Jock Tamson
-
Posts
443 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Jock Tamson
-
-
On 3/6/2017 at 5:56 AM, Vergeltungswaffe said:
In his defense, there's a much bigger and brighter green button just above that that says "Start download".
...which is quite clearly for a product called "Easy PDF Combine".
I agree that they hope that people who don't read what the screen is saying will accidentally click on the wrong link.
-
Yes, much the same as assaulting vehicles, the crew - who had no idea you were there - will come piling out and kill your assaulters once you have blown up their vehicle. Meanwhile your assaulters will allow themselves to be shot up by the egressing crew as if they had no idea there might have been anyone in the vehicle.
-
No it is not hard to install, but it does not encourage casual purchase. S***m on the other hand enables casual product discovery and purchase - search by genre.
-
Absolute bunk.
By your logic, Battlefront start selling their products via Steam, and then somehow Steve stops being Steve and succumbs to the deluge of feedback.
"New people", my God, the mere thought of it!
-
Fan tears a strip off fan, because first fan wants more people to find and play game they both love. Nuts!
Meanwhile outside the CM bubble a generation of gamers spends billions of dollars on Steam, GoG.com etc and is barely aware that software is available anywhere else.
When I built my gaming PC back in 2011, after being away from games for a decade or so, I was suspicious of Steam and bought Rise of Flight and Arma 2 on CD.
That lasted about 6 weeks before I realised that things had moved on. I now have I guess 100 or so titles, many of a type that I probably wouldn't have considered back in the day when I purchased CDs. As any Steam user will tell you, the shop is always open
. Buy a game, go and get another beer, come back and it's installed.
-
Impressive although I think 6mm works better for WW2
-
9 hours ago, sburke said:
Those who realize there is only so much that can be packed into the code and those who don't.
With respect, and speaking as someone who works in this environment, the decisions as to what appears in a given version of the game engine have got far more to do with available programming resource, desired release dates and business decisions relating to worthwhile features, than what can be "packed into the code" - a phrase that doesn't really have any technical meaning. Most people have systems with an additional three CPU cores doing no work while CM is running. Re-engineering CM to make more use of these would be a huge undertaking, but it is a resource and business limitation, not a technical one. Different 3d engine offering improved terrain and building deformation? - business decision, not a technical limitation.
I don't share the OP's criticisms, most of them are flat out wrong, however as someone who only plays single player and has bought pretty much everything that has come out, I do share his experience of upgrading over the years and then slowly going off the boil as I come up against familiar let downs in single player particularly.
-
I think the bugging out behaviour, in urban environments in particular, is probably the most frustrating. I would prefer more nuance - sometimes crawling out of the back edge of buildings rather than the full on dash out into the open across the street and line of fire.
-
13 hours ago, Ch53dVet said:
Again, No. I choose not to because as the 4.0 game engine states:If the (optional) designated target was an Area Target, the vehicle will cancel the Target command upon reaching hull down. If the target is an enemy unit, the vehicle will begin attacking the target once it reaches hull down.
The key point I've been trying to make here is that just because you can draw a HD command line, it doesn't guarantee you that a HD location exists between you and the endpoint, from what I've seen so far is that after placing a HD command marker between you and the enemy your tank commander will disregard partial HD locations in hopes of finding a full HD location and if a full HD location doesn't exist your area target command won't cancel out and you'll be hopeless and dead as your tank commander drives you to the enemy.
Appreciate your point re the possibility that there is no HD location. However, I don't believe your point about Area Fire is correct, no Area Fire will take place even if a HD location has not been found. I will happily stand corrected on that though, I will experiment tonight.
-
On 2/10/2017 at 8:25 PM, Ch53dVet said:
No, I want to be HD to the target, not HD to the end point, (unless the end point is the target) which, might not be HD to any location on the map. I'll draw the target command from manual movement commands to find the 100% HD locations. The addition of the HD command (from what I've read) is supposed to help and remove the manually micro'ed procedure as I've stated above.
If I have a possible sound contact or I suspect a possible ambush location and there is elevated land between us, I will place the hull down marker on the target or suspect location. However, the elevation between us might not be enough for a 100% hull down location, only a partial one at best, "it appears to me" (and I could be wrong) that when a hull down command is issued it will always by-pass the partial HD locations in search for a full HD location and if one doesn't exist it will take me to the murder hole (end point) I was hoping to avoid.
I could add a target command at the end of the HD endpoint, yes, but, if there isn't a true HD position between me and the possible target or suspected location endpoint I won't fire my main gun if the enemy comes into view, because, I have an area target command to get out of the way first before I can engage any real dangers in front of me. I, have as yet, to see any real self-preservation override any pre-programmed orders, even though all the manuals say that self preservation does exist. I have yet to see one occur.
I was just saying, the documentation I've read on the new hull down command doesn't specifically state if your armor will stop for both partial and full HD locations. It would be nice to have the ability of not being able to place a HD endpoint between you and the target location if one does not literally exist.
That target line on the HD waypoint is not an area fire order. Have you actually tried it? - I don't see the behaviour you are describing (ie the Area Fire).
-
as others have said, using the target command from the waypoint you have plotted is key. Adjust the waypoint until you have a clear blue target line to your proposed target.
-
Sure, but at least if you have them copied off locally you don't have to go to the site when you are reinstalling.
-
22 hours ago, Erwin said:
I was scared to upgrade as often it ends up taking half a day of frustration to sort out the resulting mess. But, this time upgrading all the titles only took a few minutes. Wonderful! Looking forward to upgrading CM2 on my other 2 machines when I get back. Thanks BF.
PS: On "Our Account" page on the BF site, wouldn't it be more useful to list the name of the purchased item rather than the date? Looking for the code for a particular product takes time when you have to check every item.
Next time you check through the items, copy the license keys into a notepad doc.
-
8 hours ago, gnarly said:
Have you actually drawn a target command from the Hull-Down end-point to a target of interest?
You may have, but your post sounds like you've simply placed a Hull-Down move point with nothing else.
Which will still work - the unit will stop at a position which is hull down to the waypoint, if it finds one. Setting a target from a HD waypoint will make the unit stop at a position which is HD to the target, somewhere along the line to the waypoint. Both equally valid ways of using the command.
-
3 hours ago, Warts 'n' all said:
@ Jock Tamson.... Surely you could do that yourself. Just don't scroll all over the map during the replay phase.
How would you know your opponent was doing the same?
-
On 1/24/2017 at 0:33 AM, Erwin said:
I share a similar frustration. I must have more than 100GB of mods downloaded from when CM2 first came out. Now so many don't work with patched versions, but which ones? It would take me months to examine each mod cos there is no efficient way to do that, and no help re what mods are totally obsolete.
I envy newcomers who can start with fully up to date versions of all these games. Having all these titles as separate games requiring their own engine etc. is such a waste of HD space and creates more and more work. Just keeping up to date with all the activation codes is a PITA. I really hope that CM3 can incorporate all CM3 titles so there is no duplication and the "feel" will be more akin to how we experienced CM1 - everything in one game. Otherwise, it would be a concern that the series could collapse under the aggravation of complex time-consuming installations, mods, updates and patches - kinda like what happened to PESE. And that was only one game.
It is trivially easy to have one directory containing your sound mod, which all the games point to. It doesn't even have to be in the game's directory structure. Use Directory Junctions (in Windows).
Example: you have CM installed on C: You put your sound mod in a directory on a different drive D:
mklink /j "c:\program files\CMBN\data\z\sound" "d:\mods\CM\sound"
mklink /j "c:\program files\CMFI\data\z\sound" "d:\mods\CM\sound"
mklink /j "c:\program files\CMFB\data\z\sound" "d:\mods\CM\sound"
etc
Obviously your precise installation paths will be different to the ones above.
A variation of this would be that you have a sound mod in CMBN and you want all the other games to use it:
mklink /j "c:\program files\CMFI\data\z\sound" "c:\program files\CMBN\data\z\sound"
mklink /j "c:\program files\CMFB\data\z\sound" "c:\program files\CMBN\data\z\sound"
-
6 hours ago, John Kettler said:
Would love to have "ears" locked in place to where the men are, rather than being able to fly them about as some sort of unfettered acoustic detection system. Find it ridiculous that LOS has to be from where the observer is, but hearing is at will and anywhere. At the very least, I feel this should be implemented in Iron, but would favor its being in effect well before that. This would, I believe, be especially useful in infantry combat, where recon would become even more valuable. This could also permit implementing noise discipline as a game feature. I feel such measures would allow worthwhile patrol scenarios and such. Contrary to the ill-designed challenge on "Mythbusters: The Search," sound can be more than adequate to deliver a killing blow, especially if using grenades, which are pretty much sourceless to the recipient, start bursting!
Regards,
John Kettler
Agree. In fact I would like Iron to limit map scrolling to within a couple of hundred metres of your troops, creating a frontline / fog of war effect.
-
Looking forward to trying this scenario out.
Can I shamelessly plug my own version of Mord's Mixed Combatants for those who want more variety in their enemy:
-
On 2/1/2017 at 10:21 PM, sburke said:
I think you guys are arguing over nothing. My understanding (and I could be totally wrong) is wego and RT are intertwined. You can't have wego without the game running RT in increments. The wego folks just forego our ability to issue commands for a minute and in return we get unlimited playback.
Steve is not a big fan of zero sum arguments ?
I appreciate the relation between RT and WEGO in the current engine. But this discussion is not limited to the current engine.
The point I am making is that the game is already CPU bound because it is largely single threaded. Unless they completely rework the engine to use greater multi threading - a lot of work and difficult to predict benefits - the amount of processing available for this engine or the next is going to be limited to that one thread and core.
There is a limit to what can be going on in that thread whilst maintaining the sort of frame rates that RT needs in order to be playable.
If RT is dropped, frame rates become much less of an issue. If frame rates are less of an issue, more computation can be done in the thread = more features. I am sure, for example, that most WEGO players would wait a little longer for turn resolution if it allowed the AI to have more processing resource, for example to move away from scripted plans to something a bit more dynamic.
I have played a lot of RT, but I would rather have a better, less predictable, game against the AI and only have WEGO.
-
8 hours ago, sburke said:
Steve plays real time so you needn't worry ?
Hopefully one day he'll realise what a cul de sac it is and divert the resources elsewhere.
-
Dropping Real Time. For me, the addition of Real Time must have significant influence on acceptable amount of computation going on under the hood, in order to allow playable frame rates. One wonders how much more computation would be available if the game was WEGO only. Would it, for example, allow a more dynamic tactical layer for the AI ie an AI commander of sorts, who could react to events on the battlefield.
-
Saw one of my guys take out a BRDM in CMBS with a LAW from a corner while the rest of his team were faced up against the wall, was very cool.
-
Imagine if we could export / import QB forces as, say, XML. You could then share XML around the community. For single players, this would mean being able to import someone else's XML into your QB and thus would mean you would be unaware of the AI's force composition, provided you didn't peek at the XML contents.
-
I would even pay just for the update of the Quick Battle system in CMSF
. Buy a game, go and get another beer, come back and it's installed.
Armchair General praises Final Blitzkrieg
in Combat Mission Final Blitzkrieg
Posted · Edited by Jock Tamson
I used to love browsing the 1:72 packs of Airfix infantry, with the beautiful box art. In my part of Scotland, or maybe just among my friends, we used to call 1:72 soldiers "midgies". I built dozens of Airfix models, but never painted any of them, it was all about the building for me. Although the AFVs had a part to play in my various solo wargames, usually with copies of a couple of Donald Featherstone's books lying open which I had out on repeat loans from our local library - maybe "Solo Wargaming" and "Wargaming Airborne Operations". I was 8, and I thought Featherstone was a god. My battlefield was a reversed Subbuteo pitch laid over chipboard, with books underneath to form hills.