SlapHappy
-
Posts
1,576 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by SlapHappy
-
-
Thanks....a gigantic "duh" on my part.
-
I guess it's kind of important to point out that my example with the pesky T-90 mentioned above was not a case of AI-chosen weapons systems. I was targeting the building manually. It was more a case of AI-chosen munitions in direct fire mode. Normally, the HEAT round would have been the obvious choice in this situation, but not for this particular application. To solve the above problem you would have to have override on choice of munitions used.
Which opens up another can of worms.......
-
Perhaps, I've yet to figure out exactly how baked scenarios work.
I followed the steps indicated in the manual....but then how exactly do you load the baked scenario? None of the menu load options connect to the baked scenario folder.
-
Steve and co.
Have you ever thought of allowing scripting for player side units as well as Computer player? It would be interesting to be able to script a portion of your forces to deploy in a certain fashion on the map before you take control or simulate yourself as a lower level commander in a larger overall mission such that you only control a portion of the troops on the game map.
Also, the possibilities for AI vs. AI demos or for testing potential scenario designs would be useful as well.
-
I still see what Steve is saying here, though....
Say we had a button for each weapon the UI. If we click it then that weapon button lights up and that weapon becomes "active" and can be used by the AI as per your orders. Now let's say your LAV is in MG coax mode only an is hosing down some infantry in a trench, when a BMP-2 comes into LOS way down the map several hundred meters. Normally, the AI would begin pumping 25 mm into that target, but you've told it not to so....a couple crucial seconds later the BMP sends a Sagger right up your tailpipe.
How would you feel....you'd be pissed, to say the least.
Maybe there is some middle ground here where selective and automatic fire options can blend seamlessly, I don't know. I have to admit, I haven't thought of a perfect solution.
-
Ahhhh...but sometimes a lack of choice leads to problems with allowing the player to be clever........
SPOILER
In the Streets of Hama mission there are two T-90's back to back in the extreme right side of the screen. They are shielded on both sides by buildings. I was able to target an destroy the front one by approaching with an M1 from a frontal angle. Now I've got one pissed off T-90 shielded by buildings on the left and right the map limit in the back and a T-90 wreck in the front. I chose to blast away at the building with HEAT on it's left flank to try and expose it. I used up all my HEAT trying to blast the building down, but wasn't able to target the building side well enough to get all shots in-place and bring down the building. I was able to blow away the nearest wall section, however.
Now I can target the far wall with Sabot rounds and....guess what....sabot round through the opposing wall and right into the side of the T-90...BOOM! The differences in the way the various rounds work can lead to different tactics. It would have been nice to simply target a line of fire where I knew the T-90 was and simply shoot it.
Barring that it would have been nice to not have to expend all my HEAT rounds to pull of this effect. The system assumed I was shooting a building and not the T-90 on the other side so it automatically chose HEAT rounds to my detriment.
-
Moon
Would it be possible to have a message board dialog about how movement and commands will be differently implemented in TOW2 vs. TOW1?
If not, will there be some kind of information posted on Battlefront.com which will discuss these differences in detail?
-
At least you guys can tell the difference...here in Midwest USA people drink crappy beer and think that that's how beer is supposed to taste.....
It's sad.
-
I'm not sure that it's because they button up that is problematic for me....it's more because you have to go back and unbutton them that makes it a micromanagement PITA.
But yeah, the tendency for them to do so could be down-shifted a bit for me as well.
-
I wish there was a way of bringing squad members who do not have LOS to a target that is under LOS from other members of that same squad.
It's frustrating sometimes that only one member of a group is capable of firing upon an enemy target and the rest of the elements will not adjust position to achieve LOS.
I believe there was an adjustment in one of the patches where troops will not leave good cover positions to seek other positions despite lack of LOS. I could see where this could only exacerbate the problem mentioned above.
-
Wow...start game...game over......
-
A better PSU is definately needed if you intend on buying a new Graphics card. My new Core i7, 4870x2 & 6 GB ddr3 ram surely gets you the FPS you mentioned
One thing that bothers me though is that small foliage and grass polls still are only visible at a certain distance. I dont have that 2gb ddr5 for nothing !
On your problem; probably your graphics card has burned out partly already, but you could allways clean it thoroughly (dust, etc) and check if the fan still working good. If I had to put my money somewhere I would bet overheating. Did you thoroughly cleaned your pc, checked if all the fans still working?
Ive never heard about a psu destroying a video card, but perhaps the power output is degraded and not enough when the system needs full output? Perhaps you know someone else or a shop where u can test your system with a working 650+ watt psu. That way at least you wont have to buy a new graphics card for nothing
Would you be willing to post some FPS examples from that rig for CMSF?
That's a pretty hardcore setup!
-
The PSU may be faulty, but a 650 W supply is MORE THAN ADEQUATE for a 8800 GT card.
-
Steiner, check your main memory modules for problems, too. Use a program like MemTest.
-
Would it be possible at some point to have buildings that have floors that are broken up somewhat with interior walls?
Is this beyond the scope of the LOS rules given the action spot concept?
-
Currently the game has flavor objects which allow you to dress up your scenario maps. However, the limitations on their placement and their types make them less useful for intentional cover items.
Are there any plans to implement items that can be placed for intentional defensive use. Like improved positions, sandbag emplacements, etc?
Would be very useful as the game continues to approach the Normandy release.
Also, is there no way to place the current flavor items on the 2nd+ floors on multi-level buildings....I see no way to do it.
-
There's a Superbowl coming up in the next few days in the very competitive NFL American Football League.
Last time I checked there is no Superbowl for wargames.
I don't think one-upsmanship is the cardinal rule amongst wargame developers and publishers unless something changed since I woke up yesterday. I'm not in that business so I guess I could be wrong. It seems more like an ongoing attempt to build on what others have done in the past.
The only "winners" should be the wargaming consumer who gets to choose amongst many hopefully good titles. At least that's the way it should be.
Play what you like.
-
What's really funny from my standpoint is that I bought TOW pretty much on the gargantuan effort from 1C to finally get this code published in some form. Then I crossed my fingers and hoped I would enjoy it. I don't regret the purchase, although the game is no longer on my hard drive. I did enjoy tinkering with it, but was ultimately disappointed with the lack of development of the infantry portion of the game. Max unit numbers was also a bit of a letdown, especially considering map sizes are quite good, but a waste without the ability to adequately populate them.
Now, if this "campaign expansion and map pack" had actually been a rework of the infantry model and also incorporated the building entry coding, I probably would have happily plunked down the extra 25 bucks to see what effect that would have had on the existing scenarios and such. Not really interesting in an all-armor WWII game, and only that portion of the game really has a satisfying feel to it.
The other alternative now will be to put another twenty spot with the price of the campaign pack and purchase TOW2 - A more refined but smaller scope game which has improvements but makes me relinquish any benefit from already owning TOW1. For now my plan is to check out TOW2 demo....If the gameplay is much improved over the original I may pick it up...if not I'll probably just take a pass and wait for CMSF Normandy to materialize.
-
I hear the new "Dancing Demon" demo for that really rocks!
-
I've seen many apartments with ground floor balconies....
-
Has anyone tried this? Supposedly the new memory management of Windows 7 is already showing some measurable improvements when running applications.
-
I would think that the fairly heavy-duty CPU calculations required by CMSF might choke the low-wattage Atom chip. Performance is said to be typical of that of a typical Pentium III processor. The idea for the Atom is based around power-saving, not performance. In a mini-laptop that equates to better battery life.
I guess the graphics subsystem would affect it to some extent, but you're definitely in the realm of what is known as CPU-limited game play.
-
I'd say more like a 3d version of Close Combat with bigger maps, but similarly sized unit limits. Handling of infantry is somewhat different than the way it is done in CC however.
If this sounds like your cup of tea, you will probably enjoy TOW. It does not have the CC5 style grand campaign overview maps, however. Campaigns are more like the way it is done in CC3.
-
In a different thread, Moon indicated there was going to be some new info regarding TOW 2 that would drop most likely some time this week.
I guess that announcement is still pending? Any updates?
PMC's?
in Combat Mission Shock Force 1
Posted
I have to agree with Dietrich here. If anyone needs a reminder of just how nasty the Taliban really are, then a quick glimpse at some very recent events in the news should serve as a refresher as to why these guys need to be stomped out of existence as soon as possible. I just wish the correct level of resources had been administered in this direction sooner rather than becoming a sideshow to the Iraqi conflict which (IMO) has a much more dubious set of motives behind it.