Sigrun

Thanks Jason, that was a superlative reply, painted the entire gig in my mind like a picture. It's obviously not going to be possible to replicate the operational circumstances attendant to Barbarossa, so I guess I'll have to abstract them somewhat with restrictions on the use of the T-34 and KV-1 for the first month of fighting. After that it'll be gloves off I'm afraid and vJerry will have to put up with a far more formidable vIvan than the real chaps did. Thanks again for that most excellent summation.

Are your email programs restricting certain file extension types? Try zipping the files (winzip) before you send them.

One rather gets the impression the German attack into Russia in June of 1941, at least initially, was a cake-walk against Soviet bean-cans. Then, suddenly, up popped the T-34 and KV-1 series of tanks and the Panzers got a bloody nose. When did the Germans first encounter the T-34 and KV-1 in any meaningful way? When did they first cause a significant problem? It looks like over 1000 T-34s were produced in 1941, but they don't seem to have caused the German advance much of a problem. What were the Panzers killing in June 1941, with their MkIII's 50mms? The reason I'm asking is that somebody has pointed out my war's Barbarossa will go tits-up if I allow un-restricted availibility of the T-34 to the Soviets in June 1941. [ August 28, 2006, 11:10 AM: Message edited by: Sigrun ]

The book doesn't work, it appears to be made as a MicrosoftWord97 document? "Unable to convert graphics filters" or something. Apart from that your entire book idea sounds pretty good. I'd certainly like all the WW2 armor data tabulated in such a way, and would happily pay for it (if it works).

Personally I'm happy to wait, and I know Oleg's track record for after-sales support.

A vital requirement imo if this game's going to last longer than a handful of months.

Kewl!

Thank you sir!

Hmm, I wondered how a 24" WS monitor would do 1600 x 1200. I have one coming on monday (my Iiyama 22" CRT has stopped switching on). What does it do, leave empty strips down each side? Or stretch the image?

Thanks Kelly. No, I wasn't planning on accomodating a 1000 ( :eek: ) people. Thirty fully active players per side, with a few part-timer reserves, would fit the bill perfectly. The last war I ran had about a hundred regular participants, with a few more that would fly occasionally, but that was a genre that could handle those sorts of numbers (an air sim, IL2). Yes, I was a little worried that ToW might be about to kill CMBB off, but then I thought about the lack of a scenario editor for that game. Without one ToW will never be a serious contender. CMC is just more CM, with extras. I'm hopeful it'll plug right into a war.

Thanks Enigma, I'll check those places out. I'll give Onion Wars a miss though, I don't think it'd go down too well trying to lift members from another war on their own forum.

Apart from lots of vs-AI action I strongly recommend you read the full manual, there's a whole bunch of good stuff in there that even I didn't know about. If you bought a bargain-bin version without a manual, order their online item (it's worth it if you're really keen on this game). In other news, my site and forums are back online and the forum activation emails are now fully functional.

Thanks GM, I'll check it out. Ah! Checked it out, that looks like just the ticket. I've registered and will post when there's something to show. Thanks again. [ August 17, 2006, 01:14 PM: Message edited by: Sigrun ]

Rick, most of the work-in-progress is on my desk (about two inches of A4 so far) or on my hard-drive. I'm well into the first draught of the ruleset but it's not ready for reading yet. I jump about from bit to bit, to keep my brain fresh, but it's all getting there. One of the intentions, when it's done, is that even a total noob will be able to participate. I like stuff written for me as if I'm a total moron, it makes things so much easier, and I try to extend the same consideration to others. There's nothing worse than reading instructions written by somebody who has clearly assumed you already understand half of everything before reading the first sentence. And not every commander was born with command experience. Currently I'm working on complexifying (I don't think that's a word...so much for being easily understood) the resolution of combat on the strategic map. Basically it'll depend on how good your win was as to how far up the next CMBB map you'll start, how many flags you'll already have behind your line, etc. I'm quite excited about it actually, because the game-play ramifications, when tied in with a bunch of other components, are pretty slick. The entire affair is about bringing the individual CMBB combats to life, in more ways than the purely physical. Tying them to an external strategic map, in a meaningful way, has huge psychological impact (guess why CMC is going to be so popular!). Anyway, I'm going on. Both my site and forum are down at the moment, my host has transfered everything to a Linux box (to hopefully fix the forum email problem), and they said it'll be a few hours before everything comes back online. Thanks for your interest guys.

Where are they then? Coz they sure as hell ain't around here. Or does yer typical CM player not belong to an online forum? In this day and age, I ask ya.

The UN versus Syria, huh? How's that going to sell then? Oh, hang on...I'm seeing it now...half the US population voted for Bush...which means they've probably mistaken "UN" for "US" and still think it'll be an American-on-A-rab slaughter-fest.

Am I the only cynic to see the (alleged) obvious? SF is about the US kicking seven shades of shinola out of the Syrians...cue humungous US sales, from spotty kids to fat-gutted red-necks to right-wing armchair psychotics across the land. WW2 just doesn't get that kind of response. Or dollar.

Thanks for the reply PSK.

Hi PB. Yeah, I did that 'market research' stuff before and almost nobody responded. Then I built the war anyway (it was for IL2) and people flocked to it. So I figured putting out feelers first is a waste of time, probably because for every ten announcements of a new war only one actually comes to reality. I don't think four years is particularly old for a first-class and much-loved game? RB2-3D, IL2...old, but still have multiple wars going on, hundreds of players. I thought CM was in the same league. Then again, as the genre requires more mental grunt so the community membership becomes more rarefied. I have looked around on the net. Hard. There's almost nothing out there. A lot of sites have forums listed, but then the link comes here. Cheap bums. I'll continue anyway. Fortunately I had the foresight to give the new domain a root name, so it can be turned to pretty much anything. CMC is looking good. ToW won't make the nut without a full scenario editor of course...fifty maps will soon get very tired, and it'll go on a shelf after a couple of months is my prediction, unless they release one later. Not sure how CMC will work out for online wars, though the ability to parse files (if get-atable) is exciting. Hopefully, if this CMEF doesn't take off big time, I'll be able to incorporate most of what I've done into a CMC war. Thanks for your input.

At which point one might wonder why one doesn't simply play an FPS.

...that I've wasted a bunch of time and money making an online war for a game that next to nobody plays anymore. I've even looked for other communities, thinking maybe this one isn't 'The Big One', but there's nothing substantial out there. I've found a handful of sites, most without even a rudimentary forum, some with pages that were last updated years ago...what's the deal? I thought the CM series was where turn-based tac was at. Instead it appears to be tumble-weed central. I thought the flight-sim community was moribund, but this experience is setting a new standard!

That's why I want a shed-load of people playing it (up to a maximum of three players per sector), as that makes it more likely that attack and defence commitments can be honoured. A sector combat can be resolved with a 1-vs-1 combat just as well as with a full 3-vs-3 one. However, as mentioned previously, I've briefly thought about allowing other sector officers to step-in to a sector where none of that sector's players are available. I don't see any reason why that shouldn't be doable? It would, of course, mean that the absent player would have to give the stand-in his OOB, and his troops and equipment would be taken over by that stand-in (and possibly used and abused quite horribly. One isn't as considerate of somebody else's men as one's own). Neither should it be a hard & fast rule that all combat must take place only at weekends. [ August 16, 2006, 05:01 PM: Message edited by: Sigrun ]

All owners of CMBB are welcome, so long as they're intending to do the game justice. The advantage to running an online war for a game like this is one already knows the players are of above-average intelligence, maturity and commitment. CMBB is hardly something that appeals to the average CS junkie.

Apparently registration activation emails aren't being received right now (server teething problem I'm assuming, support ticket is in), so those accounts currently registered have been manually activated (you can now post). Sorry for the inconvenience.

I'm afraid not JT, it will be strictly TCP/IP. All battles will be fixed at 30 turns, and I'm anticipating a max turn time of five minutes, making for a total battle time of approx 3 hours (not including set-up, as that's going to be variable). Each sector can have a total of three human players stationed within it. Not all of them have to attend a sector-vs-sector battle, and a sector may not be fully manned. For each pair of humans in opposing sectors there will be an individual CMBB battle. This allows for players to be able to take a weekend off, knowing that the chances are at least one of their comrades will be covering their sector. If a sector is totally unmanned for a defence against an announced attack the sector will be deemed lost. It may be possible for players from non-engaged sectors to stand in, I haven't much thought about that yet. Theoretically, given that each sector could be 3-vs-3 at max capacity, a player could get away with attending just three hours of combat once every three weeks if all three guys in a sector spread the load. Or stand-ins could even further reduce the need to attend. For those more passionate/commited to the game, three hours every week is available, assuming their sector is attacking or defending that often. So I think, under these conditions, TCP/IP is doable.