General Jack Ripper

The idea behind the change is that the normal prone position is actually less exposed to enemy fire than the cowering pose. Cowering offers a larger target cross-section if you will. It's also harder to judge the suppressive effects of your own fire if the enemy isn't visibly "cowering". As RockinHarry pointed out, the normal Cowering animation is less effective than simply lying prone when trying to avoid getting shot, and that one of the death poses actually might serve better as a replacement for the cowering pose. That's a rough summary anyway, personally I can take it or leave it, but this thread certainly has some interesting information in regards to the game engine itself.

Probably not, it was an excellent shot.

Tall Walls! The ultimate in RPG protection!

M-10's are pretty awesome. God this takes me back! Thanks for sharing.

I hope someone at BFC is reading this and thinking, "RockinHarry has a point about the Cowering animation."

Just goes to show how realistic this game is. If the soldier isn't actually moving, he doesn't move!

I think there is a workaround for this (including multiple .bmp's for the part in question), but you'd have to ask a modder to be sure. I do remember the old rag-tag mods, where you would include multiple versions of the same .bmp, and the game would mix and match at random. For example, you could create multiple tank turret .bmp's, each with it's own turret number, and the game would select different textures for multiple vehicles. As far as individual files for the decals themselves, I have no idea.

I feed off of all types of attention, not just negative attention. You asked a question, I answered it. Clearly you did not agree with my answer, but instead of initiating a discussion, you made a snarky reply about board games and counters. I'm perfectly willing to accept newcomers, and have even encouraged those who might have gotten a bad reception to stick it out and learn the community. You will get no such support from me however. If you are labeling me "the face of the community" you clearly do not understand this forum. That may be true, but the people who DO post on the forum are the ones who actually care enough to make their opinions known, offer advice and technical support, and encourage the modding and scenario design communities. Anyone who buys the game and doesn't take five minutes of their lives to register on the forum and say hi aren't worth anything to me. Also, if the only thing holding someone back from purchasing a game is the fact: "there's no blood in it!" Then good riddance. Those are customers Battlefront doesn't need. We certainly don't need them polluting the forum with nonsense like: "Why do modules cost money?" "Why aren't the textures in HD!" "I bought a $2000 hyper computer so I'm better than everyone else!" "When my guys throw grenades at enemies, why can't body parts go flying around?" "Where's all der headshotz, lol!" You might be surprised, but that "number" you speak of is actually extremely small, and most want improved visuals as it affects the game environment, not just cosmetic eye candy. FYI - The original Ghost Recon (a fantastic game) had NO BLOOD IN IT. That's my last word. Good day.

Are you one of those people who need to see blood and gore to remind you you're playing a wargame? How about you go back to Call of Duty, plenty of blood and gore to sate your appetite. This topic has already been discussed several times before, and Battlefront has already stated there will be no blood and gore in Combat Mission, ever. Discussion over.

I recall the same thing, the "hitbox" for infantry is the 3D model itself.

Battlefront included Battleship Artillery, even though they explicitly stated in the manual 'this stuff shouldn't be used'. In response to that, I arrayed an entire battalion of troops in an open field and hit them with 16 inch artillery. Then I loaded up a town map, and destroyed it. It was fun. Just because something doesn't fit on the battlefield being played on, doesn't mean it shouldn't be in the game. Rocket Artillery is fun, thus it should be in the game.

Waste of processing time on something purely cosmetic.

By the time Battlefront has finished the current family of WW2 titles, most of the resources would be in place for a Korean War game. All that remains is the desire to make it.

Sounds good to me. I'll bookmark this for later experimentation.

I do recall 2v2 team based multiplayer was discussed several times, but I never heard an official position. I'm of the opinion it would add value to the game, but honestly I could take it or leave it. H2H campaigns would definitely be my preference as well.

Yes, PBEM is definitely the 'low stress' solution for multiplayer games. I never did fit in with the twitchy real-timers.

That all sounds good. Excellent work RockinHarry.

Well, the game engine was built with real-time play in mind, so any solution would have to be programmed with that capability. So the game would need to support 4 direct connections, all of which can give orders to the troops they have assigned. If one is doing PBEM then the capability for 2v2 play is already there so long as everything stays organized, which you already know. I know of a 2v2 game going on over at FGM as well. The real implementation would have to support either real-time, or turn based TCP/IP with 4 players being connected simultaneously. The current PBEM implementation of 2v2 is more of a stop-gap procedure, while support for 2v2 direct connection multiplayer could be a big selling point. Much like the Scourge of War implemented 8 player multiplayer. Each player is in charge of the formation they have selected, and all fight simultaneously in real time.

It's on the radar, but I do believe it lives at the very bottom of the list. We will probably see 2v2 multiplayer scenarios long before we get full multiplayer support for campaigns.

I would love to see full H2H support for campaigns. Right now the best you can get is a campaign played hotseat multiplayer. In this day and age, having an actual person within easy distance to play games with seems to be very difficult.

I do remember Steve saying hits are detected and calculated when the round being fired intersects the actual 3d model of the unit in question. Don't ask me to look it up, it was like 3 years ago. Now, it would be nice to have a prone animation for Buddy Aid, but whatever.

Now doesn't that just look wonderful?

You mean this guy?

Thanks. I actually did mean to type especially, but for some reason the wrong word came out of my fingers.

If I had a time machine, I'd go back in time three days and buy a winning Powerball ticket.