Vinnart
-
Posts
2,570 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
4
Posts posted by Vinnart
-
-
I was carousing the list of books I have listened to, and here a few more recommendations if any are looking for some to listen on 4 hr rides:
In Fifty Years We’ll All be Chicks by Adam Carolla (Very funny)
American Sniper - The Autobiography of the Most Lethal Sniper in U.S. Military History
Dog Company (Like BoB, but about Rangers from Point De Hauc mission. Lots of great stories, and the ballsiest thing I ever heard. Four Ranger’s make an entire fort surrender!)
Angela's Ashes - Frank McCourt ( He narrates it adding much to this great story of poverty in the depression in Ireland. He’ll have you wanting to drink a pint of Guieness.)
Into the Fire by Dakota Meyer ( Medal of Honor winner in Afghanistan. You will see, and feel how things like PC ROE is total frustrating B.S!)
Swan Song by Robert R McCammon (without a doubt my favorite fiction book about the apocalypse. Much, much better than “The Stand” by Stephen King)
The Long Walk by Slavomir Rawicz ( The best, most amazing escape story from a Russian gulag you will ever read)
The Things they Carried (Very different book about Vietnam. Very poetic.)
The Men Who Stare at Goats by Jon Ronson ( So bizzar it’s great. People may not know it but Barney the Dinosaur played a roll in trying to break terrorist. They would lock a dude in a metal trailer, and blast “I love you, you love me” 24/7, and dudes would crack.)
Anyhow those should keep anyone busy for awhile. You got to love Mp3 technology.
-
I have a subscription to Audible Audio Books. I've listened to the unabridged Thrawn Trilogy which was very good; this also has sound effects.
Unfortunately I don't see a listing for "Darth Sideus". I also Google checked this and came up with no match. Would you be referring to ""?
Yes, I'm sorry the book I was refering to is "Darth Plagueis". I was thinking Darth Sideus as it is about him too. The book is the whole back story from the third Anakin Skywalker movie where Senator Palpatine asks Anakin if he ever heard the story of Darth Plagueis the wise who allegedly learned to bring back the dead. The story is about Plagueis, and young Plapatine who becomes his apprentice, and eventually Darth Sideus. I’m not really into syfi, but this was a good story, and interesting sound FX worth the listen. Also, I was so surprised to learn there is a Star Wars encyclopedia online that has illustrations to show you what Plagueis (a mune) looks like.
-
They are showing now! I looked again, and found he did an update for the "tankettes" for GL. I must have installed the old one not realizing the complications with vehicles, and compatability isssues with the need for updates. I installed the update, and now all is good. It still is bewildering why the first one did not show as the file title is the same. As far as my CMBN mods the first USA uits I saw were halftracks. I could have sworn I had HT mods, but I don't so hopfully the one I do have will not give a problem. At least I have learned that CMFI GL is a bit more complicated in regard to mods, and that some may need updating to work.
-
The scenario is “Indietro”, which is a single battle. I am assuming it is CMFI base as there is no “GL” in front of the title. I just got the game, and this is the first battle I am playing so perhaps the problem is scenario specific for some reason. The specific CMFI mod I downloaded as my first to try is Aris Tankettes. The mod comes with different options with optional number tags after the title that need to be deleted to use, which I did. As far as my CMBN vehicle mods go I did not have any mods of USA units that I seen so far. I thought I had halftrack mods, but do not, and those were the USA units seen so far. I will download more Aris CMFI specifics to see if they do not show either.
-
Excellent advice. I too use overdrive from my library and download books directly to my iPad for reading. However when I listen to Audio Books I often drop off to sleep..........
Try listening when you are not ready to go to bed. I listen while I work, drive, exercise, do chores around the house ect...
My library has lot's of military books most of which I would never have time to read if I did not listen to them. Since I have been into audio books for the last few years I would say I have "read" over a hundred mostly military, and non fiction books about all sorts of stuff that sounds interesting. The great thing is if It isn’t that good I just stop listening and get another one free. Just a few that stand out that come to mind that the narrators gave watching a movie in your head feeling rather than someone reading a book to you:
“Generation Kill” Excelent narration! I felt like the I was there.
“Brother’s in Battle, best friends” (Babe Heferon, and Bill Garnure’s personal sides of the BOB story). Don Malarkey, and Maj. Dick Winter’s audio books were done very well too, and each gives more personal, and never heard stories. These are a must for any BOB fan.
“Killing Lincoln”, and “Killing Kennedy” read by Bill O’ Reily were awesome! O’ Reily’s reading adds to the story greatly. He did a great job with his voice tempo like a mystery unfolding.
Some great non fiction-
Any Steven King read by Frank Muller (one of the best narrators/book actors ever, but unfortunately died not long ago in Bike accident).
“Darth Sideus” Prequel to Star Wars that gives a great back story to Darth Vader’s mentor for anyone who grew up on it. Great reading, great story, and cool sound FX to create atmosphere.
”The Godfather”. Great multicast reading/acting. Even with The Don’s voice and everything.
I could go on, and on I have listened to so many great books I would never have time to read.
-
Check out your local library for tons of FREE e-books, and audio books. Most libraries have “e” sites where you can download them to your PC from your home, and copy them to your device. All you need is a library card #. My library requires you download a free program called “overdrive” to do the “e” transfers. I like the audio books best since it is SO convenient to just put it on my phone, and listen while I work, drive, run errands ect.. In this way one can multitask, and I go through about a book a week all FREE. The narrators for most of the books are fantastic! They often bring much life to the story sounding much more like actors than someone just reading a book to you. Some books even have sound FX, and multicast reading for each character. Most are with single narrators, but will do different voices for different characters. Check out audio books I think you might be pleasantly surprised in how it improves the story.
-
Thanks for the response. The scenario I am playing is a single battle CMFI base scenario, and not GL. The Aris mod (tankettes) is a mod he made specific for CMFI so I am still bewildered why it is not showing. The only thing that sounds like it is throwing it off may be the additional tags which are not present. For example the bmps are titled as such “l3-33-hull” in the mod. From the wanting of using vehicle mods the “tags” thing sounds like it could get a bit confusing in making mods compatible. I might have to explode the game to look at the original files to see how the file names are for vehicles to see what’s up here. In the end it may be more work to get vehicle mods to show than is worth it.
I am surprised I could not find other posts describing the vehicle mods not showing.
-
I just got CMFI+GL, and all my mods are showng except vehicle mods. These are not showing for some reason. Most I have installed are Aris's from CMBN which are the same units in CMFI. I did try my first CMFI specific which was the Aris tankettes 33-35 mod, and that is not showing either. Any Ideas why?
-
I didn't particularly like the mission. I felt it was over done against the player with way too much artillery, and MG’s for the defender. Spotting was the worst I have ever encountered too. Even my best eyes were seen first, with sneaking, and tiny arcs, everything. I like a challenge, but this seemed to stack too many odds for acceptable casualties most of which came from artillery that lasted pretty much most of the mission. Perhaps the way to really win it is the way I went about it.
I captured the bridge, and pushed a few approaches up the road, and through the swamp after softening, and finally knocking out the ATG guns to bring the 3 tanks I had left up. I kept trying to sweep the other side of mines, but that road is covered with I don’t know how many MGs (lots) but, without more smoke they started getting ate up. Nothing seemed that is was going to be worth trying to capture the hill in the back , so I settled for the bridge, and said F the hill since it was a long campaign to go. Also I played this as my first CMBN campaign, and did not know what to expect with replacements.
At the start of the next mission “University of Hard Knocks” I felt I made the right decision to not risk losing the entire force to get the hill/ridge as the briefing didn’t expect it to be taken. “University” is a much better mission. Challenging, but not impossible. I felt a little cheated, as I just needed a few more minutes to capture the last objective in the rear.
-
The support for RT multiplayer is very poor, and basically is non-existent here. The interest in it is not as great as it could be due to several reasons. One is because there needs to be improvement in the features for player’s situational awareness. Another shortcoming is it is limited to 1v1 where as every other RTS game past and present offers Multi-multiplayer, which is how RT is best played IMO being more of “team sport”. This is how I enjoy RT most over 1v1, which WEGO PBEM is best suited for. It takes awhile for a single person to do the set up too, and get the game going vs. several players being able to set the force up which would be much quicker if it were multi-multiplayer.
There are some guys here who play RT, and over at A Few Good Men gaming club. One guy I know there eniced73 plays RT. They have a live chat feature that this forum does not have. This is essential to get a game on the fly, and can’t figure out why Battlefront does not implement the feature for RT game finding support. I joined A Few Good Men recently to access the live chat when I am in the mood to play RT. Leaving messages on this forum just does not work to get a game RT as wanting to play is spontaneous, and requires too much scheduling in trying to get a game through forum messages. All I can suggest is joining there to live chat. Perhaps you will find a game. I’ll give you a game if I run into you, and am in the mood to play.
-
Note to self. Post more at 2am with tired mind, and eyes. It improves proof reading skills
. I write in word, and paste doing it twice without even realizing. The sad thing is I can’t edit it.In regard to using more groups more complications. With armor only med force it is only using two to three groups instead of the five I went down to.
Next, I will try keeping the plan with five groups, and make alternant plans with four, three, and two groups with the hope that the computer will select the plan that best matches the amount of groups it only wants to utilize. Otherwise it misses parts of the plan when programmed for more groups.
I was right to assume that stacking orders over objectives will leave some units on VL while others move on to next VL. At least I know now I do not need to designate a group strictly for defense.
-
Paper Tiger, that would very helpful. In regard to the particular problem I have encountered with the computer excluding groups I think I will just have to play around to see what is the max groups I can use to best effect without losing any for medium size force. I’m going to knock it down to five, which should work for at least a medium size force. I say that because I was getting up to five groups with always group 1 absent. One group can be defense. I will try plotting order 2 for defense group to objectives blue, and green to dismount set to cautious. Also, I see that you can paint an order over an order. If that works then I can paint order 3 over all objectives. This should leave some units on blue, and green while other units in the group move toward each objective slowly. Is that the secret to having a single group leave some units while others move on? If so, then that improves the flexibility of each group. I have been testing with mech infantry, so I also need to find out how groups are divided with an armor exclusive force.
Paper Tiger, that would very helpful. In regard to the particular problem I have encountered with the computer excluding groups I think I will just have to play around to see what is the max groups I can use to best effect without losing any for medium size force. I’m going to knock it down to five, which should work for at least a medium size force. I say that because I was getting up to five groups with always group 1 absent. One group can be defense. I will try plotting order 2 for defense group to objectives blue, and green to dismount set to cautious. Also, I see that you can paint an order over an order. If that works then I can paint order 3 over all objectives. This should leave some units on blue, and green while other units in the group move toward each objective slowly. Is that the secret to having a single group leave some units while others move on? If so, then that improves the flexibility of each group. I have been testing with mech infantry, so I also need to find out how groups are divided with an armor exclusive force.
If there are any exceptional ME QB with AI more than 2 or 3 groups I would love to check it out.
-
PT when you do your tutorial it would be helpful I think if you include info about making QB ME. I am finding it is a bit different from scenario making in regard to groups, and their limitations. The biggest difference, and challenge I am finding is that in a QB ME the amount of units will be different each time where as in a scenario they are constant. Because of this the flexibility for creating is easier for scenario than what I am doing.
The problem I am coming across is the AI not using all the groups unless there are more units. I have made 6 groups in the set up shown in the graphic that work in attacking good if the setting is set to large. Here all groups follow their plotted paths, and orders. If the setting is set to medium then only groups 2 – 6 will show up, with group 1 absent. If the setting is set to small groups 1 and 6 are present, and 2,3,4,5 are absent. This obviously creates a problem, as the plan cannot be fulfilled all the way unless all the groups are there. In scenario design it is constant so they will all be there all the time. I am also assuming that to have the AI keep some units on back flags a defense group must be created, as it does not appear defense, and attack can be in the same group. Part of the challenge is in the amount of VL’s in the map. I don’t think I have ever seen a ME battle with more than 3, or 4 VL’s. The fewer VL’s the easier. Most will have one VL in rear; so one group can be set to defend, while one or two groups can attack. Recently I made a variation of the map that has eliminates all the center VLs leaving only four (blue, green, red, and orange). This should be easier in regard to the amount of groups needed. From what I have seen though breaking the force down into more groups gives a better challenge to the player, but groups are limited for QB ME.
In light of the way groups work for creating ME battles I think an improvement can be made in the computer separating the force into the groups no matter the amount of units. Even if it put a single unit into a group it would be better than it eliminating the group altogether.
I will have to rethink my groups to make them less it appears. One group can be set to cautious, and be programmed to bring up the rear, and sit on flags to occupy for points. As far as the attack goes the minimum I think I can keep the attack going good is four groups. I will have to see if it attacks as good as I have it set now, which is more precise following the best terrain. Due to the size of the map if I can get it to fit into five groups it should accommodate a medium size force better as 5 groups showed with that setting. Med. Size force is the minimum one would want due to the size of the map. Currently as I said I only get the six groups if it is set to large.
When it comes to AI planning in general I think it is rather straight forward, and user friendly. It seems not much different than potting orders, and waypoints when playing, but less precise than what can be done as the player. Understanding the subtitles of the settings I look forward to hearing more about.
-
Paper Tiger from playing around with it this evening I have been able to answer most of my own questions. I do look forward to reading the AI tutorial that you will be doing. The only one I havn't figured is best setting to get them to keep some units on rear objectives while some of the group advances. The work around is to just make a group to move to rear objectives, and stay there. I actually got the AI putting up a better fight than most ME maps i have played. The key I think is in making more groups with clearer moves via more orders. From my expereiments I think more order waypoints to keep them on better paths to objective is beter than leaving it to the AI.
Here is the plan 1 which is a wide front approach. All group set-ups are in blocks where the icons I am showing. I would rather use more of a line for set up as that is how I would do it as a human. The set up is set to active. Order 2 is set to dash, active, and unload passengers. Orders 3 and 4 are a mix of advance, and assault set to active. The map is basically a large long hill that has different elevations, and ridges on it. There is lots or rocky open ground with patches, and lines of trees. Plan 2 will be a flank blitz taking it from left to the right, and plan 3 is the same from the opposite direction. Plan 4 will be a double envelopment. In al scenarios I want the AI to take, hold, and be ready to defend objectives blue, and green from this side.
I like playing it in the senario author test mode. It is like watching another person play in real time like I envision being able to observe multi-multiplayer RT.
-
George, First thanks for making that manual. I read it, and it was helpful. I am trying my hand at AI planning for the first time to make my “Death’s Head” map playable as a single player ME QB. The map has many different victory point objectives spread out with lots of possible ways to approach it.
is it really better to paint just over objectives, and let the AI decide best way to get there, or to paint in paths of advance to get them there to make sure they stay in good cover? I really want the AI to make good choices to advance smart. The map has many different ways it can be taken either along a wide front, or in flank attacks.
You say you recommend wider painted orders, as opposed to lines. Why? When I look at the AI plans from LJF’s maps he seems to use more painted lines.
What setting is best to get the AI to keep some units back on an objective to defend while some of the group advances, or does a group need to be designated to defend a rear objective to get them to keep some units on a flag?
What is major difference between advance, and assault as far as AI is concerned?
I see the AI will divide a QB force into groups on it’s own, but in my last test group 1 was missing. I had another test where AI groups were missing too. Any ideas why? Is this normal? Right now I have the AI force in 6 groups to get them to spread out across a broad front at order 2. From there I want each group to move in different paths toward the objectives on the enemy side. I also need them to keep some units on their rear objective to occupy.
Any other particular tips regarding meeting engagement battle planning I would appreciate. Thanks.
-
Apparently what i was doing wrong was not setting to "used sometimes" instead of “used frequently” to get the AI to use groups in a QB more like a scenario. I changed it to this, and now they are deploying much more like I would, or at least they did in my last test. They went straight, and fast.
The next question is it really better to paint just over objectives, and let the AI decide best way to get there, or to paint in paths of advance to get them there to make sure they stay in good cover? I really want the AI to make good choices to advance smart.
Also are wider painted areas for orders better, or are thinner lines?
What setting is best to get the AI to keep some units back on an objective to defend while some of the group advances?
What is major difference between advance, and assault as far as AI is concerened?
Guys if you never watched a game in scenario test mode it is very cool. It is like watching another person play much like I envision an observer would see the game watching a RT multi-multiplayer.
-
I have read George McEwan's scenario manual, which has certainly been helpful, but what I am trying to do isn't as cut and dry it seems for QB ME as opposed to a scenario with picked units. I looked at a few AI plans from other QB's, and I did see that more than 1 group can be used, or at least the plans are there. However, my test shows that all the units seem to still go into one group, and follow that groups plan.
What I want is for the AI to spread out along a long front, then advance in different directions. I am getting them to do it, but the AI is having some units move out very diagonally to order 2. Units move for example from the right side of the set up zone diagonally to position on the left sides frontage. This is not how a human would deploy. I want them to move straight to deploy along a wide front.
Is it possible to have more than 1 group for AI plans for a QB ME?
-
Here is what the map looks like from above. Remember it is HvH only. Currently I am learning, and experimenting with AI to make it single player also from either side. When I feel I have the AI giving a decent fight I will update it for single player. Until then give it a try PBEM. I think you will find the landscape ineresting, and different. If anyone has any good tips for making good, challenging AI plans for a ME map I would appreciate them.
-
This latest update includeds all the experimental shapes I made beside arrow type bases giving the option to use them if one likes. Included are different shapes such as a pentagon shape. Of all I think the thick bright arrow set in the default folder is the best overall.
The only difference from this release from the 1st release for this mod is there are more alternate base options available for you guys to check out. Enjoy!
-
This latest update includeds all the experimental shapes I made beside arrow type bases giving the option to use them if one likes. Included are different shapes such as a pentagon shape. Of all I think the thick bright arrow set in the default folder is the best overall.
The only difference from this release from the 1st release for this mod is there are more alternate base options available for you guys to check out. Enjoy!
Preview:
-
I don't have CMA, but assume they should work fine with it.
To use a variant take the folder named "Thick bright arrow" out of the "Vin arrow base default" folder. To make a custom mix create a new folder and call it "Erwin's bases" for example. Copy the green base from the folder "Thick faded arrow" and put it in the custom folder you made "Erwin's bases". Then go to the folder named "Thick bright arrow", and copy the yellow base putting it also in the custom folder you make. Now tou will have folder that contains the thick faded green arrow, and the thick bright yellow arrow. Put your custom folder then in the folder "Vin default arrow base" which contains the red, and dark red bases. Last put the folder"Vin default arrow base" in the "z" folder, and you are good to go. This will give the mix thick FADED green arrow with thick BRIGHT yellow arrow. The key to doing custom mix is to make new folder as I said where you can mix-n-match the different types. You can only use 1 green base type, and 1 yellow base at a time. Hope I explained it clearly.
-
I have only made one, and it was a creative buzz. I'm definitly into only doing double image maps for QB fun vs. historical. The post made me think that just changing an existing victory point location can change the way a map plays significintly. I'm going to make another version of my "Death's Head" map just taking the center objectives out. If you have never seen the map it should lend itself to having to do much probing with many different ways to approach it making it play differently to get more out of the map. One can do this with any map out there to get more out of them.
I did start on another double image map of a woman with huge tits laying on her back. The problem I am finding is in order to get the detail, and best relief sculpture I have to make the map huge which my older machine takes too long to load. Don't worry though I'll get those tits out there for everyone to play on eventualy:D even if I have to work smaller due to machine limits.
Another map I want to do is the face of Sgt. Rock. No other image inspired me as a boy to want to be an artist. I just love Joe Kurbert's work on this cover. Just look how bad ass this drawing is.
-
Yay! I was gonna ask....
I figured why let everything I made go to waste, and give you guys more options to choose from. Also, for guys that like max visability at the expense of having a bit more base under the unit I thought it a good idea to include some extra thick arrow styles to try.
-
As far as hit text goes the option to have it on, or not is already is there so one can have the preference to use it or not. Having it this way gives options. The more options the better since many people have different taste. If one thinks it is desired to have them off they can. One can play without any play aids at all even no icons if they like. Agree with an opponent if you want to play with no icons, no hit text, no camera above level one, no disappearing trees, no moving the camera to enemy positions. The freedom is up to the two players if they want to play in triple, super master, expert, titanium, grog mode
. It's all about options. I like the hit text so I play with it on no matter what setting. From a RTS stand point they are needed to help keep situational awareness from being more frustrating than it needs to be so one can focus on commanding the whole at one time.And hit decals would be cool.
. I write in word, and paste doing it twice without even realizing. The sad thing is I can’t edit it.
. It's all about options. I like the hit text so I play with it on no matter what setting. From a RTS stand point they are needed to help keep situational awareness from being more frustrating than it needs to be so one can focus on commanding the whole at one time.
Multiplayer System [Suggestion]
in Combat Mission Fortress Italy
Posted
Indeed CM multi-multiplayer has been brought up. Here is a concept thread that describes it based on 6v6 with observer slots so people can watch live games:
http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=109832