Andrew Kulin
-
Posts
499 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Andrew Kulin
-
-
Not a bug per se. But I just noticed in my set-up for the second battle in the CMDF Sottish Campaign that the British tanks and Bren carriers all look like US tanks with the big white stars. Is that the correct paint job for the vehicles?
-
5 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:
You actually kick off the campaign with French Canadian troops. They probably don't take too kindly to being referred to as "Jocks". Oh, well, c'est la vie, as Chuck Berry once said.
You also get French Canadians in CMDF's Mission 1 of the Scottish Campaign. Anytime I bothered to look at leader names, they were always Anglo names. Did not see any French Canadian names.
-
You're probably confused because a Russian vehicle actually spotted something. And fired.
-
1 hour ago, OBJ said:
I think you have me Anthony. When it first came out I tried placing the end waypoint on the spot I wanted my vehicles to be hull down to, and my tanks just kept moving, with very unpleasant results, so I stopped using it.
Thanks to you and others I can clearly see I need to go back to it and use it in conjunction with an area/enemy unit target command.
ditto
-
I am content to wait and see.
-
22 minutes ago, Vacillator said:
Any views on pros and cons compared with 'normal' PBEM behaviour, with or without CM Helper? I note the disappearing save files you mentioned.
Cpt Miller has valid points. Though I have not experienced the glitch per se of losing the entire game and having to restart from scratch I know there have been issues like that in tournaments (which may or may not have been resolved getting Slitherine involved through BFC Elvis).
The other main shortcoming with PBEM++ is communication with your opponent. Unless you know/are given their e-mail or BFC/Slitherine/Matrix username and can communicate through e-mails or forums you have no way to get in touch with them. This is more an issue in tournaments as you are drawn to play against people you likely don't know rather than PBEMs you are setting up against someone.
I used to used CM Helper but I don't see it being supported anymore (GreenasJade seems to have disappeared last time I ever checked) so using it for newer games might not be possible. The other alternative is IanL's (Canadian Cat) Whose Turn Is It (WTII) which he has added player to player communication, at least on a beta I tested out with him. Not sure if he has made that public yet but I am sure he will chime in . @A Canadian Cat - was IanL
-
16 hours ago, Chudacabra said:
Is there a guide to this feature somewhere? Just got a new laptop so reinstalling all my CM games with Steam/Slitherine, but I find this feature to be very unintuitive so far and haven't really found a good guide to using. Would prefer not to go back to Dropbox, but at least it's simple.
Here is a rudimentary rundown.
- you need to set up a Slitherine Account - you will need your username, password and e-mail for PBEM++ (note, I don't 100% remember if it is a Matrix or Slitherine account you need - I think you can link the two in the Matrix or Slitherine systems. In any event my username and password is identical for both my Matrix and Slitherine accounts so it makes no difference to me)
-
In the game you can login to PBEM++ through the Options Menu but I never do that. No idea if there is an advantage to doing so or not. You can also log-in when creating a new battle or playing a PBEM turn or accepting a challenge
- The PBEM++ Login will ask you to enter your Username, your password and your e-mail. You will enter all three the first time you attempt login in a CM Game (e.g., CMFB, CMCW, etc.). You will need to do this for each game. On subsequent login attempts the game remembers your user ID and e-mail, you just need to enter your password
- Once logged in you will stay logged in until you shut down that instance of the game.
-
To start a new battle in PBEM++ pick a new battle and side. There will be an option in the drop-down menu for how you want to play and you will select 2 Players - Automated PBEM+. If not already logged in you will get the login screen (see bullet 2)
-
If you want to set a password for your opponent to be able to first get access to the game you MUST manually re-select (click on it) the automated PBEM+ option even if it defaults to it on your list (it is called a private challenge). Otherwise the entry box to type in a password will not appear.
- You want to set up this password if you do not want anyone you do not know to accept the challenge and play against you.
- And you obviously tell your preferred opponent what the password is. This password is only used once so that they can accept the challenge. It has nothing to do with your login password to the system.
-
If you want to set a password for your opponent to be able to first get access to the game you MUST manually re-select (click on it) the automated PBEM+ option even if it defaults to it on your list (it is called a private challenge). Otherwise the entry box to type in a password will not appear.
- Click on Next or OK. You will now get a password screen for your side like you would normally see for a regular PBEM game. You can leave it blank so just hit OK. There is no danger to you from cheating by your opponent as things are protected through your PBEM++ login
- Click on okay for save e-mail game.
- Your first turn will now be sent to the PBEM++ Challenges page.
- To accept a challenge go to Saved Games and PBEMs. On the Drop-down screen select Automated PBEM++ Challenges
- A listing of all challenges will appear with the date Username and scenario description. If there is an asterisk ( * ) in the first character position that indicates a password is required to accept the challenge. No asterisk means anyone can accept the challenge
-
Accepting the challenge will require your challenge password to be entered in the white box above the accept button which may be greyed out. The a login in to PBEM++ if not logged in and basically follow the steps outlined earlier. Once your opponent has done all they need to do and sends the turn back to you it will be accessible under the Saved Games and PBEMs/Automated PBEM++ In Progress drop-down selection. It will only show save game files that you are personally playing through PBEM++ and that are for your next turn. Once you play the turn and return the file, it disappears from your list and is removed from your game files folders.
- This is one thing I don't like about PBEM++, so if you are someone who want to do AARs or videos you need to be aware of this and move the fles to somewhere safe before sending the turn back. I haven't tried, so I am not sure if you can even replay the turn files later outside of PBEM++ however
- Slitherine will send you/opponent e-mails saying your next game turn awaits you. I find there is some time lag on their end getting these sent so if you are banging away a number of turns in an evening, you will probably be quicker just checking PBEM++ In Progress listing frequently. I think the lag in email notifications is typically on the order of 15 minutes +/-
I think that mostly covers it.
-
John, is there any requirement to apply patch during orders phase of any existing games? I am in a middle of campaign - not sure if that past requirement only applies to PBEM games or all games.
Also does this get borked up in any way due to Steam? As in Steam updating the game automatically and you are not in a position to go into the older version and save game in orders phase before the update?
-
41 minutes ago, A Canadian Cat - was IanL said:
To make our gaming live better. I think that would not be a waste of time at all.
I agree. If CMX3 is not a thing in their pipeline then continue to expand with CMX2 modules. But if CMX3 is something they are going to work on "soon" then I would think they would put efforts going forward from that time into CMX3 titles.
-
My thinking is BFC will focus their efforts on completing Game Engine 5 rather than going full bore on any new expansions. CM2 is a 17 year old game engine and could use a major overhaul to take advantage of advances in personal computing over the past two decades. No idea what they are up to regarding Game Engine 5 but I'd like to think putting in multi-core usability and maybe changing graphics from Open-GL (I think that is what is used) to something modern (and usable on AMD cards) could be high on their to-do list.
Things still on the go, being battle-packs and CMCW-BAOR are being put together by community "volunteers" which would free time for BFC staff to work on Engine 5. And what of CMX3? I know there have been rumblings in past on forums regarding a CMX3, and if that is something actually going to happen, why invest their limited time on adding games for additional time frames using the 17-year old CMX2 game engine? Though their working on Game Engine 5 suggest to me that CMX3 is still something far down the road.
If and when BFC decides to expand on the CMX2 series, then I should think they would be walking back on the WW2 series incrementally to make the introduction of new vehicles a little bit less daunting, and more importantly take less time and thus let them release the product sooner and generate cash flow to help support the business and then create more content.
So Eastern Front I would think 1943/Kursk would be the most likely candidate as I would imagine some of the existing vehicles and formations from CMRT were also available in 1943 so not as much effort as doing Stalingrad/1942 first, for which maybe a lot of the vehicles/formations present in 1942 would be older models not found in CMRT and therefore require more work and time for BFC to pull together whilst not generating cash flow to support the business. Having said that after a 1943 module is released, work on a 1942 module could be easier as some of the newly added vehicles and formations put together in creating the 1943 module might be around in 1942.
Then do 1941, and after that 1939-40. If they are even contemplating such a long lifespan for the CMX2 engine.
-
2 hours ago, Ultradave said:
Nope. My experience was similar so I gave up. No matter how I fiddled, the tank I tried to get hull down went too far, which of course led almost immediately to explosion and fire. So I do it by eye now. Set an end point for the move, move the camera there and look, and then tweak the endpoint if needed. After a while you get pretty good doing it by eye.
Dave
So if it does not work as intended maybe that is something BFC works on as a patch or Engine 5 thing. Or remove the command in its entirety and replace the now open slot/command with something else, like "Move to Contact" which a CMX1 command that I happen to miss.
52 minutes ago, Halmbarte said:I use the hull down command a lot as a time saver. The method that works for me is making the endpoint the point where I don't want the vehicle to move past, then setting a firing point to the spot I want to be hull down to.
Or maybe it works as per the methods that IanL, Domfluff and Halmbarte have all offered (they seem to me as the same method). I will give that a try next time an opportunity arises and see if that makes it better.
-
It is supposed to work with you selecting a point off in the distance you want your tank to be in hull down position FOR. So in theory that means your tank stops its movement at some point before it gets to where you plot your hull down movement point.
I don't use this command as I have not had any luck with it. Possibly I have had a vehicle move to the point, with not good consequences. Though that was a really long time ago so I may not be totally correct in remembering that. But my experiences trying it out way back in time left a bad taste for me, hence I don't use it.
Others may chime in and say I am full of crap. Which is fine.
-
If I am remembering correctly, which is becoming a big "if" for me with age, the aircraft noises are something you might hear for a turn or two after upgrading a game in play to an newer patched version of a CM game. Can't say I ever recall hearing unexplainable explosion noises.
-
I will say side waiting in ambush is defender. My logic being Attacker is side moving from A-B. To attack you start at your initial position and move to your (hopefully) captured objective. If attacker never moves to the location where the defender lies in wait then nothing happens.
-
I also enjoyed all games save one (CMBN Round 3). And played against great opponents.
Some suggestions going forward:
- Make tournaments Invitational - too many drop-outs/no-shows. I was lucky and got nine opponent who all played out to the end but I would be royally pissed getting stuck with a no-show or quitter.
- Make it a condition of joining a tournament that payers e-mails or BFC forum addresses be provided (something like in the tournament announcements that anyone signing into this tournament agrees that their contact information be provided to opponents). It is frustrating not being able to contact your opponent to give heads up about being away for a period or to find out why they are not returning turns, etc. I was able to find some opponents with BFC forum names, and one or tow through the Slitherine/Matrix forums (their forum mail system is kind of useless BTW) but in some cases I tried communicating absences and such by typing in messages on the save game file screen (laurent 22, who was named in tournament as lawren so I did not clue in to that, did you see those messages on your save turn screen?). I think it is really important to be able to contact your opponent in these things.
- Have someone do QA/QC checks on each scenario before they are put live. It was obvious that a number of the scenarios were modified for use in the tournaments to have total scores in the 2,000 point range. Unfortunately there were a number of instances where points shown on the two briefing screens did not match up with the 2,000 points (or so) for the tournament and had what were the original scenario objective point totals which were usually lower (e.g., mission objective scores on top half of screens did not match up with briefing notes). So a bit confusing. This was also an issue with some of the objective. Someone mentioned the 2nd CMRT scenario which must have originally had an EXIT condition for the German forces, yet the modified scenario briefings did not mention anything about getting points for exiting (as I recall as I can no longer open up the German side to see the briefing) but exit zones were still on the map. So I interpreted scenario to ignore exiting as Germans but my opponent did exit some units but got no points for that.
- Iron out the bugs in PBEM+. One that bit me hard was in second CMBN Scenario. My opponent did not send me our final turn (Me Axis, He USA). He somehow got totally confused about the turns and never sent me the final minute of play. So that one side of the scenario did not finish (the other did - his German side auto-surrendered). As things stood score would have been Axis 800 (I still held corner) to USA 400 (He got the farm/commune) had it been finished. Because game never ended the final scores should have based on those 3-1 intermediate scores (so say 101 - 87 or such). But game never ended, I was winning marginally, but final score ended up being 0 - 2000 (AXIS - USA). How???
Just my two cents.
Looking forward to the next ones.
-
6 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Instead we deemed more people wanted us to go forward, so we did that.
So would it be easy for you guys to go forward again with a hypothetical Western Allies vs. Soviet Union in 1945-1946? Seems like you have all the pieces in place now to be able to do that.
-
On 12/20/2023 at 9:56 AM, jackal263 said:
Considering the huge amount of time to play CMx2 battles, I think the only solution is to make invitational tournaments, allowing to join only to those players that have a 100% finished games (or at least won because the other player vanished)
I was thinking same thing. I have been lucky having drawn nine different opponents across three tournaments who have returned turns and played out the games to the end. But I feel real bad for others who are getting hosed by no shows or quitters.
For others who
-
Something similar happened to me in round 2 CMBN. My opponent never sent back last turn in one of the two games and he got 2,000 points for it.
-
4 hours ago, Jackal2100 said:
The scoring is still bugged. I lost 1000 points in the Normandy side from last week to today. My opponent had surrendered both sides, giving me 4000 points, and this morning it is now showing as 3083. Similarly lost points in RT, though that was less. Both sets of matches finished weeks ago.
Similar (sorta) here with CMBN scoring off (incorrect) in my matches before the thing ended but did not change at all when things officially ended. And it looks like the final turn in one of the two matches disappeared in transit to my opponent (or from him to me) so one game never ended with 1:00 left and there was nothing we could do about it.
-
4 hours ago, BFCElvis said:
You've got me for the Red Thunder Round. Which makes you lucky in 2 ways. 1) I'll turn the files over in plenty of time to play the whole Round. 2) You've got easy wins coming your way.
@Holien has me for the Normandy Round. He's going to get the same benefits that Suzuya will get.
I played Elvis in Round 1 (CMBN). He speaks truthfully.
-
I think you have it. I am not going to catch you.
I expect to end up with 800 points as German in my last game with my opponent as with 1 minute left I have units on the main intersection, and I don't think he can rush any forces there in time from where he is presently at (but not sure of that of course), and I am not sure where my side is with the less than 30% casualties, and I am certainly not at >70% US casualties. And neither of us control Favre though he should be able to move something onto that objective as I don't have the forces there to do so and survive.
-
And yet they post official videos or such before the tournament rounds about the scenarios. To market the games, generate excitement I figure. But certainly provides lots of information in advance about the scenarios to anyone who wants to look at them. And these are mirrored tournaments so unfortunately there really is no fog of war, at least in terms of forces and initial set-up zones though reinforcements could be a surprise, as in where they show up and what you actually get, unless you have played through the scenario before or looked at it through the editor.
But the scenarios used in the tournament can be modified for the tournament. Point scoring for sure since BFC seems to be aiming for about 2,000 points +/- per side and I have noticed inconsistencies in the briefings where original point values are shown either on the strategic map screens or the briefings. And possibly also in forces that are in play. CMRT Round 2 briefing gives German side King Tigers in the briefing notes but only regular Tigers showed up.
-
34 minutes ago, Anthony P. said:
That is a feature, you've just got to ensure that the crew is turned out since they're not on the same radio net.
I have done that to no effect.
-
Maybe also allow soldiers from the same side speak freely with other troops from the same side. Seems to me that if I have infantry within 10 feet of a tank, and the infantry sees enemy tanks moving towards their position while their own tank does not (in my experience, a very high probability with Soviet Forces in CMCW for example), that information is not passed onto the tank. You would think there should be no problem hollering this out to the tank crew parked nearby.
Seems to me this does not happen because of chain of command things - information has to be passed up the chain and then back down again. Which is fine for information from a squad 500 m away from said tank reporting tank movement near their position and that this information then eventually makes it way to said tank as a contact in that area 500 m away as it gets passed up to the overall HQ and then back down to other units. But it just does not look like these same infantry units directly relay the information to other units within voice range of them, at least not to units under a differnt command chain.
Downfall: Enjoying the module?
in Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg
Posted
Oops. Saw the reference to Remagen campaign and thought that was what was being talked about. Though I did question why French Canadians would be involved in that one.