PhilM

Another thought (though not sure if I'm remembering this, or making it up ...) is that GaJ has arranged things so that if an error is encountered on start up, the log is shown even if unticked as an option, to show you that there is an error and to allow the log to be examined to point up what / where the error is: does your log file show an error of any sort?

In that case, you need GaJ!!!

For both H2HH and CMH, the programme menu bar (on a Mac: I assume the Windows version works similarly, though following PC conventions) has an "Options" section: any item in the list can be clicked to tick/untick it, in order to run/not run, respectively, that option. "Show Log Window" is one of those options: ticked, it displays; unticked, it doesn't.

Another thought: what kind / size of mortar is it? The smallest sized mortars are usable in "direct fire" (i.e. they have to spot and target the enemy units directly, themselves) mode only, and cannot be called up via the artillery dialogue button. Is it one of these by any chance?

OK, I did mis-read your post, and it is a problem with the arty call system rather than you just not using it: sorry! Trying to remember (!) my experiences of the arty call system: - if the mortar unit itself were out of contact, the arty dialog system would open, and tell you that; - if the forward CO were out of contact, or otherwise unable to call the mission, the dialog system would open and tell you the mortar was denied. A greyed out arty call button, which does not activate at all, to me implies the mortar unit is out of action (not just not deployed, which is another error message the dialog would give you if it were the case). Do any other units - though they may not be able to call a valid fire mission for any of the reasons above - nevertheless open the dialog? Or is it "dead" for all your units? What does the unit info panel say about the mortar team itself? And, given this new feature for RT, have you got command lines turned on as an option, to give you a visual check on C2 links?

He - the forward located Co CO - IS able to call in the mortar mission, in the circumstances you describe. Your problem, if i'm reading your post correctly, is to try and use the mortars directly (which have no LOS to the target) to fire the mission. With the forward located CO as the selected unit, click the artillery support call button, which will open up the dialog screen to target and call your mortar mission ... this help?

Got them now! Thanks again.

Vin, thanks for doing these: I use your other game sets, and am grateful you have done these. The games are MUCH better to run with them. (Though I cannot find these in the repository yet? I assume they will turn up!) My colour choice is (will be, when I get them!) Allies/Soviet red (olive green FOW), Axis/German grey (tan FOW): seems *most appropriate* to me somehow ...

GaJ, Your solution of deleting the AppState.txt file and restarting CMH worked! Now I have just one install of each title, and one of each saved game. Just one more point (I know, I'm being very picky ... ): when then browsing to link the games to their dropbox folders (the CMH install didn't auto-find all of the games), the browse process opens by default at my "Documents" folder, but I thought (?) H2HH used to go direct to my (default location) dropbox folder when doing this, assuming that's where the needed game folder would be located? I know it's only one more click to get to dropbox, but thought I'd mention it just in case CMH was intended to go direct to dropbox when game-edit browsing? As always, thanks so much for all you do.

Hi GaJ, I have just downloaded CMH v1.1.1 for Mac: it is still (as with 1.0.6, noted by a couple of us in another "H2HH/CMH" thread) showing duplicate installs and duplicate saved games for all CMx2 titles *except* RT - which latter game is correctly just single copies of install and saved games .... Anything to do with the different Mac install process for RT, which puts it direct into the Applications folder, and not (as previously) in a named folder of its own? The H2HH install paths of directory and executable are thus different in format for RT from those for CMSF, CMBN and CMFI. Wasn't sure if CMH is "reading" this H2HH data, or finding the installs for itself? For example, the CMH v1.1.1 installs show both "CM Battle for Normandy" (with MG and CW sub entries), as well as "CMBN" with (MG and CW sub entries) ... etc etc. I assume each of the duplicated installs are getting their own saved games attributed to them ...

I hate to think what NSA list that got you on ... actually, they might have had to make a new category just for you

I've now tried starting CMH (while H2HH is closed!), and I get the duplicated games thing as well, but: - two copies of each install, and of each ongoing game, for CMSF, CMBN and CMFI; - only one copy for CMRT. I wondered if this was anything to do with the (for a Mac ...) different install routine for CMRT, that puts it as an app directly into Applications, and not in an enclosing folder like the earlier titles? The contents of the installation root and installation executable fields are thus different in RT compared with the earlier titles, for H2HH?? (I am presuming CMH reads off the existing H2HH data?)

Thanks for the clarification - and to GaJ too. Though my question "how can you tell we don't both have the same" was just me winding you up a little, it was also a genuine query in that I have downloaded CMH but was holding off using it just in case it caused a chat hiccup with others who still have H2HH. Now I know it doesn't, I will move over to it ... I guess I should have known that GaJ would make sure they worked together ...

Oh no! BF would never do that! The graphic is drawn from a real live horse, standing up; then computer wizardry tips it through 90 degrees to make it LOOK like it's lying down ...

Ahhh ... but which of the two do you have? And which do you think I have?

Will the current version of H2HH "chat" nicely with CMH? And, my thanks too for the support and development of both of them.

The wire simulation sounds good - I'm a sucker for each and every bit of verisimilitude ... But, can I ask if ALL arty calls are at present subject to the abstracted regime? And, in particular, that you currently get no (?) benefit of direct, on map communication with on map assets? I ask because a recurring irritant to me is that, having (say) placed an HQ spotter in the first floor of a house and a mortar in voice comms with it in the garden behind the house for cover, firing over the house, it still seems to take ~5 minutes for the (set up) mortar to respond to a fire call ... even though it is their CO bellowing directly at them. Guys are dying waiting for a mortar mission that seems like it should get off a first, spotting, shot in rather less than the 5 minutes it seems to take them? If my inference that there seems to be no current benefit from such direct comms is correct (?), then I'd like to have some timing distinction made in future, based on the comms method, and rewarding good local comms being maintained.

I think we need a sliding scale of hit decals v armour thickness ... Horse gets decals for anything up to 20mm; anything over that, there won't be anything left to put a decal on ...

I'm not certain it's dead: no hit decals ...

Your new post has brought this to my attention - managed to miss it all before somehow. But now eagerly watching from reel 1! Thanks to all involved for doing this, very much appreciated

Except that it would surely improve their cash flow, at the expense of idiots like me who are prepared to pay in advance for a future download with no firm availability date? I agree that it doesn't have the same practical value for BF that you quote for the hard copy production run: but I cannot see why it would cause them any downside to do it, given the cash flow benefit for them? Unless of course the deposit of such vast sums in the BF coffers were to prompt the team to vanish on an immediate vacation, leaving the game unfinished, in which case it would not be such a good idea ... :D

Without wanting to seem to doubt your word or experience, I'm surprised at that. Apart from possibly a few HEAT (i.e. explosive) rounds, aren't all (?) AP rounds as modelled in the game solid shot, with no explosive power at all? Given that, though I wouldn't want to prove the point by becoming a target for them IRL (!), do AP rounds have much effect on infantry targets other than perhaps some suppression? Unless the round actually hits an individual, even a near miss will not produce any casualities? But I've never tried it out: will do so at the next opportunity and see what happens ...

As a grateful user of your current UI work, I'd be happy to try and help out by testing, if you still need volunteer(s). I try to have half a dozen or so PBEM games going, with at least a turn a day from me for each: if that qualifies as playing "a lot"?

LOL! Was this using a beta of CMBN v4.0, with the "play blindfolded" option ...? And I think my guys have problems with LOS and spotting ... :eek:

I've had a StuPa KO'd with (sadly!) most of its ammo loadout still unfired ... that made a very loud noise, a very bright flash ... and a very large hole underneath it when it was over ...