how it works, I think a similar sort of rule should be applied to tree foliage. Thoughts and comments welcomed.

Thanks very much for your replies. Now I can as least finish the QB without worrying if I have wasted troops by putting them in the centre of objectives. It is an odd design decision but at least now this threat has cleared things up.

Just saw this in a QB I am playing. Do I have to occupy just the green rectangle outline or do units inside the rectangle count for points? It seems odd that you would not get points for occupying the inside of the rectangle. Maybe the designer of this QB map made the inside a hidden objective just for aesthetic reasons? I would prefer not to open the map in the editor to find out as I would see enemy positions etc. and would like to finish this battle without cheating. Any help much appreciated.

Params as follows (I went the Russian Attacking side vs. the AI-controlled Ukrainian Defending side)... Battle Type: Meeting Engagement Battle Size: Medium Length: 1 hour Map Selection: Automatic Map Size: Large Environment: Town Year: 2017 Month: June Daylight: Day Weather: Clear Rarity: Standard Attacker: Service: Russian Army Combat Force: Mix Electronic Warfare Strength: None Unit Purchase: Automatic Map Preview: No Preview Force Adjustment: -20% Defender: Service: Ukrainian Army Combat Force: Mix Electronic Warfare Strength: None Unit Purchase: Automatic Map Preview: Preview Allowed

I think I know what the answer will be but I would love to see BFC spend some time on reworking the Quick Battle automatic unit purchase logic. I played a QB yesterday with the "mixed" force setting and got given dozens of "Igla" surface-to-air missile troops, sniper teams, and engineers, but no regular infantry. To my mind, any setting that might logically include infantry (such as "mixed") should have a regular infantry unit as its core, and specialist teams like Igla missile and sniper teams should be a tiny proportion of the whole. I have got bored of playing the same battles over and over again so QBs are becoming increasingly appealing for a quick game - but the present force selection logic just makes you want to rage-quit and play something else.

Thanks, I will give those tips a go.

I have put up with this happening with all CMx2 games I own and am wondering if there is a solution. Basically the entire game temporarily freezes for a second or so now and again. It sometimes does this when there is an explosion, sometimes when clicking a unit. The game carries on as normal afterwards. It's pretty minor - an irritation more than anything - but maybe someone who had this has found a workaround? I have a pretty decent Windows 8.1 machine that can play the games on max settings with ease - apart from these occasional freezes. Thanks.

Thanks for giving it a go and for your mini-review. I will most likely submit it to the Repository soon.

Anyone tried this? Perhaps I should just post it on the Repository.

Scenario "Supply Convoy Ambush" for anyone who wants to try it. Blue vs. AI only at present. Synopsis: After taking a wrong turn and running into an ambush a US supply convoy must cross the map and exit via the opposite map edge whilst taking as few casualties as possible. Supply Convoy Ambush.btt

This is nearly finished now. Just need a few tips on how to do the Victory Points. I have designated each type of US unit (Truck, Humvee, Infantry) as a Destroy objective for the Russians and have painted an "Exit" objective on the opposite side of the map for the US. If I ceasefire at the start the US gets a major defeat - all well and good. If they get everyone off the map then presumably it will be a draw because the Russians won't get the points for destroying them. So, how do I make it a Win for the US if they get say 50% of their stuff off the exit zone? Looking forward to your replies.

BFC have occasionally talked about doing a "CM: Shock Force" sequal and I agree - now would be a good time. They could advance the timeline to 2018 or something and have a three-way battle over Syria: NATO vs. Russia (+ Asad) vs. Insurgents vs. NATO. Would be an interesting combination. You could have some scenarios in which the Russians and NATO are effectively fighting the same enemy and others in which NATO and Russia come to blows - perhaps accidentally, perhaps not.

That sounds like it might be fun. It could be similar to the "Jessica Lynch" wrong-turn convoy of the 507th Maintenance Coy during the invasion of Iraq. Navigational error or bad intel results in supply convoy getting into a firefight it was not expecting. I would place this mission after the US has halted the Russian assault on Kiev and has begun to pursue the retreating Russians. In the confusion of battle pockets of Russians are bypasssed and intel on their exact positions is sparse, resulting in a Maintenance Convoy following on behind the US counter-attack making a wrong turn and running into Russian stragglers it was not expecting to find along its route. US forces would be lower quality than typical and the Russians would be perhaps higher quality but low on supplies/morale and just looking for a way to get back to their lines. When the US convoy blunders into them they see it as an opportunity to maybe scavenge some fuel for their vehicles to head back to Mother Russia. Does this fit your idea?

Hi All, I want to make a new scenario for the Repository and I am looking for sources of ideas. The scenario must be a pretty small action - no more than a company - as I think CMx2 really shines at the platoon to company level. Anything bigger and a feel that you get swamped with information overload and can't really keep track of what each unit is doing. So, does anyone know of any good sources for tactical situations? I am thinking maybe training manuals for the military (doesn't have to be US, Russian or Ukrainian doctrine would also be interesting) or articles on wargaming sites. Thanks in advance.

I tried this in the editor and discovered that there is a subtle red-tinting effect when the sun is below the horizon. See composite sunrise image below (click to enlarge) with night on the left and sun risen on the right. I was not aware of any red-tinting effect until now but I guess not many scenarios are set in the early hours of the morning. By the way, the shadows look wrong in the left-hand image slices but I checked in the editor again and the shadows are being caste by the Moon until the Sun rises.

That map looks nice. Thanks for having a go based on my post. I think the key is something that was posted earlier in the thread about forests generally only being there because the land is unsuitable for farming and is therefore left to nature. That means undulating terrain, massive boulders, rocks, steep cliff-like slopes, deep ravines, etc. Of course there will also always be a place in maps for man-made "recreational" forests - such as city parks.

I will look into how to mod the sky but would this mean that there would be not transition to a normal sky as the sun drops below the horizon or climbs higher into the sky? The point of my post was more to do with the fact that the game engine itself does not model sunrise/sunset correctly, despite modelling other details that we probably don't even notice such an accurate star field and correct moon phase for the location and date. It seems like quite a big omission to me, especially as it could actually increase interest in the game because the effect of sunrise/sunset is aesthetically appealing (to most people anyway). I would also expect the whole map to take on a redish hew, not just the sky. You should see the sides of white-coloured buildings looking slightly pinkish for instance.

Hi all, I can't believe I haven't noticed this before but none of the CMx2 games appear to have red-tinting effects at sunrise/sunset. You get a lense-flare effect but the clouds and landscape don't get a redish hew like I have seen in some other games, and of course in real life. If it is not too much work I would love to see some beautiful sunrises and sunsets in a CMx2 game. It would make a typical dawn raid scenario all the more special. Here's a sunrise image picked more or less at random to show what effect I mean. I can't scale the image though (don't know how) so it might be a bit big. Apologies for that. [EDIT] Replaced image with a very rough mockup of sunrise effect in CM:BS. Click thumbnail pic below to enlarge.

Hi Imperual Grunt. Thanks for your honesty. I have to admit that your Spartan Resolve campaign was one of the downloads I had in mind when I started this topic. When I saw the map for the first mission I thought wow, this one has a lot of trees, but I gave it a go and got a minor victory. Then I started the next scenario and again, lots and lots of trees. At that point I unfortunately lost interest in carrying on. I did enjoy the first scenario once I got over the trees issue and just got on with it, so I am sure the campaign is well designed - but if it's Endor every mission I can't see me finishing the campaign. Sorry for that, and please recognise that this is a personal pet hate of mine that is obviously not shared by all. [uPDATE] I decided to reload the mission 2 save and once I scrolled around the map a bit I could see that there are a fair number of clearings and interesting features scattered around so maybe I will give it a go after all and see what map 3 looks like. I can see that you have tried to break up the Endor look so apologies for my knee-jerk reaction - which could be due to the initial camera placement being more or less in the thickest part of the forest.