missinginreality

and just a PS after a quick play - freakin excellent EXCELLENT work folks - top quality - I mean, I loved CMSF1, this is pudding on the cake And my ol' wall-jump animation is still in there! Haha awesome. Touched

Steve, Casio et.al, Been a few too many years since I was active on the boards or behind the scenes but there's pretty much not a day goes by that I don't make a PBEM move with my ol' mate across the Pacific - I counted the other day that we've been playing around 10 years or so. Anyway, just wanted to say a big congrats for CMSF2, just downloading the demo right now and looking forward to getting stuck into it. I remember getting the original CMSF 1 demo on a disc with Australian PC magazine and playing that for weeks before I found a Paradox CD copy in a bargain bin in my local PC store. And indeed the rest is history. As I recently said to my PBEM mate, there's been some dark days/weeks/months over those years - as I'm sure a lot of you perhaps have for many different reasons, and sometimes the only thing I did in the day was send a move over the sea. So, just simply thank-you for CMSF1 [and CMBS] and bloody well done for getting CMSF 2 out - stoked! All the best for the launch!

I had these exact same issues with the menu on my HP DV6. Fixed with some experimenting with the quality/performance settings under the Catalyst Control centre. Currently settings are all the way over to the QUALITY under Gaming Performance/Standard 3D settings. Under Gaming/Image Quality I have AA 4x standard Nothing ticked AA mode performance Anisotropic 16x nothing ticked CMSF options are set to: Display - Desktop VSynch Off AA Off High Priority Process ON ATI Left click ON Hope this helps to get you going. Once I'd changed the vide card settings I remmeber then being able to get into the Options CMSF menu for enough time to set the High priority process which i think was the fixer in the end. Good luck MiR

Hi Folks, Haven't posted for a couple of years but I been reading again recently and thought this might help as I had the same problems when I did a reinstall. Oddly enough I fixed it by messing around with the graphics settings between my card and CMSF. I think maybe the "high priority process" on CMSF settings perhaps? Or try changing some settings on your graphics card. Sorry to not be more specific but I hope it works for you guys. Cheers MiR

PP that was funny man With much thanks to all for your patience and work and input and for keeping this going; am now in the process of uploading a zip to the repositories; should be live in 10 mins or so. Cheers MiR

Hi guys, Humble apologies from me and gratitudes also to those putting in the time and effort to get this fixed up to Brit compliance in my absence. Bushfire season just starting here and between that and a bit of work have been a bit chokkas. Weather permitting will run them all through the subdueing process this arvo and post asap. Cheers MiR

Hi folks, Apols, work getting in the way of fun things! Wll be on it either Friday this week or Mon/Tues next. Thanks for your patience!

Hi Guys, Appreciate your post and am glad to hear the mod's been useful to you; am happy to re-do them with the new icons no worries; will get it done obver the next few days all being well. It is an alpha channel thing Zatoichi - if you need it sooner rather than later, basically each icon has a 50% or so grey alpha channel included. But will get to it when I can for sure. Cheers MiR

Mord, Congratulations on having the courage and determination to see out a dream of yours and for the greater courage to admit that things weren't working out for you and to do something about it. Awesome man, well done. You went out there and gave it a go and came back with new found lessons on life; hell mate; I doubt you've disappointed anyone. I think you showed great determination and courage, good on you and welcome back Mord; respect to you for living your life.

Not long after that - am not sure how long exactly but I know it feels like an age! I managed to hold on by not decisively getting engaged until they arrived; got down into the valley, especially behind that low wall down there, and in the trees, and dug in till relief came.

**SPOILER BELOW** Rogu187; If this is the one I think it is; hang on a while longer; you'll get a bunch of reinforcements that'll help you through.

Well it makes sense if you think about it; the Unit Lock or View Lock is just that; moving the mouse to pan your view means you can't physically be locked to a sinlge unit to do that as the camera needs to be able to move non-centrically to the unit. Orbit or height are the only movements one could realistically do with the camera locked to a specific unit. The solution is to keep the right mouse button held down for orbiting and roll the wheel [if you have one] for height adjustment; with the right mouse held down you wont break either view or unit lock that way and can scoot around the Tab'd unit to your hearts content

These from MarkEzra's Viper Pass scenario [nice one by the way Mark - a bit of a meat-grinder for Red but fun to play all the same ] A couple of times in this scenario my PBEM opp has almost but run over hidden RPG teams. This was one of the lucky ones that actually managed to get a shot off - gotta love the detail in this game when you get down to dirt level; I was half expecting to see the Stryker gunner gawping at the incoming RPG.

Doh, sorry mate. You got there in the end and that's good

darn that's odd Unless someone else comes up with any less drastic ideas I'd suggest uninstalling and re-installing SF. I take it you've not got any mods installed yet? if so, remove all those to try too.

Could try turning off shadows [alt-s] see if that helps? Oh...no icons though? Hmmm, that's very weird. Do you have troop icons when they are in the vehicles?

Which is exactly my point too; that area fire should always have an inherent accuracy/effectiveness penalty ongoingly UNLESS the unit is in C2 with someone that is spotting to that point

I would say it good be looked at the other way around though - that ANY area fire is ALWAYS penalised in terms of effectivenes; however, if another unit has spotting to that area AND C2 in some way to the firing unit then that effectiveness penalty is proportionately reduced. And reduced to such an extent that; when a unit that has LOS to an OPFOR is in comms to an area firing unit, the effectiveness penalty is all but negated dependant on tech/C2 clarity etc. In that way, anyone using area fire legitimately blindly is suffering what would be a standard reduction in effectiveness; someone using the "gamey" trick would also be thus subject to that reduction in effectiveness. HOWEVER, that effectiveness penalty is reduced if and when C2 exists to an LOS unit. Thus the 'astute' player is not penalized, the 'astute' player is only dealing with the 'usual' effectiveness of blind area fire. It is the 'extra-astute' player who is firing blind yet in C2 with an LOS unti that is 'rewarded' with an improved effectiveness.

I posted this possible solution to the issue in the last thread on the topic, which addresses it not from a time delay issue but from an effectiveness issue; in essence looking at the solution from the other direction i.e apply a negative effectiveness modifier to all unspotted area fire unless the unit is in C2 with a spotting unit. ............... Maybe it would not be so much as a time penalty as an accuracy penalty then? For instance, a general suppressing fire would I guess be by and large "unaimed" except in the rough direction of building/copse/treeline etc. Thus the chance of actually hitting anything hiding there if not spotted by anyone would be a bit random. However, say C2 is used to request an MG team to put suppressing fire on a building from an advancing unit that has LOS to an opfor in said building.Now THAT area fire from the MG would surely have a higher percentage chance of suppression? Thus the penalty would be a negative on accuracy for "unspotted" area fire and unpenalised for "spotted". In computation terms at all times the program knows that in a certain building there is either a spotted unit or not? Thus area fire into a "spotted" zone would carry a higher chance of suppression than area fire into an "unspotted" zone I perceive this would have the following effect: Retaining effectiveness of random unspotted area fire but possible reducing its suppression/effectiveness Increasing effectiveness of C2 called area fire. Obviously there would need to be some kind of check internally that the unit providing suprression is actually in C2 with a unit that has LOS to the target. This is where a possible delay could come into play. Delay = increased effectiveness .................. I believe, though am open to being corrected, this addresses Steve's 3 point check i.e: 1. The unit, through its own senses, suspects or knows about an enemy position but, for whatever reason, can't use direct fire on it at that particular moment that the player has to assign a Target Command. Maybe it was visible the second before, perhaps it is just a spot that looks too obvious for the enemy to occupy. The reason is irrelevant. Addressed that there is no delay yet the area fire is computationally less accurate than spotted fire. 2. The unit places fire on a location as directed by another unit even though it has no first hand knowledge, or even suspicion, that firing at that location is the right thing to do. The more sophisticated the ability to communicate, the more versatile the weapons are, the greater opportunity for this type of thing to occur. The most common example is indirect fire, since the artillery units obviously are doing Area Fire on something it can't see or couldn't possible have sensed on its own. Addressed in that an accuracy modifier would not be applied to artillery/CAS etc, it would remain as it stands.In other situations, addressed with a computational effectiveness/accuracy modifier which reduces proportionally to C2 etc. 3. The unit places fire on a location that it doesn't know about and wouldn't know/suspect to shoot at if it were not for the intervention of the God like player. In this case fire is being unrealistically manipulated to yield the best possible result regardless of the realistic chance of such fire happening in real life. The gnarly one and addressed in all of the above i.e ANY area fire is penalised with a computational accuracy modifier behind the scenes, automatically; however, should the unit in question that is delivering area fire have C2 to a unit that is spotting in that location, it's accuracy penalty is significantly reduced proportional to C2/tech etc. In this way, area fire generally is always penalised from an effectiveness point of view, for ALL area fire [except arty/cas maybe].However, when the area-firing unit has C2 to a unit spotting, that penalty is either reduced or removed.

I've had the AI throw in the proverbial time a number of times, most recently on Around the Bend, Blues for Allah and the fiorst few scenarios of sandstorm too. Took me by surprise the first time and then just kept on a-happening. So yes they do sometimes.

Choice, thanks mate

AHH that might be in, thanks Sergei. I'd thus assumed-wrongly- that coz the MG was listed as 7.62, by acquiring 7.62 from the BMP that'd be MG ammo. Hmmm, so does that mean Syrian MG teams can't resupply anywhere then?

I just noticed this last night and repeated it over to make sure: I had a number of Syrain MG teams all carrying 600 rounds of 7.62mm. In turn I moved each to a BMP to pick up 440 rounds 7.62 then moved them out again. With all of them the ammo is still only listed at 600 although the ammo bars of the 7.62 have gone up.

Ah simultaneous post with Moon; OK, now all becomes clear thank you. no more duh

Yea but Steve's post: DOOR || DOOR = passable DOOR || NO DOOR = passable (in earlier versions this equalled non-passable) NO DOOR || NO DOOR = non-passable related to two walls being existent. Stoex in your pic there's one solid wall between the two buildings so there 'shouldn't' be any way through. As far as I'm understanding it Steve wasn't addressing your point of a single wall with no door; only a solid wall abutting a wall with a door that they made a 'hack' to allow passable, which is sensible. Your post and pics brings up another point entirely which is units running through a solid wall without any doors. I'm not sure Steve intended to extarapolate the theory to cover a single solid wall against no wall. Sorry if I'm belabouring this point but after all the trouble you went to with the screenies I just wanted to get clear about it