A Canadian Cat

Only one machine will calculate the actions so that machine will determine if the medic is spotted or hit. The other player will see the kneeling animation. If the medic is spotted.

Ah guys this view is logically flawed. You are saying "if I perform well I should win with light casualties" but flip that around. If the other side says the exact same thing they both cannot be true. If you perform well you will minimize your casulties but remember the other side is specifically trying to *cause* casulties and therefore even if you do things right your pixels will be at risk of undo suffering. True, path finding can be trouble some and could be better. One thing we can do now is learn how things work and plan our orders better - it really helps. The coming patch should help somewhat with the coming under fire behaviour while clearing buildings.

I think this was discussed in the linked thread... Summary: the way the game works is the models are used to determine hits therefore changes to the animation will have an effect. But there should be no unfair advantage in PBEM because one machine calculates the events of a turn and that machine's model and animation will be used for those calculations so both players will either get the benefit or neither will depending on who's machine has the mod and who's machine is calculating the turn.

3....2....1 waiting for someone to come along and say: "that time limit was too short need to add more time so I don't feel rushed" LOL

I can confirm it has been reported (a couple of months prior to the first report here). I added a note that it appears in CMRT as well.

It looks like I do. This is one of the handful of items that didn't make the move to the scenario depot. I still owe @Bootie list of other items I have that didn't make it. I'll email you a copy if you like. Eventually I'll get my list together and let @Bootie fix things up.

There is precedent for keeping a bug quiet - I once found a way that allowed mortars to direct fire anywhere on the map (no spotting rounds near instant HE death). We didn't discuss that on the forums while the fix was being made. I am not sure how and MG setup bug could be that bad but I'll let @Bulletpoint make the call on where to report it. Either way well get it logged - if it is not already...

That sounds like a good plan. Make sure they have somewhere to go.

How is that different from Silk Armor: Blaze of Glory

I know, I know /s indicates sarcasm

Cool, those look at lot like what @Zveroboy1 created.

You have a machine gun attached at the sholder???!!!????

Exactly. It's not an exploit. Some people are not being prudent as you suggest above and then whining about it later

Oh an excellent point actually. I think someone did some experiments about how tough (or not) buildings were. The main take away was the look of the building did *not* matter as @Bulletpoint suggested only the type of building bar, independent building, modular building, church (technically a church is an independent building but they seem to be tougher)

But what BFC product did you buy yesterday, last week or last month? This thread has turned into a blame BFC for all credit card fraud thread. /s

Cool first thread. Welcome @powdermonkey. So @Combatintman pointed out there is a patch due that will help with reducing the tendency of troops to automatically withdraw due to taking some small arms fire (your squad enters a building and takes LMG fire) and the issue with troops sticking around while under HE fire or not staying in their fox holes during same. That's good but you raise a few other issues that are not going to be changing any time soon. I'm just inserting an expectation check here (it's my job) BFC does not believe that they have over modelled artillery. There are no plans that I am aware of to change that. BFC does not believe they have under modelled the protection buildings offer. There are no plans that I am aware of to change that either. So, no patch is planned or due to "fix" those things because they do *not* believe there is an issue with them. The issue of high casualties has another root that sometimes comes up - us, the player. In real life after taking some number of casualties the battle field leaders would have usually stopped the attack to regroup or wait for additional support. But *we* don't do that. We keep fighting.

On additional suggestion for those "buildings as part of the walls so you can have a window to shoot out of" idea - add low walls along the outer edge of the building. That will give additional protection for those shooting out the window and allow for the building wall to take more of a beating before becoming a big hole.

We were playing PBEM which has the advantage that the .ema file is automatically the watch file and the .bts file is automatically the play (orders) file. But his rules also have comm delays and targeting accuracy issues. So, cool. I read the briefly and have one question: if the supporting fire inaccuracy rolls come out that the supporting fire can see friendlies at the location can the no fire? By that I mean if your table would cause friendly fire but the units involved can actually see the friendly personnel can they elect not to fire or perhaps re roll or adjust in some other way?

Whatever they care to create

To be a bit nit picky vibrance does change the saturation - just not the same for all colours. Don't get me wrong vibrance is a great adjustment to make since it doesn't make some colours look crazy as you increase the saturation of the one you want. https://digital-photography-school.com/vibrance-vs-saturation-in-plain-english/

OOps sorry man. Don't you just hate it when people tell you to do stuff you are on your way to doing already.

Once you are added as an author you can upload new mods without external help. tagging @Bootie

Mr Bean is from BC?

Oh no not his crap. Do not read this! Even if he might get things right in this article it will be largely by accident. Sorry I feel slightly bad about saying that but his articles are bad, really, really bad. If you want to learn never read any of this stuff. Here are three articles that are from reputable sites. I quickly reviewed them and they offer a reasonable explanation if you care to read more. Like I said the site above might be OK but my rule is I never ever ready Ken Rockwell's stuff because so much of it is bad. https://fstoppers.com/pictures/adobergb-vs-srgb-3167 https://digital-photography-school.com/adobe-rgb-versus-srgb-color-space/ https://clickitupanotch.com/color-space-questions-srgb-vs-adobe-rgb/

OK now this is what I though would happen. Yes, BMP files do not have a colour profile. I said nothing yesterday because I have a lot of trouble wrapping my head around colour issues and I didn't have access to my Photoshop PC. I am a photographer who has read fair amount - it is one of those issues that after reading a good explanation you feel like you get it and then a hour passes and you think "wait what, how does that work again" At any rate what you described is what I would expect. If you are working on something for CM edit in sRGB, stay in sRGB and be happy. If you start editing photographs then cool do some reading...