Kieme(ITA)

Thanks for sharing, some of those field modifications are really strange! The conduction line seems to be the search for additional protection against RPGs, one even has a double layer of spaced armor. Concerning the game, problem is that such improvised solutions are all different from each other, and the amount of modelling required to make, let's say 5 versions of them, is much probably equal to the amount of time needed to model an entire new vehicle. Moreover, the quality and efficiency of these improvised solutions is all to be estimated, not to mention the durability in the field.

I don't really think that they come back as reinforcements, wounded soldiers could still take many weeks or even months before a full recovery, and the campaign timeframe is much smaller.

All this coverage done with videos before the release of the game, since last year's autumn first peek videos about CMBS, surely was a very nice and interesting information sharing by BFC. Thanks.

He is somewhat lucky to be able to fully recognize the development of the last 7 years, from one extreme to the other.

Couple of more views to kill the wait: Some more props added to the horizons, as suggested before I looked at the TV and radio antennas, and came up with something not too big, made it red and White to add some colors. Then, a concrete water tower and a shiny steel grain silos complex, some other of those modern features I was looking for.

I really hope this mix of games won't be followed, it would kill the franchise of CM.

You live in the desert or what? Take a trip to normandy to check local flora...

Well, I belive the situation changed, and changes, a lot from gun to gun, if you look at it: And this: Without being an expert I recognize there will be a lot of differences in setting up these two guns, if not only just for the shape and technical construct of the carriages.

The blur line doesn't get removed, it's just a visual trick. The more similar is the distant texture to the closer texture (in terms of pattern, brightness, saturation etc.) the less evident to the eye is the line, yet, it's still there. I belive that the game engine could potentially render the same detail of the closer view up to 2 or infinite number of kilometers, but that would mean to force the computer to display a 1024x1024 pixel texture, per game square, at a distance where you couldn't get any detail out of it anyway, so you'd not only need a super computer to do that, but also wouldn't be necessary. The actual options let you partially move this dread line farther or closer, but for not much distance. I'd also like to see an option more directly connected to this matter, maybe with some strong variations, not sure how my rig would manage it, but I'd like to try. An alternative I thought about, but from my own ignorant point of view of non-game developer, was to have more than the two options for each texture, now we have the big, best texture that renders the terrain close by, and then the tiny version for everything more distant than that, so I wondered if adding 1 or 2 more "intermediate" versions of the texture would reduce this problem or not.

There's Always another option, which I am experimenting with lately, you can leave the original horizons, and mod those, or over-those. For example you can change brightness and saturation, without too much effort. You can also add or remove details from them. It's a poor man's choice, but lets you do some modding without actually making a Whole new texture from scratch. Example of details just added over the original horizon texture

Well, I belive it's a matter of 1)choices and 2)game scope. 1) modelling the 88mm FLAK in travelling conditions requires a lot of work on 3d models of the two wheel carriages, it takes time to code where these two go after the deployment, and these will Always cause problems with pathfinding etc. same goes with any light FLAK gun, which has a dedicated carriage which is separated by the gun in standard operational conditions, and this happens before the actual battle. 2) since it takes quite some time to make a 88mm FLAK ready from the transport configuration, and given CM's game scope focused on the tactical reality of a single, precise battle, the 88mm FLAK deployment is assumed to happen before the battle CM games depict. I am not sure of the time required to a trained German unit in 1944 to unload a carried 88mm FLAK, but I assume it takes more than few minutes to make a fighting position ready. So, you can have 88mm FLAKS, but you can't drive them around. You ca't drive a 88mm PAK as well, because CM is actually missing the vehicles capable of towing that, but you can tow a PAK 40, with a truck. Your AA assets will cover your troops all over the map.

I am not an expert of programming or 3d modelling, but I assume that the effort of making a complex 3d model is, in BFC eyes, not Worth for something that would just be a prop. Besides, there's a Whole bounch of problems when it comes to interaction with shots/units pathfinding etc. etc. I wouldn't mind the absence of cables. Although I also belive that few things like the high voltage Towers contribute to make a landscape more modern and these items are quite common. There are many potential "modernizing" items, guardrails for example. Making these as 3d models to appear on the side of a road might be possible, but I also belive they fall under BFC concept of time-vs-revenue, where revenue is the effective impact in game of the work done to make them, and since it would again be more of an aesthetic thing than anything, I realize they are out of question. Standard commercial containers, big boxes that would surely be the easiest thing in the world to model in 3d, yet, how would you code them? As flavour objects? Make sure they block LOS, make sure you can stack them somehow, that would take more time than to model them I'm sure. Another thing I miss: tall industrial cimneys. We can make a lot of shapes with the modular buildings, yet we miss some large details that are those which give character to a building: such as a tall cimney, or a round, metal silo, or a cluster of pipes. Now, consider that these big flavour objects must be destructible, otherwise you'd feel something wrong the minute your company sitting inside a building complex is oblitarated by artillery and the buildings raized while that tall cimney made of bricks just survived... In the end: if we were asked something like: would you like to see in game a BMD variant or a set of industrial models as big flavour objects? I guess 95% would go for the tank (I would) because, in the end, we play a tactical sim game, not sim city. But I'd like to have those props nonetheless, if only it was moddable someone might make those.

Ouch guys didn't want to fool you around! I'll upload these as a mod once the game comes out.

they are no big deal, I just downloaded a picture and cut out the Towers, then tweaked them to fit the horizon. Not very detailed anyway, just to fit the original horizon picture.

...meawhile, modding to kill time: I hoped these high voltage towers were added as new big flavour objects (maybe they will one day), anyway, trying to make the usual old horizons "feel" a bit more modern: (terrain and foliage fully modded as well)

In any case there are many "missing" vehicles, it's a matter of choices, also considering that modules will come.

I talked to greenasjade and he won't support CMBS, that's why I asked, looking forward for the new game release and its modding support.

I don't usually comment on other games here, but about arma3, I remember downloading it duing a free weekend few months ago, and gave it a go (I play the franchise since operation flashpoint), so, I went on the editor, placed some vehicles. Went inside a tank and started driving around.... the effect of driving it in game on various terrain types (which looked like dirt/grass etc.) was like driving my mustang if it was half ton lighter on an ice lake with slik tires. Uninstalled the minute after it. Might be viewed as limited mind or whatever you want to call it, just my two cents...

Yes dead cows were in vanilla CMRT as far as I remember too.

Any expert knows by chance a good free service to upload and download files in case? Got some opinions on this one? http://www.tinyupload.com/

1.3 has the same by the way.

Since it came out in this discussion more than once, I'd like to share some picture I just saw from a Italian newspaper: This slideshow shows drone's pictures of Donetsk airport. http://www.repubblica.it/esteri/2015/01/18/foto/donetsk_combattimenti_all_aeroporto_la_distruzione_dall_alto-105227375/1/?ref=HRESS-2#1

Now that I recall thanks to your words, Pak40, back in the old CM1x games, before modular buildings were introduced, didn't we have the option to choose light building, heavy building etc.?

I agree Vinnart, as I stated some months ago, there's very little control over your mods. I understand the approval security measure, but it's very tedious process for a known uploader. Besides, you can add a picture only after the mod has been accepted and published, which is in my opinion wrong. Not to mention the file limitation, which forces you to cut your mod into parts, adding to the confusion and frustration not just yours but for the downloader too... I had a CMSF terrain mod that had to split in 10, TEN, parts. And for the downloader it's a mess too, the reseatch function is not user friendly, the mod database is confusingly organized.

Well, what I'd like to say is: keep trying. I had to do many versions before making something I would use with my game, which was CMSF at the time. Anyway, if your starting picture is a good one you'll have less work to do. Such picture does't need to represent a true 360° horizon, it could be a 180° one and you could still fit it in the game, it's just a matter of perceived distance and in game you have less view depth/range than your eyes have in reality. Moreover, you can make the original picture a little longer and a little shorter, not too much, so you can have it some more pixels longer. Problem is, if you stretch it too much it will look squished, like looking at a 4:3 movie on a 16:9 screen. It all depends on the original picture, and what kind of details are there. About the 1 pixel gap, making strange straight lines between some of the horizon pictures, we belive it's a bug. Aris couldn't solve the problem either, I couldn't, and I tried everything I could. What I can tell you is that such gap is more visible the higher is your horizon terrain in the picture... let's say your horizon is a mountain, covering all the possible height in the horizon picture, you'll notice the 1 pixel line bug a lot, let's say you have a plain or a gentle hill only, you'll notice the bug much less..