A Canadian Cat

I was watching a turn tonight and ended up seeing this: This is from an on going game with Siffo998 from "Linking up and breaking out". This is behind the real action so I am not giving anything away. Through the smoke you can see just a hint of what is going on at the pointy end of my attack. The burning jeep was first blood. I miss understood the briefing and thought I was moving into a undefended area. Ooops the recon guys paid for it. Actually some of them got away but the jeep sure did not. Also the team in the near ground were caught in the open by a HT's MG42 all lined up. It sucked to watch that one burst and four men down. This is getting interesting.

LOL - if you've got it use it. I am currently dropping approximately every fourth building in "The Main Event" as I fight my way into the town. The locals will not be very happy with me.

There is another possibility: It could be the long hinted at PBEM turn management / opponent finder application.

I am not 100% sure but I have never seen them in game and did not mod them for my version of the low vis icons for CW. If they show up they will stick out like a sore thumb. I think they are unused right now. Any one hazard a guess as to what ltv means? Is it for an APC of some sort? If so could it be used once Kangaroos are added to the game - he says hopefully.

It was Sgt Schultz http://smtp.battlefront.com/community/showpost.php?p=1287716&postcount=11

Yeah and he did it in such away that you cannot easily see it in game - impressive.

+1 to both of those. Suggestion is brilliant - if you spot a member of the gun crew you see an infantry icon but when you finally spot the gun you see the gun icon. I would add that the icon should be centred over the members of the team that you can see. Right now it is centred over the whole team which means that if you can only see one member of a squad you can tell approximately where the rest of the squad is by the direction and distance of the icon from the spotted solider.

Driving the GUI to provide "out of program" enhancements is an inherently fragile design. Even a slight change to the program can break the added value community. This is why software companies do not support tools of that nature. They need to be able to fix things and redesign problem GUI components as needed. The right way for "out of program" tools to be created is with a public (or private) interface of some kind. That can be a programming interface (API) or a file import interface or even a command line interface. When a company designs such an interface they are also offering support for that interface and an assurance that changes to that interface will be managed some how so that supporting programs will not break without notice. The business advantage for companies doing this is that it helps create and expand a community of users. Part time developers add value around the edges of the vendor's product and the customers get additional features or other benefits. An excellent game related example of this is Eve Online. They have a API interface that has been used by many out of game developers and even players themselves. In their case the "out of program" developers are adding a lot of reporting applications (players can track important events in the game - your kills for example plus trading information that can rival stock exchange's reporting) and some design applications (ship design assistants). An example that might be relevant here is map and scenario design. Clearly BFC's current map editor is doing its job. Lots of scenario are being created and people are really enjoying many of them. Well done everyone. But there are people out there who would like to design scenarios but feel there is a barrier to their entry. I am one such person (see item 1 on my wish list). There is a long list of features that designers would like to see in the map editor. Those items go on a back log of things BFC would like to do and they have to prioritize them. Lets be clear. 1) Prioritizing features is the right thing to do. 2) BFC has show, in my opinion, that they are excellent at doing that. 3) I mostly agree with their choices. 4) I back them in their decisions even when I don't agree. (After all it is there game) What that means is that if BFC spends their time on non map scenario editor capabilities there is a group of people who will not create scenarios. And the simple fact is that might be just fine. You never know I might suck at creating scenarios:-) Here is where having a map creation API or file import capability comes in handy. There is a cost to them for giving me my top feature in a future game. There is a cost to them for giving other people their top feature. An alternative is to declare the current editor good enough and instead spending the cost of developing several new features towards creating a way for out of game developers to enhance (or replace) the map / scenario editor. They pay that once and then essentially forget about making new enhancements to the editor. If there are enough people willing to spend some time working on this area new tools can be made that provide a kick start to map editing just like @StoneAge has done. Apps using a supported interface become more reliable because they will be supported from release to release. It means that @StoneAge can work on new features he wants with confidence that his program will last long term. It also means that BFC can see what features really are used by designers. So in future games they can incorporate some of those ideas into the game. Or better yet they can look at the what features are hard for out of game developers to do and provide support for those areas in the game editor. More clarity: 1) I am *not* saying anything bad about @StoneAge's work. My opinion is quite the opposite I am very impressed and I would like to see more such work and for that work to be easier. 2) Click driving the GUI is not a good design choice in general terms. Currently there is no other choice for a tool like this: therefore saying that is in no way a criticism of @StoneAge for for that matter BFC. OK I'll stop now - long post. Just my 4c worth. Ian

That's cool - I was just making sure. BTW - for anyone reading this thread in the future: I meant "show stoppers" not "show stores".

Oops, my bad. I was looking in the wrong place. Thanks for steering me straight.

Oh, yes go ahead and use it. I did not mean to imply any bugs were show stores by any means

Yes, I have seen it happen as well. No, I do not have a test for it. I'm not even sure how to create such a beast. The time I do remember it well was when a Sherman was crossing a breached bocage bump. It fired its main gun (based on the area target order I gave it on the bocage line on the other side of the field) just as the shocks bounced low after the tank came over the bump. The He round hit halfway through the field instead of on the other side.

Something seems to be odd - I don't see your carrier mod yet and I cannot find the Churchill IV either. When I list vehicle mods by date I do not see anything after February. What's up with the repository?

Yes that is exactly what it does. I find it very useful. I have given Mad Mike some feedback - more work for him:D and pointed out a few bugs. I hope he decides to do some more work on it.

I see that too. That may not be a serious problem. I suspect that the scenario does not have a picture. The scenario organizer should not create a broken link but it is harmless. OK that is telling me that it had trouble processing one of the campaigns. I would suggest that you move the Kampfgruppe Engel and Scottish Corridor campaign files out of the directory and try again. If you get the same error then I would remove all the campaigns from the directory try again and then add them back in one at a time to see which one it is having trouble processing.

I'm not Mad Mike but I have used his tool and conversed with him about it several times. And as a Java developer I might be able to help you get it to run. OK that just means I have some test version he sent me you should replace the name "CMBN_Scen_Organiser_v0.3.jar" with whatever your .jar file is named. Sharing the error message you see after you do that might allow me (or others) to figure out what is wrong. You are not supposed to do anything with that. It is there for java developers to see his source code. I have not even looked at it though. Don't worry about it. And using 7zip manager will not get the program to run it will just show you the inner workings of the .jar file. Which is not likely to help you in any way.

That makes sense @Ranger33. There was a lot going on - my Royal Tigers on the tree line plus his two Achilles on the other treeline plus various Churchill's floating around. I never even noticed the second hit which is why he made the video.

So noob, interesting discussion you started up here The more I read the more I think a NABLA scoring system is the way to go even though it is difficult to grok by most players. But the bottom line is if you want to run a tournament then just set the rules and be clear up front. If you followed the Farm tournament that Bimmer has been running you can see that there are many happy forum members who had fun playing. I for one would do it again even though I was eliminated in the first round by one of the players that is going deep. Would some kind of round robin or NABLA scoring system have been better? Who really cares if everyone has fun and the rules were clear at the start.

@Topkick Not sure what the issue would be but try this. Open a command window in the directory where the scenarios and scenario organizer are located and run this command: java -jar CMBN_Scen_Organiser_v0.3.jar If you get errors report them back here and I'll try and help.

No BFC will prevent that - after all they don't want the war to be over quickly in game because they would not be able to sell the next module.

Another thing that can be done is to use a slightly longer bridge than strictly necessary. When investigating why I was having trouble getting vehicles to cross the bridges on Pete's map I did just that. Long story short: it turns out there was nothing wrong with the map it was a quirk of the game that my way points were being misplaced. You can read the sordid details here: http://www.battlefront.com/community/showthread.php?t=103833

Yes, my friend and I are currently playing a 12 000 point QB on this map now. There are a huge number of tanks running around on it. We are making notes as we go in order to write an AAR after that we plan to post.

Yep v flips 180 degrees. I use it a lot to flip between my guys and the enemy's view of things. I did not know you can <CTRL> click on the map to move the camera though - I'll be using that next time I play. Learn something new every day.

Wow that is dramatic! At first I thought you were talking about in our PBEM game - since it is raining:)

Bummer. I too have had games that did not upgrade to the new patch. My solution is to simply play each game all the way through with the version I started it with. You can have multiple versions of the game installed no problem. Right now I have the 1.01 patch and the 1.1 CW version installed next to each other. I still have a game going using the 1.01 version and several going with the new one. I have had opponents upgrade games before and so far most of them did upgrade OK but not all of them. In one case I had the same screaming airplane / rocket sounds and they lasted about 70s or so and then all was well.