Dr.Fusselpulli
-
Posts
315 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Dr.Fusselpulli
-
-
I changed the given names of the units on the map, and now it's persistent.
I restarted my computer, closed all unnecessary programs, including skype, discord and the browser, then started a fresh game. But the bug is persistent now.
Maybe my system is overheated? I'll give it another attempt tomorrow morning. -
Yes, I think it's not a big issue. I don't need it to be resolved. But it might be a problem for performance in general? I don't know.
Just thought it's worth reporting to make Battlefront aware of this issue.
I never noticed this neither. Only know, in the final stages of my 18,5km² map, (7280m x 2544m) I notice it in the Editor only and only on this huge map. The impact on normal sized maps is probably just neglectable, or you don't change back and forth often enough.
But it is indeed the case, that at some point, the game will consistently crash, when changing to the 3D view and back to the editor repeatedly.
-
It's not something I need to have resolved, but it's definitely a bug, Battlefront should be aware of. I don't know how it works ingame, if it is possible to have two players, let's say do a PBEM, and they have maps with different elevations. Not sure how it would turn out in combat with LOS. But if you have a fresh start, the map looks like it is supposed to look like.
The elevation changes if the 3D preview is used several times in the editor, up to the point, that the game crashes consistently at some point. So there must be some sort of memory leak or something, adding up RAM with every load of the map. -
Working on a huge map, I noticed the height resolver to be inconsistent when a map is loaded several times in 3D preview in the editor. Restarting Combat Mission solves the problem.
I guess, there is a memory leak somewhere or something. Maybe it is something where Battlefront can improve performance for the Engine update 5.
The following screenshots show the same area of the map without changes, just at different loadings of the game:
-
I noticed that big as well with an M113 in CMCW, it was not 180° but close to it, maybe about 170°
So doesn't seem to be that odd edge case. -
"Leibstandarte" (Personal Guards/Personal Banner) please, not "Liebstandarte" (Lovely Guards/ Lovely Banner)
-
I had not a penetration before, but a friendly unit got killed by a mortar smoke round once. Yeah, although those things don't explode, they are still dangerous if they hit you.
Similar for bears I guess, although they are not venomous, it still hurts a lot if they bite. -
Just an idea, could it be that the original map had trees at the place where the motar is standing, and setting the map to the desert setting is not deleting the trees for the AI, so they can't fire upwards because the line of fire isn't clear?
-
The M113 can't shoot to the back. Driving forward to escape and shooting to the back isn't possible. The Gunner also seems to always face the front, only the Turret rotates.
-
On 10/28/2021 at 6:03 PM, BFCElvis said:
This is marked in the bug tracking software as "Resolved"
Yeah, I believe it is, as this doesn't seem to be a complicated bug. But it needs to find it's way into a patch. But if the next patch is just about PBEM++ ...isn't there a little bit of space for the small M113 as well?
-
On 9/29/2021 at 6:22 PM, BFCElvis said:
All that I can ask in the meantime is for you to enjoy your Battlefront version of the game.
Yes, it's great! Just would love to see the termal vision for M113s fixed. And if possible the behaviour of firing ATGMs from vehicles changed from denying when "Waypoint exist" to "driver is driving"
And I'm curious about modules already, but this will probably take a while. -
Yes, it is true for all ATGM vehicles. My suggestion would to bind it to the "Driver is driving" variable instead. It's not a huge thing, but at Cold War, it is weakpoint.
-
On 9/14/2021 at 2:29 PM, Lethaface said:
The 30sec is already possible. Just give m a waypoint where you want them to fire (and optionally a facing or arc), reverse after.
That's only possible with tanks who fire a cannon, machinegun or autocannon right now. Not with ATGMs, as ATGMs will only be fired, if no waypoints orders are left for the vehicle. If waypoints are given, vehicles will not fire. So if you give a reverse order, this will not happen.
-
On 8/26/2021 at 6:24 PM, The_Capt said:
Ok, so that is a little disconcerting. A T72 can kill a Leo 1 at 3 kms and a Leo can do the same at 800m?! Am I reading that right? Now I am wondering what a T64 takes.
The Leopard 1 was only lightly armored. Calculations at the time were, that it is very difficult to armor a vehicle against modern anti-tank systems, it would make the tank bulky, heavy and slow. Instead the tactics was speed and movement. Leo1 tactics is shoot and scoot and not get hit. Heavy armor would make the Leo1 inert.
There was another vehicle planned to replace the Leo1 at that time, a new concept of a Jagdpanzer, the VT1 with two guns and an extremely powerful motor, optimized to perform fastes acceleration forwards and in reverse, to maximise the ability to do shoot and scoot manouvers. But the vehicle did not go into serial production, because it was not able to perform in a satisfying way in any other form of combat. -
Unfortunately, today is not the big day. The release is postponed to an unknown date. Probably August.
-
Nato had several mine laying devices to delay a Soviet attack and deny an area. The Scoprion Mine Laying Vehicle of the Bundeswehr for example, with 300 vehicles taken into service in 1981/82. But minefields can also be prepared by artillery or helicopter. None of it is part of the scope of a Combat Mission scenario, but the mines which would have been in the area are, and we have them available in the game.
Which we don't have is Soviet counter equipment, Tanks with mine rollers to deal with those mines, and prepare a still dangerous, but somewhat safer route through a minefield for the following vehicles and infantry. Can we get tanks with mine rollers later on to fill this gap? -
For the independent buildings, I place all building types on the map, in the same pattern, as they are in the editor, and then I can check in the 3D world which building would fit where. I do the same with trees. This buildings will be deleted later of of course.
-
Yeah, but sometimes 10 seconds are not enough. And sometimes the tank shoots immediately, and then waits for several seconds on the spot. I know, that similar behavior can be simulated already, but it isn't optimized.
-
What I would like is a new movement type of "Firehalt", being a "Quick" move to a waypoint and then stops there with "Firehalt", a special type of "Pause" until the main weapon, either the cannon or an ATGM got fired.
This could be used for tanks advancing forward for an attack, if the tanks are old WW2 tanks, or soviet cold war tanks, to shoot with maximum precision while on the move.
It would also be useful for perfect shoot and scoot maneuvers. As you could order tanks to move into a fire position, the tank would pick its target, fire, and then reverse back into a hidden position, if this is where a follow up reverse waypoint would be headed.
There could also be a "Firehalt 30" type, to switch through. To "Firehalt" until the main weapon got fired, or continue after 30 seconds, if it did not got fired. For example, if the expected enemy did not show up, is not spotted, or destroyed by another unit. The 30 seconds would give the vehicle some time and a chance to spot, but it would then continue to advance further, if it is in an attack, or go back to the hidden position, if it would be in a defense. -
I would also be interested in this campaign. @Aquila-SmartWargames would like to put it on his Dropbox folder, available for everyone, if possible and if storage space is needed.
-
8 hours ago, FogForever said:
Agreed but missile armed vehicles should be able to shoot and scoot in the same manner as any other vehicle.
Yes, when I reported this "bug", or maybe better "questionable design decision". I suggested, to change the "if/then" from "if further waypoints exist, then vehicle can't fire atgm" to "if driver is driving, then vehicle can't fire atgm". Because this is also a variable tracked by the game, as you can see in the lower left corner if you click on the unit.
-
It does work with cannons however, so for tanks or machine guns, this is not a problem.
-
On 7/2/2021 at 3:41 PM, FogForever said:
IMO, the inability for the M901 to go true hull down and to shoot and scoot prevents them from being used effectively.
Shoot and scoot maneuvers are possible to some degree. ATGM vehicles do not fire ATGMs if waypoints are still available. So you can not give the order to drive from a hidden position into a hull down position, give a pause order of some seconds and then go reverse into the hidden position, as the vehicle will not fire ATGMs from the paused waypoint. At least not as the game is done right now, because of engine limitations.
But there is a work around, if you give a pause order in the hidden position first, then drive up to the hull down position, so that the vehicle will stand there for about 10-15 seconds, before the turn ends, then it will shoot, as there are no following waypoints ahead. You can then drive reverse into the hidden position in the beginning of the next turn, to perform a full shoot and scoot maneuver. -
1 hour ago, Erwin said:
The covered arc will not be followed slavishly. The AI will permit units to open fire outside of arcs depending on variables that are not explained.
Yes, I know. But here I guess the target arc is not working at all, if it is used for passengers.
Please, try it out, with elite and highly motivated soldiers against not threatening enemy soldiers.
However, this "bug" is of very low importance, as target arcs for passengers are not so important, because usually vehicles get spotted quite easily anyway.
Height resolver is inconsistent (Bug report)
in CM2 General Tech Support
Posted
Did a bit of optimization by redoing some of the hightmap at another place (less set hights needed without an actual change of the geometry).
Now it's working again. Seems I'll be redoing a lot of the hight markers and cut every unnessecary hightmarker out of the map, before the release of the scenario.
This map seems to be really an edge case