marka

My theory is that, when they were writing the code, they put a limit at 10 results, so they could concentrate on coding the search heuristics, and put off worrying about formatting the results. Then, they forgot to go back and finish the code to format the results, so the 10 item, single page limit is still with us.

I have been looking for Mods for CMBN in the Repository. I have noticed that when performing a search, the search tool will not return more than 10 results. I saw, in another thread on this subject, that the Repository software is provided by a third party, and it is what it is, love it or leave it. The Battlefront.com site is FULL of multi-page subjects, including the Repo itself. Why would it be so hard for a search to return more than 10 results? Surely, the coders know how to provide a multiple page result, with forward and back buttons. I'm thinking that perhaps it is just an oversight, and when pointed out, they will get red in the face with embarrassment, and fix it?

I have been trying to use the "Search" function with the Repository. It appears that, whatever search criteria you enter, it only returns at most 10 results. That is really lame. Don't the coders at the third party who coded it know how to return more than one page of results? Or, more than 10 results per page?

I remember reading the story of a B-29 pilot in the Pacific theater. The bomber collided with a Japanese Zero, and both went down. The B29 pilot had his story published in a "True War Stories" type magazine, many years later. The pilot of the Zero happened to read that issue of the magazine, recognized the story, and contacted the magazine publisher. The publisher put the two in contact with each other, and they became good friends. They both wound up glad that they had not succeeded at killing each other.

I've wondered the same thing! I thought they were in a training exercise, as none of them have helmets. He looks like he would be great fun to go drinking with. The other one who looks so very young is the loader in the picture of the panzerschreck. Neither of them look like they're very comfortable with the weapon.

I found a nice little animation of the working of the GAU-17 minigun: http://www.techeblog.com/index.php/tech-gadget/feature-cg-animation-shows-gatling-gun-cycle-of-operation The barrels continuously rotate.

Hmmm....I'm not so sure.... I can see that the playback slows way down as the bullet exits the muzzle, but the barrel appears to be completely stationary as the bullet flies forward. Doing the same calculation as before: M134: barrel length = 0.559 m muzzle velocity = 853 m/s number of barrels = 6 rate of fire = 4000 rpm (According to wikipedia, it is rated at 6,000 rpm, but is usually fired at 4,000 for improved reliability). 4000 rpm (6 barrels) = 667 rpm per barrel = 11.1 rounds/sec/barrel = 11.1 rev per sec angular velocity of barrel assembly. muzzle velocity = 853 m/s -> 426 m/s avg velocity in barrel barrel length = .559 m / 426 m/s = 0.00131 sec in barrel 0.00131 sec * 11.1 rev per sec = 0.014 rev * 360 deg/rev = 5 degrees displacement while round travels the length of the barrel. During the slo-mo firing footage at 3:00, the bullet is seen travelling at least twice the length of the barrel after it leaves the muzzle, and the barrel does not appear to rotate at all, when it should have moved about 5 degrees in that time. There is another, less slowed-down shot, at about 3:55, where the barrels appear to keep rotating when the round is fired. It seems that it would be unnecessarily complicated to devise a system of stopping the barrel for 1.3 ms as each round is fired, when the lateral acceleration caused by a continuously rotating barrel could be compensated for by just biasing the alignment of the barrel. But, I'm not an engineer. Any other thoughts?

Interesting vid. Thank you. The vid shows, quite clearly, that, for the minigun, the barrel actually *stops* at the firing position. I would think that the barrel assembly on the M61 would have too much inertia to stop as each round was fired, but I don't know that for a fact. My assumption is that the barrels rotate at constant velocity, and the bullets are fired as the barrels move. I did some calculations. See if I made an error: The rate of fire for the M61 is 6000 rounds per minute (lower rates can be selected), which is 100 rounds per second, for all 6 barrels, or 16.7 rounds per barrel per second. If a barrel fires once per revolution, that translates directly to 16.7 revolutions per second for the barrel assembly. The length of the gun is stated to be 1.875 meters. From photographs, the barrel length seems to be about 80% of the gun length, which gives a barrel length of 1.50 meters. The muzzle velocity is just over 1,000 meters/sec. Assuming that the round acceleration is constant down the length of the barrel, the average velocity of the round traversing the length of the barrel would be 500 m/s. 1.5 m barrel length / 500 m/s average velocity means that it would take the round about 0.003 sec to travel the length of the barrel. At 16.7 revolutions/sec, the barrel would rotate 0.05 revolutions, or 18 degrees, during that time. It seems to me (my favorite phrase!) that 18 degrees is not a huge amount of travel, but it is significant, and will cause the bullet to travel sideways as well as forward when it is fired. That degree of lateral velocity could probably be compensated by angling the gun slightly. IOW, the path of the bullet will not be exactly along the axis of the gun. I could imagine staring straight down the barrel(s) of an M61, when someone pulls the trigger, and being pleasantly surprised when all the rounds hit the wall next to you. I wouldn't volunteer to try it out, though!

My usual interest is in WW2 sims, but I have a question about rotary canons, such as the M61 Vulcan. The barrels rotate at high speed, and, at different points in the cycle, a round is chambered, fired, and extracted. Clearly, the barrel doesn't pause in the firing position. Doesn't that give a significant sideways velocity to the round as it leaves the barrel? How far does the barrel travel between the time the round is fired, and when it leaves the muzzle? Is that sideways velocity just compensated for in the aiming?

That's him! Thank you. The commander to Manteuffel's left is the spitting image of my physics professor in college.

One of the splash screens that displays while a game is loading in CMBN shows a German commander, reviewing maps with three of his officers. The commander is in the middle of the picture, wearing what seems to be a leather coat. He is quite a bit shorter than the officers around him. Does anyone know who that commander is? Just curious.

Good to know! So, once I load an "ema" file from Incoming, watch how the last move went, I would then press the Big Red Button (BRB) to bring up the "issue commands" phase. I would then make my moves/issue orders, select SAVE, and save the file, then press BRB again to generate the outgoing *ema file. If I then load that saved file, it will have all the moves I just made, with the game in the same state as just before pressing the BRB? That sounds like it would be a good habit to get into.

I'm involved in a PBEM game. After loading the incoming game, watching the action, and making my moves, I saved the game. Is there any way to re-load the game to review the moves I made? If I just put it in the Incoming folder and load it, it requires the opponent's password to open. Are there any other options?

Don't use "Bing". Bing is evil. Bad, bad Bing! (Fish sticks and custard are MUCH better!)

I have noticed that the SAME unit, on different turns, may gain or lose LOS to a particular target. I think it has to do with the level of suppression. For example, if a MG team is "cowering", it loses its LOS. Later, when it is "spotting", the LOS has returned. Is that correct, or did I skip a dose of my Thorazine?

I just found this thread. I have CMBN/CW, patched to 2.01, on my laptop. I wanted to start a new game with someone who has patched to 2.12, and found that my (2.01) version wouldn't work. However, I have an on-going game with someone else using 2.01, so I decided to bite the bullet, and re-install a new instance of CMBN. The re-install went without any problems at all. I have all the original CDs copied to my HDD. I just fired up the install program, specified "C:/Users/Mark/Documents/Battlefront2" as the installation directory, and everything went without a hitch. During the install of Commonwealth, and the 2.0 engine upgrade, the default directories were already set to "Battlefront2". It didn't even ask me for my license keys. Setting up H2HH was also trivial: I selected "Add Installation", created a tab labelled "CMBN2", pointed it to the new directory, and everything has been working flawlessly. So, now, H2HH has two tabs, one for the 2.01 version, and one for the 2.12 version of CMBN. When I start a new game, I use the appropriate tab for which version it's using, and everything works as it should.

I noticed something odd about the defensive capabilities of the StuGIII in the encyclopedia: for side and rear facings, the rating for "Small calibre AT" is "BAD", which is WORSE than it is for "Large calibre AT" rounds, rated as "POOR". Also, for hollow charge weapons, frontal armor is weaker than side, rear, or top. Is this a misprint? Why would StuGIII armor be so unusual?

I just tried installing CMBN under Wine 1.4.1/Ubuntu 10.04 64 bit. No joy. It installs OK, but when you try to run, it gives "OLE Error 80004001" Does anyone know if it will run in a virtual machine with a native WinXP installed? I run Ubuntu all the time, and it's a real pain to have to reboot into Windows just to play CMBN.

Not specific to CMBN, but I don't know where else to ask, so, here goes: I'm using h2h helper on my Win7 system. I have just started a new PBEM game of "CW Keep Calm and Carry On". H2HHelper absoultely refuses to remember the name of my Dropbox directory. Every time I boot, I have to right-click the game, and re-enter the directory name. It has never done that before. Is this a known issue, or is there something I'm missing?

I have been playing CMBN for a few months, mostly with my son. Last night, as I was watching some of my mortar rounds raining down on his (presumed) positions, I noticed that, when the camera is zoomed out, there is a delay of a few seconds between seeing the explosion, and hearing the sound. I LOVE THAT! It is one of my pet peeves in most movies that, when you see a distant explosion, you hear the sound at the same time. It takes about 4.7 seconds for sound to travel one mile, so, unless you are personally being blown up, there should be some delay. Kudos to the game designers for that little bit of realism. It makes it seem that much more "real" for me.

I play CMBN on an HP laptop running Win7-64. I just installed the v2.0 upgrade, and it seems to me that camera panning/control has gotten MUCH slower. It may be related to how closely zoomed in I am when moving, and how many units are in view. I have changed all the settings to "Fastest", which seems to have helped a bit. I did not have this kind of an issue while running 1.10; panning/rotating was quick and smooth regardless of how close I was to any units. Looking over some other threads, I see others mention that panning may be smoother with mouse versus keyboard; another suggestion was to update drivers, etc. I'll try those things, especially the drivers issue. I think the laptop just uses the built-in Intel graphics hardware, but the drivers probably haven't been upgraded for a while. Any other ideas on what to look out for? I *may* be in the market for a newer laptop soon. If I do buy a new laptop, superior performance for CMBN will be a priority. What kind of specs would y'all recommend?