Jock Tamson
-
Posts
443 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Posts posted by Jock Tamson
-
-
I have rebuilt mine, then upgraded to win 8' then moved to a bigger SSD over the past year and I have yet to have to ask for an activation.
You get 4 activations in a year.
-
When you stop jumping right to the nuclear weapons theory with all of your stories you've invented over the years, I'll stop bringing up your name.
The forum has rules. Please familiarise yourself with them. The abusive personalities section might interest you most:
7. Baiter - someone who purposefully goads another Member into a violation. People who make a habit of trying to needle someone into doing something they ordinarily wouldn't do are a detriment to the sense of community and therefore will be held accountable for their actions. That being said, Members are still responsible for how they respond to a Baiter, therefore it is possible that both parties will find themselves banned (though perhaps for different durations).
-
DX has a licensing fee for each use.
Eh, no. Where did you get that info from?
The API, SDK and runtime are all free, and the client is a core part of the paid for OS. Even Visual Studio is free for teams of up to 5 devs.
-
Won't last beyond the first farmers' protest.
Still, at least if anything ever kicks off with Russia the French will have inside scoop on all the ships they've sold them. But maybe only if they don't have people out there supporting them as they did in Argentina with the Exocets in '82.
-
-
I bet if you click on the 3rd tank, it has a ?-type sighting and that can cause a facing change. Do you have a save of that?
Yes tt does have a ? , as you'd expect.
The point is (I was playing hotseat), the Russians all have ? too, and in every single test not one of them slewed to the ? prior to getting a definite visual. Nor did any of the other platoon members slew to a ? when the first Russian got a definite visual. The effect of this is that the Russians were always beaten to the draw.
I've got the btt. But it would take less time for you to create it yourself. Map is 1400 * 1400, units are all veteran. Each side is given a move order in column to the other end of the map. T90AM v M1A2, dry, warm, clear, no EW.
-
What I've noticed is quite a lot of this: tank 1 is the only tank with visual, but tank 3 is already slewing round to the target. Observing the Russians, they don't slew until they have a visual.
-
64bit Windows release
What's the most RAM you have ever seen CM use? If you have 64 Bit Windows the 32 Bit exe can use up to 4GB.
-
As a sidenote, I have trouble believing you know very much about computers yourself if you describe your rig as "very high end" yet claim to get only 15 FPS in forests.
Wow, my first internet stalker. Which forum did you dig that out of, CMRT? I don't find the trees as bad in CMBS but there is undoubtedly something about the rendering that is very inefficient. Maybe it's an issue with the API. As far as CMBS is concerned:
I have a i5-2500k @4.7Ghz, 16GB of RAM, and a 4GB GTX980
I set the GPU to 1/2 refresh rate (30FPS) vsync as most of the time the frame rate (best/best) is in the 20s - Combat Mission is CPU bound. Setting the cap at 30 irons out the peaks and troughs and makes the camera movement smoother.
I have multi sampling / AA set to On in the CM menu (if you turn it off and then try to force it in the Nvidia control panel, it will stay off).
In the NVidia Control Panel, I have anti aliasing set to "Enhance", and I use 8x
I also downsample the display from 2560*1440 to 1080p, scaling the display on the GPU
-
The number of non-AI compatible -- but still popular! -- addons found on fan sites like Armaholic; e.g. the multiplayer focused ACE mod vs. this one to add in functioning AI calls for fire. A comparison of AI-only videos, AARs, etc. posted compared to those featuring player intervention on one or both sides. More generally, around 1200 hours in ArmA2 and a lot of contact with the rest of the community.
What's your source for AI-only spectating being even, oh, I dunno, let's say five percent of the total of any wargame of the past ten years?
Why would I cite a source when I haven't made any sweeping generalisations about how popular a feature is?
There are many, many more Arma players who have never touched multiplayer, myself included. You have no idea what features they may use. BTW, most of ACE works perfectly well with the AI, as does nearly every other mod on Armaholic. From memory, the most active threads on the BI Forums were usually the AI related ones.
-
That doesn't even make sense.
Perhaps not to you. It does to anyone who knows anything about computers.
What would the impact on frame rates be if the CPU was dealing with a 2 second spotting cycle for every unit? It matters in Real Time. It doesn't particularly matter in WEGO. So, by the same token, any developments of the AI which demand more cycles from the CPU will negatively affect frame rates. Again, matters in Real Time, doesn't particularly matter in WEGO.
-
I find the BFC position here to be somewhat self-contradictory. On the one hand, they state that "vs AI" is the default play mode, with the vast majority of their constituency only ever playing against the computer. And on the other, they dismiss any desire for an improved AI opponent. I do understand that it's not totally internally contradictory, but surely AI is a priority for the vsAI players; we already know that people bitch and moan about paying $10 for feature-based engine upgrades, so hearing the same complaints about an AI-based engine upgrade shouldn't stop that leg of development, especially now the game is largely "feature-complete".
I wonder how much Real Time - which I would see dropped in a heartbeat - hinders what BFC feel they can achieve with the AI. For example, is the 7 second spotting cycle to help support a certain minimum frame rate in Real Time?
-
Yeah, but it isn't exactly the most popular feature
Source? Or do you mean just with you?
I remember spending many hours in Arma 2 setting up the AI to go head to head and then flitting round the battlefield watching "cool stuff" happen.
It might not be high up my wishlist in CM but I can absolutely see the appeal, because plenty cool stuff happens in CM too.
-
I'm 32 and I feel like the youngest one here where in regular gaming circles I am an old man.
You can do all your "old man wisdom" crap, but honestly, this is about gaming and trying to educate people on new features that people actually like, because honestly you'd still be playing with 8bit hexes.
This is too stressful, I have Mulitple Sclerosis and stress makes my symptoms worse so just **** it. This isn't worth my time. I just posted an idea and all I got was hostile obnoxious responses.
I wouldn't sweat it. Some of the people that you are debating with don't even own the game. So arguing that they don't want precious resources wasted on features that you want, when they haven't even bought it...
-
Assault command is the lazy way to control your squads rather than actually splitting them
It's also what the AI has to use, so if you want to be fair to the computer player, arguably you should use it too.
-
Please note how Steve manages to never let a single word slip out about planned things, even when you can forsee one coming out of a paragraph...
Yes, this is one of the things that reassures me he isn't actually Derek Smart
-
The ideal would be if the game supported multiple players such that each player's playback was limited to what his units could see (or, if the playback was limited to tabbing between your allocated units). Then some of the game's inbuilt C2 would be at play.
-
M1200 VS-17 signal panel option
If someone is interested in this little option...
it's the very same hull but with a VS-17 signal panel taped on the top.
Please note: all M1200 in game will have that taped on top.
preview:
http://community.battlefront.com/topic/117795-kiemes-modding-corner/?p=1587628
Download:
https://app.box.com/s/p85dsi2ch14t6sf2pi379lmzccm7u3p2
Installation:
unrar and just place it inside this folder:
"Kieme CMBS - vehicles - USA M1200"
overwrite the original file
Could this be numbered in the usual way so that, say, there are 5 standard hulls and 1 with the signal panel?
-
Every time I read something like this I can't help but remember Steve saying a few years back that the sales of CMBN were similar to the sales of CMBO. Think about that. BFC spent 3-4 years developing a new engine and used it to put out a game with much higher production values and their sales didn't increase.
Look at it this way - if they hadn't created the new engine, how many more CMx1 titles would they have sold between then and now?
-
This is the first time I have ever had to reconsider a response based on knowing the one I wanted to write would likely force Steve to give me at least a temporary ban. Do you really have no idea how conceited,narrow and and childish that post was?
Of course I do, it was deliberately offensive, in response to something that I found equally offensive.
-
Easy now lads. Let's not get personal.
I do want to ask for an apology from Jock about the smear of our testers or how we handle them. It was as uncalled for as it is offensive. Our testers are a cut above the rest, for sure, and trying to tear them apart to prove some point that I can't even understand is not the right way to go.
As a fact, Arma3 has legions of professional and unpaid testers. Is it bug free? No. As a former QA Manager, with paid tester staff under me, I know why that is the case. I also know that our unpaid testers are better than the ones that were drawing salary. Not to say my old staff weren't good testers, because they were. But when you've paid someone to bang on the same game for 8 hours a day for months I can promise you they aren't as sharp as a fresh tester coming on with 1 hour's worth of experience.
But I'm sorry. I'm interjecting reality into the rants again. My bad!
Steve
Sorry Steve, I work in software myself so I understand the approach.
However if I am called a liar, I am probably going to be unnecessarily offensive in return.
Happy to retract the "strawman" allegation and agree that Vanir's summation of the thread was a gross exaggeration.
-
I never called you a liar, but I can taste the hypocrisy.
I am not referring to you. Search the page for "lie".
Up to that point, it had been a civil discussion.
-
Your comments are just as wrong as you think Vanirs are.
Well, I don't particularly like being called a liar by obnoxious forumites.
-
I would think that based on what is being discussed, that the comment....
"So the gist of this thread is that BFC needs to junk their current engine and spend the next several years developing a new one with the graphics of Arma 3 and the AI of Deep Blue."
...is a strawman. Or at least an exaggeration of the point that is being argued.
Ignore him, he's just pissed at the number of bugs he missed in Beta. Personally I wish they would spend my money on professional testers.
Windows 10 - CM Compatibility?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by Jock Tamson
If you are "serious about gaming and performance", Windows 10 will be the OS to have as soon as DX12 titles start coming out, because the new API will not be available on earlier versions of the OS. One of the reasons is that it is core to WDDM 2.0, the new rendering engine in Windows 10 which is offering significant improvements to rendering speeds in DX10/11 games played in fullscreen borderless mode ie using desktop composition.
To be honest, no-one who is serious about performance or gaming would think that UI changes preclude improvements to the kernel, which is what your post seems to suggest. TheWood1's stats in this thread would appear to support the reported benefits to gamers in upgrading.
As the owner of a 2500k clocked at 4.7 on air, and an overclocked GTX 980, I struggle to think of any settings in Windows 7 that were relevant to the overclocks.