The Steppenwulf
-
Posts
655 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
3
Posts posted by The Steppenwulf
-
-
5 hours ago, Apocal said:31 minutes ago, MOS:96B2P said:
How do you cancel a cease fire? And can a cease fire be canceled in a PBEM?
The only way to rescind it is to hit cease fire again, at least in real time multi-player. I've never done it PBEM.
It will almost certainly work in a PBEM.
-
Thank you for all your responses - extremely enlightening and useful information.
-
Looked through the manual and searched the forums to no avail. Seems to me like an under-discussed matter; but some important questions have arisen for me in this area of the game:-
1) Surely cease fire is a feature for two player games? If a player selects cease fire in a single player game, does the AI "ignore" the request - i.e. there is no effect?
2) In cases when a cease fire is agreed, I assume the result is an automatic draw - regardless of the division of VP to each side at that point? Or can a player still win or lose as a consequence of agreeing to a cease fire?
3) If a cease fire offer is not accepted, how long before the offer expires, if at all?
4) If a player chooses to surrender, does the game result in total defeat automatically? Or does the game calculate the VP situation at the point of surrender and give the result existing at that point in the game (which would seem illogical)? Or (most likely) does the game calculate the VP and then tag on a penalty to that (for surrendering) to represent scale of defeat (so there is a range of defeats possible with a surrender)?
5) Considering possibilities in 3) above, is it possible for a player to choose to surrender and still gain a draw? -
Apologies for bumping this thread - currently playing my first H2H of BS version 2 and I can report that we still don't have icons for the following:-
SA 13 = 9M37M missile
SA 19 = 9m311-m1 missileIt would be cool also if the aks-74u black green icon (Russian) showed in the user interface for those of us who wish to use modded full colour icons and distinguish the black metal plastic AK's from the wooden buttstock/magazines typically used by UKR forces.
Likewise there is still only one PKM icon file used by both RUS and UKR infantry (pkm green), it would be great if each force's PKM icon were distinguished, also for the reason above.
Thanks in advance
-
I take an interest in the road sections, since I've found that in many maps some of these sections just don't dovetail as they should do (including some stock maps). When they don't, the roads can range from looking odd to simply plain ugly, which perhaps may have been fitting in this case given the title of the scenario.
Anyhow I just checked, all is good with the road sections.
I see many blood-baths on this map! -
Hmm - I still have green tracers. What are the correct tracer file names anyone?
-
Caveat: I think you are going to hit issues converting BN and FI maps to BS. Many building types for example are not compatible, flavour objects more so - though the latter might not crash the game (the former almost certainly will). My guess is that Bf used RT map features as a foundation for BS maps - and that's why there is close enough compatibility to port so easily.
Well done on your map conversion though, please do post the latest version at the weekend when I can find time to take a look and give you feedback on the map itself. -
58 minutes ago, Cpl Steiner said:
Can't have anti-tank rifles so I will probably replace with "poor quality" ATGMs
You could ensure that Russian troops are equipped with RPG 7's, RPG 26 with AT4's for the Americans. Such weapons can be acquired from trucks, jeeps and IFV's - at least they can be from such vehicles in motorised, mechanised formations.
-
10 hours ago, Cpl Steiner said:
You have inspired me to make a conversion of "Getting Ugly" from CM:RT to CM:BS
Fantastic! If the map opens up in 3D preview from within the BS editor then that's even better - there's always a possibility that a map conversion will crash in 3D preview until certain objects (specific building types esp.) have been removed. The only (aesthetic) issue might be that some flavour obj in the BS 3D preview aren't what they were intended to be in the RT version. Like you'll get a bus stop in the middle of a field instead of a plough - that sort of thing.
I'd take a liberal approach to any/all changes. No one's going to chastise you for getting rid of a road or adding some houses if it makes the map work better for the game and forces involved.
Sgt Squarehead sentiments exactly, please share your finished product with the community. -
4 hours ago, Cpl Steiner said:
Is there a way to import CM:RT maps?
Yes you need to change one of the bytes in the header of the BTT file. I forget what the byte address is, but someone has converted some RT QB maps for BS. I'd recommend finding the relevant thread and investigating further. You'll need to strip out all the forces from the RT map first mind. Then save it as a map only, only then changing the byte flag so as to be able to import to BS editor.
You may need to change some aspects of the map once in the BS editor -esp. with respect to flavours.
Selecting the BS forces is the part of the process that becomes interesting. Still it's a doable and quite a short-length project - map construction itself is the time consuming part. Why not have a go yourself?
EDIT: Found it - halfway down this thread:-
-
11 hours ago, GarlicSugar said:
Except that with the fantasy tanks the Russian get in the game, the M1 is at a qualitative disadvantage. So you get double whammy'd. You have worse tanks, and less of them. American units should be at least twice a numerous and twice as effective if were going to be realistic. M1A4 shoudl being game to balance the T-90AM.
Well then you got a lucky round in that match for sure. Usually it takes at least 5 Panthers to stand a chance against a Sherman. Hitler commissioned the King Tiger specifically because the Panther was no match for the M4 most of the time.
Ha ha ha ... oh dear!
-
On 02/04/2017 at 6:18 AM, John Kettler said:
If you wanted to enlist before, this should make you INSIST on doing so! One thing I like is that Russian female soldiers seem to get to generally have their hair down, which, in my view, is much less severe and more flattering than the hair up US approach.
On 02/04/2017 at 7:41 PM, John Kettler said:Real, I'd say. Of course, they're obviously not all like that. There are lots of Russian women who don't look like that, but with 35,000 women in the Russian military as of two years ago, you're bound to get some great looking young women as a result. Naturally, everybody's less hefty at that age, too, and food is harder to come by, further holding down weight
On 02/04/2017 at 7:41 PM, John Kettler said:You may also be interested to know that a list of the 10 most attractive armed forces with females, the US is 10th and
Russia 2nd.
This is not the kind of spotting that we were talking about!!! -
It's a python module right. What's the benefit out of interest?
-
27 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
BTW I haven't yet tried the test with the Russians turned down to regular to match the Americans, but I think we can all pretty much guess what the outcome would be
Yeh I ran a spotting only test (with short arcs to prevent firing) at 1000m. totally flat terrain, no cover, short grass, day time, clear weather.
Abrams v T90 regular troops, fit, leadership 0 - totally equal settings!
Spotting times (in seconds):-
Red - 24, 29, 34, 49, Average: 34 secondsBlue - 2, 9, 16, 22, Average: 12.25 seconds
I have no problem with significant spotting disparity given the optical equipment, but over 20 seconds when who spots who first makes all the difference (on flat terrain, clear visibility). I find it incredulous that such differential target acquisition results, under these conditions, remotely reflect reality.
-
37 minutes ago, IanL said:
OK not sure if you are serious or not so in case you are only joking I'll just respond to the (my) bold part - agreed, it is, we do and they do.
32 minutes ago, IanL said:So, assuming you actually want to help, can you tell me what you meant for that test to show? You offered no explanation, no discussion of what you saw happening, no statistics, nothing. At the risk of being honest again I like to spend time playing this game just like you guys so I don't just randomly run stuff not knowing what the author thinks it shows or how they designed their test.
Ian are you even thinking about how your responses come across? I know that you are a good guy and have no intention of presenting the wrong message, but these responses read as just plain dismissive of a range of reports and come across as been deflective and rude - critical of players and the posts, yet avoid any focus on the actual events experienced.
From my experience the deficiency in spotting on the Russian side is so obvious that to be unaware of it one must only have been playing single player or have never played the Russian side. So utterly blindingly obvious that it's not even worthy of report.
It's not evidence that is required it's just an explanation. Does this reflect reality? BF are the experts and they programmed the game so what is the explanation? -
19 minutes ago, IanL said:
If there are bugs in the spotting capabilities of specific units then report them.
By report them I don't mean rant and rave about the Russian equipment being nerfed because you cannot win a fight vs the US. I don't mean anecdotal descriptions of the time X didn't see 10 Ys right in front of them and got killed. I don't mean saying hey haven't you been reading the forum clearly its broken. None of that helps and none of that will get anything changed.
You guys are all welcome to continue to complain and kibitz I will not even ask you to stop but if you want changes you need to have some specific, statistically reproducible scenarios that show the problem in game. Saves, scenarios etc. The testers cannot make reports like: so and so on the forum says spotting for vehicle X is broken please fix. It doesn't work like that. Be prepared for questions to be asked for your testing methods and requests made to refine your tests so something actionable can be determined.
Note you can complain all you like that testers should be doing that not you. I'll simply say we are and we do - all the time. Collectively we only have so many hours to do that work so if there is some issue that matters to you: investigate and respond constructively to the discussion.
If you feel offended by any of that - that is not my intent in any way - I'm just telling you the reality. Anyone is free to rant and rave - and I'll just ignore that. On the other hand if you choose to start a thread to investigate a problem I'll be there to help and I will not be alone.
This made me quite indignant Ian! How dare you to be honest: We the consumer are paying premium prices for CM games. I think that gives consumers the right not to be expected to do the testing!! I'm happy to express my view about what I experience but it's up to the testers and BF to assess the quality of the product and correct it if necessary.
-
26 minutes ago, Sgt.Squarehead said:
All good points and well made, but the underlying mechanics have to work right and this:
Strongly suggests that they don't.....Elite tank crews should not just sit still and watch while under half their number of Regular opponents shoot the bejesus out of them.
Amen
To be fair I would like to hear what BF have to say about this. I mean the game has gone through 3 patches and an upgrade so... -
The differences do seem to be excessive in my view - we are talking about Russian optics not even spotting after muzzle flash from enemy cannon. Perhaps muzzle flash aided spotting is not modelled in CM (a slight problem). Another thing, from my experience the Zala drone spots nothing ... ever. It just does not seem to function at all. It is a waste of time.
-
I'd happily give you a game Stefano - hit me up if you are still looking.
-
What happens when you press the o key?
Nothing - then you have either the wrong file name or it's in the wrong folder.
If the overlay goes black then you have no map image on the file - open it up in image editing software to be sure it is what you think it is.
If all else fails upload it so we can see what else it could be. -
Fantastic tool - It's a massive thumbs up from me. Good idea to provide some instructions with the import/export scripts for beginners, though it's texture mapping that I find challenging with blender for some reason. Regardless I must get to work with this soon enough!
Thanks sooo much for all your work on this! -
Marines only this one but still could prove useful in future:-
https://bluejacket.com/usmc_force_insig.html -
Good job JohnO - there is a website with all US division patches which can be saved as png images. Anyone know this and have a link? It's a great resource for this sort of thing. I lost the link when my last hard drive corrupted.
-
29 minutes ago, sbobovyc said:
I have a very basic Blender mdr exporter script
Superb - I congratulate you! There are lots of ideas for alternative objects; Vehicles, ( lorries, buses), train coaches, storage containers, skips, industrial plant machinery (silos), greenhouses, satellite phone masts, electricity pylons....
* Barricades!!
Cease Fire and Surrender
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted
Indeed, I concur.
I'm glad I asked the question to get some enlightenment about these two functions - it's an easily overlooked feature - I certainly think that there could be an expanded explanation in the manual. Players and games would benefit if they understood their utility better.