SFJaykey

If anybody else wants one here's the link to the deal I used. There are a number of Dell coupons up at Techbargains right now; this one seemed like the best: http://www.techbargains.com/news_displayItem.cfm/270880 I upgraded the processor for high clock speed, which I'm told is good for CM. Also note, the backlit keyboard and bluetooth, among other things, are options you need to look for and add.

Well I finally pulled the trigger. Delivery in 2 business days. I was shopping for a 15" laptop but couldn't pass on this deal on a 17" at Dell, which I found by combing the Deals and Coupons at Techbargains.com: Dell XPS 17 1080p LED display Intel i7, upgraded to 2.7/3.4 8mb RAM Nvidia GT555m with 3MB video RAM 1 TB & 500 GB dual HDDs. Advanced-N Wireless with Bluetooth Backlit Keyboard all for $1069 with free shipping - though I paid an extra $15 for 2-day shipping. For that price I can deal with lugging the big 17" around. Thanks for the replies - here and in my previous threads. I'm looking forward to meeting you all on the battlefield! MattT

Thanks for the comments! The GTX260M is actually a very good card, more powerful than the ones I've been looking at. 260 might sound like a low number but the GTX are different animals from the GT. And I've been told that the older Core 2 Duos are actually faster in single threaded mode (ie, the way CM runs), than some of the newer 4 and 6 core CPUs. Still, I think I'm zeroing in on a system - now I just have to find the right price. I am way overanalyzing this, I know. It's what I do. You should see how I agonize over setting a Covered Arc.

Thanks for the reply. My personal situation really calls for a laptop. Gaming time is split between home and downtime at work, and even at work I can be sent around to different locations so a portable machine is necessary. I know it's a compromise performance-wise, and have considered the true "gaming" laptops like Alienware despite the cost vs. a comparable desktop. But from what I read, something like Alienware is really overkill for CMBN, or the RTS-type games I tend to enjoy. I would like to try some of the newer iterations of old games like Age of Empires, Dragon Age and Baldur's Gate, which I haven't played in years. But even there, reading the specs it sounds like an i7/GT540 or even GT525 system would have no trouble with the latest versions of these. It seems like it's the shooters that demand the cutting edge power - and I haven't been into those since I wore out the original Doom. Am I wrong? As for other uses - I do a very little image editing with Paintshop Pro but except for that and gaming, I could get by with a netbook or a tablet.

Help! I am not very technical, and driving myself nuts trying to make sure my next laptop will be able to play CMBN (and future hoped-for installments of CMx2). I read the processor clock speed is more important than graphics card power, and am tempted by a Dell XPS with i7-2620M that's rated at 2.7, or 3.4 with "turbo." I can get either a Nvidia GT525M or GT540M with that machine.....would such a rig be adequate to play good-sized (maybe not supergiant) maps, with a little room to grow for future developments of the game> Would the upgrade from the GT525M to the GT540 be worth $100? And would I be ok with an i7-2630QM, clocked at 2.0/2.9, that would save me $95? I just spoke with a salesman who seems to know more than the average clerk, who recommended the AMD A8 for value. He says it has much better integrated graphics performance than the Intel onboard graphics, comparable to an Intel system with a lower end discrete video card. The clock speed on the CPU is only 1.5/2.4, but the price is tempting, around $500. Has anybody tried CMBN on an AMD A8? Finally, there's a neat machine currently on sale, the Asus G53SW-a1. It packs a graphic wallop for $899, with Nvidia GTX460m, 8gb ram, and a sexy gaming-style case. But the CPU is only the i7-2630QM at 2.0/2.9, and what little I've learned tells me this machine is tuned more for the 3D first person shooter type games than CM and I'd be better of spending on a better CPU. Halp! I haven't had a PC that will play CM in almost 3 years, and want to get back in the game! Matt

Thanks! Found it under the nVidia tab right where you suggested. 3 options are available for display of lower resolutions: "Display adapter scaling" [stretched to fill screen] "Centered output" [stretched to screen aspect ratio but centered, with border all around] "Fixed aspect ratio scaling" [bingo! with that setting CMAK fills the screen top to bottom with black side borders and no distortion.] Thanks for the pointer - My ACs have round wheels again!

I just got a new widescreen laptop myself...how do you configure it to run CM with the black bars? Mine stretches CM to fill the full screen, no matter what resolution I set it at. This is in WinXP home with Nvidia 6800 and latrest drivers. Thanks much,

Has anyone developed a balanced armor rule for QB purchases in CMAK, something like Redwolf's Rules for CMBB?

I've never played Citadel, but it sounds like a good-sized scenario with a lot to learn for beginners. If you are still interested in CMBB after that daunting initial exposure, be advised that if you buy the game there is a tutorial scenario with walk-through provided in the manual. If you buy the strategy guide, it includes a walk-through of another good little scenario. There are more such aids available online, and, as you have seen, on the forum just by asking. It's a great game; go for it!

There's also an Opponent Finder forum right here at BF.C. Just go to the Forums menu and scroll down a bit.

That might be a neat mod: a tree mod that had tree canopies with foliage thin enough to see thorugh. Maybe with thin tree trunks, or maybe just the canopy "floating in air." You could leave tree effects set to full or extreme all the time, for visual appeal, but still be able to see the action whether viewing from high angles or ground level.

Generally when I have HT-mounted infantry I use it late in the game, after enemy AT assets have been flushed out by other scouts and eliminated. I often use smoke to screen their approach. The sudden arrival of a fresh platoon or two of infantry, supported by the HT MGs, can turn the tide in the final turns, or make a late rush at a secondary objective.

Maybe some of the British radio spotters who are slow and can't embark just have really big radios? Have you seen what some of the early war sets looked like? IIRC some spotters carried their big radio in a carrier or truck that remained out of LOS while the spotters went forward, dragging wire to the radio. Maybe that's what these spotters are modelling?

My preference would be for moderate to large scenarios depicting CM-sized engagements around Cassino at 1:1 scale. I would love to see a big operation on a giant, accurate map at 1:1 or close to it, but wouldn't charge anyone with the task of producing it, and frankly not sure I would get around to compeleting it myself....

Are daisy-chain mines placed in open or brushy terrain harder to spot than those placed on a road? Seems like it should be the case....is it modelled?

Looks good, PP. I am playing mostly in Tunisia now and will keep the mountains, but try your mod when I move into the eastern desert.

OK, OK, I'll stop. Since I've been spending most of my time over at BoB and only popping in here I hadn't realized that CMX2 discussions had become so frowned upon. I just hope that when the CMX2 forum is finally created and the floodgates of suggestions are opened, we don't hear that "the newly-completed engine won't allow that." Companies pay big $$$ for research on what their customers want; not sure why BFC resists getting that info for free....

Not a demand! Just an humble petition to the BFC demigods. It's probably been suggested before, but I haven't heard of it. It came to me during a discussion of the affects of barbed wire on Woods tiles, how it makes woods passable to tanks and opens LOS: Expand the range of fortifications available to the defending player to include "projects" usually associated with engineers. These might include "AT Trench," "Cut Trees/Cleared Brush," "Graded Slope," and "Demolition," which could be applied to bridges or buildings. Like trenches and wire, these terrain modifications would only become visible when the attacking player achieves LOS to them. This would add some realism to CM mapreading, improving over the current situation where the attacker enjoys maps that are 100% accurate over the entire field of play, and the defender does not receive the RL advantage of better knowledge of the ground. It would also bring some engineer tasks into the game in a way which might satisfy both those who have been hankering for engineer functions, and BFC which believes such operations are outside the scope of a CM game. This solution would keep the actual performance of these tasks outside the gameplay, while still allowing their inclusion in an abstract way. And we know how BFC loves abstraction! Some of these tasks might be included with the purchase of Engineer formations, at a point discount, much the way support weapons are now included with the purchase of many formations. Most axe-and-shovel type tasks would be available for purchase by any force type, while some specialized tasks (Demolition?) might require the presence of engineers. Some tasks might be avaliable to attackers between battles of an operation. Sound contacts could be displayed during the Setup phase to alert players that demolition or other mischief had been done outside their LOS. edit: Instead of asking defenders to spend points on such things, perhaps a certain number of "projects" could be awarded automatically at Setup? The number of such projects could vary based on the manpower of the defending force, and its quality: my readings suggest that veteran troops usually dug in better than new recruits. [ January 06, 2004, 07:19 PM: Message edited by: SFJaykey ]

Ah well, another thing to look forward too/demand in CMX2. Thanks for reply....

Very nice work! I have a question/request: Are the faces of the infantry the same bmps used for the tank commanders and drivers. I'm guessing yes....but if not I would love to see some dust-crusted faces for those desert campaigns!

Well said Haido! While CM is already the greatest wargame ever, there are so many exciting areas still open for improvement. I hope the CMX2 engine is designed so as to make possible the following: - Multiplayer play....I am playing a "team rumble" PBEM right now and despite the cumbersome system required it is a lot of fun. True TCP multiplayer would be awesome! - Full-length movie playback, with editing possible. - The option for group orders, to make larger games (regiment scale or even larger) playable while still allowing the action to be viewed at the level of individual squads and vehicles. - AI improvements, especially the ability for scenario designers to assign "postures" or SOPs to units, such as "Aggressive," or "Defend in place." - A one-click "realism" setting that would set many parameters including view angles, availability of play aids, FOW, available force mixes, and etc. This would enable "Franko's rules" or other "rules" to be set automatically and locked for all players; other settings on the scale might include "arcade," "grognard," an official "tournament mode," and of course, "Custom." - More finely detailed terrain, either through the use of smaller (5m?) tiles, or better, a smooth, "tile-free" virtual battlefield! - Improved graphics, with dynamic lighting, water and mud that splashes, tanks that belch diesel exhaust... - Sun angle that affects spotting and gunnery...tanks that leave tracks across muddy ground, and can tear gaps in wire and hedgerows... - A more realistic artillery model, doing for artillery simulation what CMX1 has done for infantry and armored combat. - Improved handling of multi-battle operations, with more detailed calculation of territory controlled, no man's land, fatigue, supply, and etc. There's more on my wish list, though I'd be happy with half of the things listed above.....the point is that there are so many possibilities for CMX2 that it could be WW2 all over again and yet still be completely "fresh." [ January 05, 2004, 01:38 AM: Message edited by: SFJaykey ]

I have only played a couple of CMAK games so far but really don't see much change in small-caliber penetration lethality compared to CMBB. Three factors that may account for different impressions: American armor was softer (not sure that's the right word) than Russian and less likely to spall after a penetration; this may be modeled and contribute to lower lethality in a Grant penetrated be a 50mm L60 than in the T-34s we are used to in CMBB. With the Italian tanks the 2-pounder rounds would often go right through, so no "rattling around" effect that is often expected. I've seen several pictures of Italian tanks in the desert just riddled with holes. Some CMBB players liked to play mostly with the late-war "supertanks" which almost always feature sizeable bursting charges in their AP. Much more lethal than the solid-shot AP of the smaller calibers. If these players are getting their first regular exposure to the small-caliber guns in CMAK it may be coming as a surprise. In the early years in CM I've seen many, many non-lethal penetrations by the 37mm and other small guns.

AFAIK a sharpshooter in CM can't kill an entire crew, only the TC or the halftrack gunner. For some good anecdotes of what WWII snipers could do, read the memoir of the female Russian sniper at the Russian Battlefield website. Can't get into the site right now, but from memory: she was routinely engaging targets at ranges of hundreds of meters. Longest ranged engagement was vs a German HMG at a range of close to 1km (!). This was with the standard-issue Russian infantry rifle, fitted with a scope. I bet the American 1903 sniper rifle, and whatever the Brits and Germans used was at least as good, maybe better.

A shameless plea from someone who lacks the savvy to do it himself: A Scattered Tree mod that looks like gnarled old olive trees. So many Tunisian battles I read about mention olive groves! A Fountain mod for the single-tile water bmp, as was done very nicely for CMBB. [edit: just tried it and found out the Fountain mod from CMBB works just fine! Even the bmp #s are the same. I still hope someone redoes it in a lighter stone, to match the North African walls!] Also I hope someone does the Open terrain in Italy. The only Italian scenario I've loaded so far was Assault on Perano, and, I don't know, it looks like the landscape's been painted with mustard. With grids, please! Modders accepting the challenge will have an opportunity to playtest some scenarios! [ December 28, 2003, 01:25 AM: Message edited by: SFJaykey ]

One thing I suggested months ago was to create something like a "Casbah" tile, Where the whole tile would simulate small rooms and corridors. As an alternative to the current arrangement of having "buildings" sitting on top of open ground or paved tiles, in which case you get the wide alleys. Compared to Woods, a Casbah tile would provide more concealment and cover, and much less vulnerability to air burst artillery, while slowing movement slightly more or about the same. Compared to Large Heavy Buildings, units would be able to move from one Casbah tile to the next without stepping into the street. I was thinking of North Africa but "Casbah" is probably not the right name, since such a tile would also be useful for recreating European mountain towns where building share common walls and numerous corridors and passageways exist. If you want larger alleys you can mix in some small buildings, too.