Ankh Morpork
-
Posts
108 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Ankh Morpork
-
-
I'd prefer a built-in PBEM handler/British module/flame-throwers/multi-core support thanks.
Yes to the main subject and big yes to this too!
However, we've had the tcp/ip wego discussion before and sadly I don't think it will ever be made.
-
I've noticed that too - but tbh, even if I love details - it could be that they reduced some details to make it less gpu/cpu demanding?
-
If I understood correctly, you can only activate the game 4 times. Every 365 days you get one automatic extra activation, or if you have a really sad story BFC can arrange something to make an exception for you. Note that reinstalling on the same computer does not require an activation. Changing stuff to computer such as OS, replacing hardware will require a new activation.
[Edit] changed 5 --> 4. According to the manual, two installations per game (each with a backup activation), so 4 activations in total. I should really read the manual before posting, sorry for the confusion.
Actually, so should I! Thanks alot for the help!
-
I had a wooping 13mb/sec here...so I was quite happy with it!
-
How many computers can we install the game on simultaniously? I've got quite a few spread out - so it would be nice to have it on more than one
-
The one where the Finns throw StuGs at Soviet tanks to knock them out?
Which one is that?
-
The way to go is probably 3x 24" turned 90 degrees, for 3600x1920 pixels total.
Its a matter of taste tbh. I really enjoy 5760x1080.
Btw, You should be able to play using 2 gfx cards. I think somebody mentioned doing so earlier in this thread
-
-
But unfortunatly it wont handle as high resolution as multiple monitors. I was using my 50" before but it really can't compare to 3x24".
Edit: Btw, you can always flip the monitors 90 degrees and place next to each other. That way you get a more square-ish view than a horizontal one. I actually prefer the horizontal one all games.
-
That's because making a multi-monitor panoramic view work requires nothing else than adjusting the game's camera perspective. It's still the normal game screen, but it is projected a little bit different. What you're asking for is to make different things show in different monitors, and that is a completely different thing.
Indeed it is! One thing that would have been nice is if it was possible to open several windows within the game. Like overview map and such. But I think thats pretty much as big challenge to you as it is to view different things on different monitors. And proberbly low priority too.
Having a small window in a corner showing crucial losses (like closeup on a unit getting destroyed or similar) would also have been worth its weight in gold.
But ofc these are just ideas that proberbly just a few of us want.
While im at the subject of new things for the game - have You decided how much the addons will cost once they are made/released?
-
Seconded. Spring has this feature for players to mark the map and communicate with each other. It's pretty useful. A contour display would be nice too. I don't like having to eyeball for every hull-down position and piece of cover in a game of this scale.
Combine this with a coop ability and players could coordinate easily. Think huge battalion or regimental battles. *drool*
Coop would have been awsome! But it's something we proberbly never ever will see
-
Gents, first, you realize that Nvidia cards use surround to allow multiple monitor setup? ATI uses something very similar so there is no need to buy a Matrox splitter. I routinely play the demo on three 24" and there is marginal hits on FPS, though admittedly have two GTX 480's in SLI. You can pick up 24" monitors for about $175.00, less if you do the homework on the net for lowest prices. Anyway, the Matrox digital triple head runs for more than $300, their standard version can be found for about $170.00. Anyway, just thought I would throw in more minutia to chew on...
Matt
Ati use what I mentioned earlier - Eyefinity.
You can either use crossfire (ati's version of sli) or get an eyefinity card which supports up to 6 monitors (thats the one im using...6 dp ports - but ive only got 4 screens connected atm. 1 small at the top and 3x24" at the bottom.)
Edit: Eyefinity is proberbly the easiest way to get it to work with multiple monitors since all it requires is you to select the order the 3 screens are supposed to be and then pretty much every single game out there span over all 3. However, some games do get a strange FoV when you use it.
-
Im using 3x24" and the demo worked great with it. However, when I tried to change to lower resolution (using 5760x1080 - wanted to try it on 1920x1080) it refused to change. I rebooted the game and tried several times but it just won't change.
Using Eyefinity and not Matrox Tripple Head.
-
But as Steve said, it's on the list, and it's certainly technically feasible, so we will probably get it eventually. I hope we do
.Exactly
this thread turned into something it shouldnt have done in the first place, but it was nice discussing it still There are tons of other things I'd like to see in the game - but it's proberbly better to see the first release and then start bombarding with suggestions since they proberbly got quite alot to do atm as it is anyway!
I just hope it doesnt turn out to be as big letdown to me as Shockforce was (or Theatre Of War...then again, it's only distributed by battlefront and the ones making CM is not at all involved...atleast I think thats the case
)Ive been playing CMBB pretty much frequently since the release - quite odd though that I keep upgrading my pc to quality hardware...and still I keep falling back to games like Combat mission (and other oldies that dont really need my hardware).
Tbh I would have been happy enough to pay full price for an upgraded game engine to CMBB without any hesitation. I just hope CM:BFN manage to get me just as excited as CMBB did! (I guess one thing that I dont like with SF is the fact that most vehicles are classified which means we cannot get as awsome details as we do in ww2 games...and modern battlefield arent really my cup of tea!).
-
No Gibsom - I mean the part about changing things in the combat. Moving the camera around is nothing that will affect the size at all since its being calculated by the game engine while you play the file.
Edit: Oh btw, Good morning to you!
-
Ankh Morpork,
I have played CMSF and I know about data
. The simple fact is that savegames in CMSF (and also the PBEM files) are in a very compressed format, and since CMSF handles a lot more data than CMx1 games (like deformable hi-fidelity terrain and 1 to 1 soldier representation), they also tend to be large. Someone else has stated this. However, unlike what you seem to assume, even streaming this data out into a video may not be feasible, since it can often take the game engine up to or more than a minute to load a 60-second turn from a pbem file. Even on a fast computer. Of course I don't need to tell you that this is a problem 
. There is probably a way to remove the redundant parts from the pbem files and get them into a format where they can be strung back together into a full battle (before loading them into the engine), but this would have to be done beforehand, not on the fly. Remember that quite a bit of overhead is included in a pbem file compared to what you need to make an AAR, besides the fact the data needs to be translated into graphics & sound. Every second pbem file contains data from two consecutive game turns, for instance.Your ofcourse correct - BUT when you load a pbem it loads the full scenario - including every units status etc etc. However, You wont be needing to load every part if you already had the main part loaded already. What you do need is to extract the actual action rather than extract the full scenario every minute.
So every pbem include map+units+unit status+actual round. It would actually be enough to include the first things just once rather than reload them every minute. (this is ofcourse an example - I the actual content of the pbem is proberbly not exactly those things I explained - but Im sure its something similar).
Kind of hard to explain - so I hope you understand
Edit: Every unit/object/ground etc will already be in the memory already. You only need to extract the "changes" - which is far from as much as the actual pbem.
Edit2: btw - your talking about extracted to graphics/sound/video. None of these are relevant since thats being handled by the graphic engine and are not included in a pbem.
-
You actually seen animations?? Where?
-
Ofc mate - but it would be a start
-
Will there be performance improvement with CM:BFN?
I just reinstalled shockforce and it didnt really run well on my Pc. Also, the ground was all black (using Ati 5870 - could be brand related?)
I will reduce quality and hopefully it will run better - I want to give it another go and see if the menu system is as good as You claim it to be. Was a long time since I last played the game and I do know that back then, the menu system was one of the reason I quit playing.
-
If you just theoretically combined your own PBEM files into one movie wouldn't you get a movie that showed the battle from only your perspective and at whatever fog of war level you had selected? How would you be able to combine the battle views of your opponents into this movie? It seems to me that you would have at least two data streams - one for the battle from your perspective and one for the battle from your opponent's perspective. In order to have a proper movie where you would be able to view the battle from either side then you would have to combine those files somehow wouldn't you? You may also find it desireable to be able to remove fog of war if you were trying to use the movie to learn tactics rather than using the movie to just relive fond memories of when you smoked that Panther.
I'm thinking that this is a lot more complicated than you guys are portraying. If it was as simple as just taking a bunch of PBEM files and linking them together then I think it probably would have been added as a feature by now.
Actually, I do know its complicated. But not as complicated as you might imagine. I'm happy with viewing the battle from my side only. There actually is a program that is supposed to do exactly the thing I want for CMBB - however, we never got it to work. If a third party program can do it I'm pretty sure the developers should be able to do it aswell.
I do not wish to remove any fog either. Im pretty happy with the way it is + making it visible from the other players view can kind of ruin the gameplay alot since I don't want to know exactly how my opponent moved his units. I'd rather stick to just watching my own mistakes.
-
I also hope the game will support high resolutons (5760*1080).
-
So - to make things clear.
We'd like the information in the pbem's combined in the end - the order turns removed - and an option to run through all the pbem's in one go without interuption only to see the battlefield once again and freely roam around with the cam to watch the full combat once again.
Edit: Using Pbem's as an example - might aswell be tcp/ip or hotseat data. In the end they are all the same data only different ways to transfer them
-
Hard drives are not the problem, it's the sending back and forth of the files which is a problem. You would need a really good connection to be able to send 10+Mb per minute.
Im sorry mate - I don't think I follow you anymore. What does the connection has to do with replaying a game on your own pc? Using data that must have been on your pc from the start??
Edit: The data must have been sent in the first place if you play against each other. So I really don't see your point.
Edit: I see now that you edited your post
however, You do not need to load the full file into your memory. Its enough for the program to open the data file and stream its information. This takes next to no time at all. -
Are you talking about CMSF? Because I've rarely seen one less than 10Mb. Just curious.
No, He said CMBB.
Fair enough - I admit I had no idea they had increased that much. However, this is still no problem. Cos let's say a game would end up at 2gb. First of all you could make it optional to actually save the pbem's. Secondly - 2gb is nothing today concidering a "normal" hd now is 500gb+ atleast.
We're still not even close to the Terrabytes mentioned earlier.
)
. There is probably a way to remove the redundant parts from the pbem files and get them into a format where they can be strung back together into a full battle (before loading them into the engine), but this would have to be done beforehand, not on the fly. Remember that quite a bit of overhead is included in a pbem file compared to what you need to make an AAR, besides the fact the data needs to be translated into graphics & sound. Every second pbem file contains data from two consecutive game turns, for instance.
Automatic force selection in QBs.
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
Edit: Now that I re-read this thread...it proberbly was the wrong place for me to post my thoughts on this! So sorry!
One thing that totally annihilated me was when I auto selected units for both me and the ai...and the ai started the first round with rockets! Pretty much every unit I had got annihilated or atleast damage.
Im glad they gave us the option to buy units - but tbh I'd rather see something more in the line of CMBO/CMBB/CMAK. Atleast I personally thought I had a better overview and easier to select what I wanted. (although there ARE good parts about the new one aswell)