_insignia_1987.png.beabc720fe7f6c6c6bad9789c2f98fc4.png)
Howler
-
Posts
484 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Posts posted by Howler
-
-
1 hour ago, mjkerner said:
Yeah, sounds like the occasional rare glitch I would get in CMBN pbems, and maybe other titles and playing solo, just can't recall atm. (Maybe RT??) Anyway, I haven't had it happen since I upgraded to v.4. What version are you on?
Latest and greatest. I normally avoid this issue by not assuming the game can read my mind. Goes to show how Murphy never forgets to strike. The one time I don't follow my SOP - I get dinged!
28 minutes ago, Erwin said:A thought: You could try to select the whole formation which should make even the stuck units' icons brighten as they are selected. Then give some form of move order and delete the orders for all the other units.
I'll do that on our next exchange and report back.
-
Well, it's been 15 minutes of game time and both the HT and team ignore orders. In the team's case - I can't even get their icon to brighten (select). At least the HT shows full menus and allows way points to be set. They just don't complete the orders.
The original unit states was an embark on the HT located on the other side of the low hedges while the HT remained stationary.
In the above image, I'm trying to break the lock by ordering the HT to move around the obstruction. It being the only unit accepting orders...
I would normally first order the team into the AS occupied by the HT and then embark to mitigate path finding issues. I got lazy and simply went directly to the HT. The team was supposed to 'automagically' move left/right and around the hedge three or so action spots. Pretty much the path shown by the HT orders... or the other way.
-
I've got a team stuck embarking a HT resulting in both ignoring further orders. Is there a way of clearing this?
It's occurring in a PBEM game (of course!) so a save game reload isn't an option.
There was a small hedge between the team and HT which would have required the team to go around it. I thought as both were in adjacent action spots - I can be lazy with my path...
-
11 minutes ago, George MC said:
See that's why you do the job you do...
Are you implying it's not because of his good looks?
-
The bottlenecks are: a) CPU (single core speed); and 2) OpenGL. I noted load times in CMBN (oldest and slowest title) and using MSI Afterburner - looked at the CPU and GPU loads along with GPU MEM utilization both on the old and new systems. Can't find my notes from that time!
I was satisfied once I realized that no scenario was never going stress the GPU. I have what is now considered a rather pedestrian GTX 1660-6GB card.
I'm a recent NVidia convert and can attest that they provide better support for OpenGL which always annoyed me about AMD. AMD has a knack for providing even worse drivers. Wonderful hardware but their drivers are near useless.
Otherwise, any difference will be attributable to single core clock speed of the CPU.
What are your system specs? I'm sure you can get a few others here to run comparables for you.
Some numbers for you... There are other similar posts in the forums if you wish to search.
-
I'm sure I'm not only one to do this but I copy the S/N to a text file along with a short description. It not only serves as backup but also as a means to better describe the purchase (not using BFC product speak).
Fortunately, and assuming all continues to go well - the future seems to be Steam which should gradually improve things over time as some of us convert over to it.
While I don't see Steam as offering anything over the current process, most value the potential ease of use.
-
Or, it could be spotting info takes a while to propagate. Unit A gets the KO but the rest of the alphabet won't know this immediately. Especially past the letter M which is often at the other end of the map...
Also, parts of unit A may not have LOS at the time of the KO... stuff happens.
-
With 1-10k in ammo, no vehicle of mine travels anywhere without first firing a few rounds at every terrain feature or structure on it's path. I don't need contact markers and I'm sure you can find others like me who spend a lot of ammo firing at nothing!
It's worthwhile for the times you discover that you aren't firing at nothing.
It's not gamey and part of SOP by more players than just little old me... just saying.
Feel free to be smug when such fire is harmless to your position but don't then shed tears when it isn't.
-
Grey means reloading and temporarily unavailable while doing so. Mind you, when crew is missing, temporarily may take longer if ever.
-
2 hours ago, Erwin said:
Have found that many/most CMBS and many CMSF scenarios are set at night due to Allied forces taking advantage of night vision and thermal equipment.
Have found that most BN, FI, FB, and RT players prefer playing day scenarios because no one has advantage of night vision and thermal equipment.
@ErwinWhat percentage of your play in WWII occurs at night?
The great majority of scenarios in the modern tittles occur during day. I haven't counted but the ratio feels like 10:1 day/night.
-
2 hours ago, Vacilllator said:
A slightly different situation, but my US opponents the other day were strafed by their own P-40. That's probably a representation of real life I suppose.
That's working as intended as are friendly fire incidents involving ammo .50cal(?) and up.
-
While the best I've managed is also a 2:1. Some on this board have mentioned seeing 3 (or even) 4 vehicle KOs with one shot.
-
Use the all-in-one installer then activate each game and module by providing the serial/activation key.
There may be an additional patch depending on game...
-
14 minutes ago, Erwin said:
So, the only other explanation is that CM does a brilliant job simulating that all two-man scout teams have better tech than the other teams (which are effectively blind as bats) and even further, the asshole scout teams have lousy social skills and refuse to help the others see the enemy tank.
That wasn't my takeaway from this thread. Which, granted, may explain a lot.
-
2 hours ago, Erwin said:
OMG. 2030 for a new engine release? After working on essentially the same game concept for over 20 years (since the late 1990's) would either be bored and looking to move on, or thinking about retirement.
I've studiously avoided any mention of raytracing.
If it's not uncommon now to wait 3-5 years for a module to an existing title, what makes you think a complete re-implementation using *new* technology is going to be any faster?
Don't get me wrong, I'm comfortable with "it is what it is".
Again, I'm only fishing for bones ahead of the usual year end feeding frenzy...
-
12 hours ago, Sgt Joch said:
The problem is always trying to predict what will be the optimum engine 5-10 years down the road.
...
So Vulkan is now the new kid on the block, assuming BFC makes the immediate decision to switch to Vulkan, will it still be the gold standard in 2025 when the 1st CMx3 game would come out?
OpenGL is cross platform and and still being used 20 years later. Vulkan is positioned to be it's successor.
I can't speak to anything else as I have no insight into the deliberations BFC may be having on target platform(s). But, better performing OpenGL games have been released since CMSF. Not to mention games with multi-threaded support for 64bit environments being not uncommon today.
You seem to be indicating that we are five years away from being five years away from CM3x...
As I said, I was fishing for info as their target platform would need to be defined now if they were expecting a release by 2025. If it's still under consideration then a 2030 window seems more likely.
-
It's basically the FPS difference between the two technologies at a stand still. OpenGL is not Vulkan and would require an extensive retrofit.
I was fishing for some confirmation that CM3 is: a) being worked on; b) the GFX layer will be Vulkan; and c) multithreaded.
I'll keep fishing.
-
4 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
Ok, I understand where you're coming from. Of course my intention was never to break anything - I was just explaining the point I made about foxholes above.
-
Assuming your PIAT had all three spotted, which target was closest? Which target presented the more immediate threat? I'm also assuming at the time it fired - it had solid spots on all targets.
I generally use TAs to define/limit fields of fire. I'll use a TAA to rotate a turret ahead of time to shave seconds off a spot-fire cycle. I'd like to believe this (TAA) also results in infantry which may be in front of the intended target being ignored.
Otherwise, I'm generally satisfied if the AT team/gun doesn't reveal its' position by wasting a round into screening infantry.
Should I be expecting it to do more?
In a target rich environment where I need to select the most appropriate target - I place a tight TAA around the asset hoping that next turn I can simply draw a target line to exactly where I want it. Again, the alternative being letting the TacAI do it's thing given the parameters of the moment and not on factors guessed at during the command phase...
-
3 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
I'm already quite well acquainted with the game. Maybe when you also get more familiar with it, you will see there's some sense in what I'm saying.
Exactly, I need to get reacquainted with CMBN as the last time BFC "improved" unit behavior - I needed to play SF/SF2/BS and avoided BN for near three years...
It's been good to see units surrender and not run back and forth in disarray towards known enemy positions.
Allow me to enjoy this before we break something else... is all I'm saying. No offense intended.
-
7 hours ago, Bulletpoint said:
The problem is you need to give that order in a game system where you can only give orders once every 60 seconds.
There are two modes in game: 1) Realtime where you can issue orders every second to your hearts content; and 2) Turn based (WEGO) where you trust the TacAI in 60 second cycles.
The issue seems to be that the TacAI is not behaving as *you* want it to. Personally, I'd be careful what we wished for given the result of CMBN v4.00-4.02.
Let's get reacquainted with CMBN before we try to break it again. Please.
-
Air units can't be adjusted at least in the modern titles. It's either call shot or ceasefire with modern CAS.
-
I can now run Quake 3 on my Raspberry Pi Model 4 (RPI4) using Vulkan. Frame rates have gone from 30 (OpenGL) to 700+ (Vulkan).
Any chance at all that we can get CM2x titles migrated to Vulkan as we wait for CM3x?
An awful lot of platforms are offering solid support for Vulkan. It would be pretty nifty to run CM2x on a RPI4...
-
It may be by design as an FO can only manage one mission. When a mission reaches 'Firing' stage - you can then use the FO (or any shot caller) to start another as long as you don't intend to adjust the *firing* one.
So, when a shot caller gets a mission to 'Firing' they aren't deemed to be 'busy' and may initiate another.
There may be edge cases where you can 'game' around this limitation with pre-planned missions but it's hit and miss (pun intended). Otherwise, you can't adjust multiple Firing or Pre-Planned missions separately.
Embarking limbo (or how long can you limbo?)
in Combat Mission Battle for Normandy
Posted
No go. While the rest of the platoon was ordered to move - our problem team continues to ignore all orders.
Fortunately, I can make do without this team.