nightops
-
Posts
84 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by nightops
-
-
10 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:
Maybe a cheaper solution would be to keep your existing monitor and go to a lower resolution, say 900X600 or something like that. Since I haven't tried that with CM I can't guarantee that it will work, but it seems to work in general with computer graphics and text.
Michael
Cheaper and nastier, 900x600 is brutal.
-
1 hour ago, Holman said:
Here's something I've been wondering. It's a simple question, but I don't know the answer.
I play CMx2 games at a native 1920x1080 resolution. Now that I'm getting older and have a more serious glasses prescription, I find it difficult to read the tiny briefing and other informational text.
I have a decent graphics card. If I were to buy a larger monitor and kick things up to 2560x1440, would the game text be larger, or would it remain the same tiny size while only the area for actual game action became larger?
No, they get smaller. Your best option is a bigger monitor (40" is good) and keep the resolution at 1080p that will make it easier to read.
-
On 8/2/2012 at 11:40 PM, para said:
Just tried playing the Hot Mustard battle. It is unplayable, even with all the FX turned(trees off/shadows off/fastest) down and nothing else running on my pc it is constantly stalling.
Anyone else having similar problems?
Windows 7 64bit service pack 1
AMD Phenon II x4 processor 3.20gh
Ram 8gig
GFX card Geforce 9800GT 1024gddr
I just played this WEGO 4.0 and near the end of the scenario it was taking 5 minutes to process each turn. I had a look in the scenario editor and can see it's not just that it has a lot of troops on the map but the Allied troops are continuously retreating while the Axis continue to get reinforcements so as the scenario progresses the processing power required snowballs. Turning down graphics options isn't going to help, this is a coding issue as well as a need for multiprocessor and GPU game processing support.
-
19 minutes ago, Armorgunner said:
We really do not have a budget for this. But togetter with my wife, we decided to unlock arund 2500-3000$ of our savings for this, but the cheaper the better.
$2-3k is going to get you a lot of computer. I have an i7 3820 with 28gb of RAM and an Nvidia GT 640 and it handles CM nicely. Having said that I just played CMFI Hot Mustard and the processing WEGO times near the end were an excruciating 5 minutes due to so many troops on each side. They are definitely going to have to do some work on multi-processor and GPU support if they want the game to progress and compete as technology advances.
For now get the best processor you can buy, while focusing on RAM, GPU and SSD with the balance of your budget - these 3 will make the biggest difference to CM in its current state.
-
39 minutes ago, Swastakowey said:
I have played Combat Mission Normandy and all expansions for a long time now under version 3. I recently got Red Thunder with Version 4 and I notice an annoying trend which I did not notice in Normandy. Every Scenario ends in less than half the time allocated. By "end" I mean the enemy has been thoroughly defeated (or I have) and there is still 55 minutes on the clock.
I play on the elite realism setting. Now at first I thought I could just ask for cease fire when it seemed like it was over, but then I realized a lot of scenarios have reinforcements or AI counter attacks and with 55 minutes on the clock it could very well happen. So instead if have to fast forward for 55 or so turns where nothing but maybe a rifle shot here and there.
Is this a Red Thunder scenario problem or are the V4 changes at fault? I notice my men fire more shots per enemy casualty and both my men and the enemies retreat under fire more readily but I didn't think it would be a big impact on scenario timing.
For reference (from memory) the scenarios that stick out was myth of invincibility scenario, playing as Soviets and after I beat back the enemy assault including the tigers and half tracks and sat there for a while taking pot shots and survivors.
Another was Angriff where I defeated the germans and then sat there for a while where nothing happened only to ceasefire after waiting ages only to see they just got reinforcements. But this is the only scenario where waiting would have netted a bit more action.
Eye of the needle was the one that had a very long time without action before the timer went to 0 and scenario ended.
In Normandy I did not have this problem, usually the enemy surrendered if defeated enough (not instantly but not stubbornly holding) and usually scenarios ended pretty close to the timer end.
Is it just my perception, V4 or Red Thunder?
Happens to me with a lot of scenarios which is why I modify them. I just played Studienka which is fantastic scenario but which abruptly ended at about the 1:30 mark of a 3 hour scenario. I was expecting at least another big wave of Soviets. Anyway, try RDM - Angriff for a challenge, no early finish with that one.
-
Nice work...
-
19 hours ago, Battlefront.com said:
Hopefully! Though it is currently planned for the end of the year so it's uncertain. But if it misses 2017 it won't be by much.
Nope, not even a little bit. Upgrade 4 stuff started after Phil left and the code was obviously completed back in December since we released 4 out of 5 Engines. As I've said here and elsewhere, it was all tedious TO&E work that's held up CMFI. It had it, none of the others did. Phil never had anything to do with TO&E and Charles simply compiles what I give him, which takes a few minutes of his time.
The process of slogging through a few hundred thousand bits of data potentially being changed incorrectly simply takes a long time to work through since there's no automated process that can catch stuff like "oh, the 1944b version of Hampstertruppen Panzergrenadiervolksbuggers should have 2 MP-40s most of the time instead of only some of the time". As Dr. Ben Sobel would say, "it's a process"
That thread has been updated since you posted it here. Suffice to say there was a bit of speculation in that thread that has very little to do with reality. Someone from the press corps hounded me for details and I relented!
I know what really goes on behind the scenes at Battlefront
See above link for some answers I gave in relation to inquiries.
Remember that Battlefront started out as 2 people. Anything more than that is more than we started with, and we did pretty well with only 2 people
Our needs go up and down over time, so our staffing must as well. In some ways we have more staff now than ever before, but we do find working with contractors is a better fit for where we are right now.
Steve
Hope you guys keep going. As I keep saying this is one of the best and most unique simulations out there and I'd that to see it go the way of Harpoon...
-
11 minutes ago, tankgeezer said:
My Chaffee squares away at some infantry occupying a two story building and begins to receive some small arms fire (it’s unbuttoned). A couple of rounds ‘ricochet into the opening’ (commanders hatch). Nobody is hit but the crew bails out anyway and the tank shows knocked out with no indication in the damage panel what got hit. Not real sure how two rifle rounds could K.O. a tank or is this just the worst luck in the world? Hope this doesn’t turn out to be a bug exclusive to the Chaffee.
Manned by Italian troops perhaps? Seriously, I share your frustration at troops below veteran tending to be very quick to bail out...
-
RDM – Rolling Thunder
This original scenario has been randomized and expanded so that no two games will play alike, and so you and the AI opponent have more forces at your disposal making for a more intense experience. There are 5 different AI plans and all reinforcements have been set for random deployment times.
As this is an alteration of an existing scenario you can expect to play the same objectives and general flow of the battle but with more opposition and some surprises. The reinforcements have been designed to keep you on your toes and to counter those of your AI opponent. However don’t get complacent or throw away your forces – you will need them.
Feedback welcome and appreciated. you can email me at xxnightopsxx@gmail.com
Thanks to the scenario author for the original scenario and Battlefront for one of the best and most unique war game simulations around. Keep up the good work.
DOWNLOAD:
http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-black-sea/cm-black-sea-add-ons/rdm-rolling-thunder_v1/
-
On 3/22/2017 at 0:24 PM, Macisle said:
I've been working on a scenario for CMRT for awhile where the major bottleneck is trying to fit the AI's force under 16 groups. Having 32+ would be wonderful and is my top choice by a mile for post 4.0 Editor Upgrade features. Once you hit a certain level of comfort, managing more than 16 Groups isn't much of a problem as long as you make notes (renaming formations also helps a lot in keeping track of things).
I've done a vast amount of experimentation to try and get around the 16 Group limit (most recent dead end was using Exit zones for temporary Groups to exit and be replaced, but the casualty point system killed that. Aside from the points problem, it worked very well).
A technique I'm using that does work is one I call "Snowballing." That is where I use reinforcements to add units to an existing Group over time. So, for example, you start off with a platoon of ACs to simulate recon. Then add a platoon of tanks to the same Group for more firepower. Then later, add a platoon of infantry for a combined arms Group that will take territory.
The key is that the first movement Order you want for the reinforcements to use after they enter must not start until after they are on the map. So, the previous Order must not exit until the reinforcements are already on the map. For example, if the reinforcements enter on turn 5 (don't use variable times for this), make sure that the Order you want them to join in on doesn't begin until minute 6. In other words, have the previous Order exit on 6.
It can take some practice to juggle the locations and Order times, but it does work.
As a rule, I try to keep armor and infantry in separate Groups, but this technique can really help when the 16 Group limit has you in a bind, or you want to throw a curveball.
Edit: Here is a CMFB TEST FILE. Play under scenario author test as the Americans. Just keep advancing the turns. Reinforcements show up at 5 minute intervals to join the Group and advance a minute later.
Here is a CMRT TEST FILE showing the technique. Play under scenario author test as the Germans.
4
Thanks for this.
Even if they pushed the AI cap to 24 that would be a big step and a big help. -
On 3/11/2017 at 9:24 AM, Battlefront.com said:
Nah, it's a pretty good looking step-sister, but she should have ditched the 1980s big hair and leg warmers long ago
A little background...
The TO&E for CMFI was originally based on the TO&E code and details found in CMBN v1.x. With Engine 2 we made major changes to the TO&E coding to improve lots of things, in particular uniforms. Since CMFI started out as Engine 2, the two games were effectively the same to you guys. What happened after that, though, started a divergence. The CMBN TO&E was improved so that it could be readily adapted to CMRT. In the process we fixed things with the original CMBN TO&E that were in error, inconsistent, or using older techniques. Those changes automatically applied to CMBN, not to CMFI. CMRT was released with Engine 3. Next we made CMFB, which again was based on CMBN/CMRT TO&E as a starting point. Again, when problems were found with the original TO&E we made changes. Those changes automatically applied to CMBN, CMRT, and CMFB, not CMFI.
When we started making Upgrade 4 for CMFI we were initially going to smooth out a couple of specific issues (like Flamethrowers) and call it good. However, we were already working on CMFI's 2nd Module (Rome to Victory) and were already converting the CMFI TO&E to be in synch with CMBN, CMRT, and CMFB in terms of structures and coding. We were originally going to have the totally overhauled TO&E made available when Rome To Victory was released. Then we thought it would be better to role it out right away with Engine 4's new release, though we didn't have time to do that as Christmas came upon us. It was the right thing to do, however I wildly underestimated how long it would take to make the conversions and have the issues shaken out by our testers.
Which brings us to today
The fun thing is that for a while CMFI will have the best, most up-to-date TO&E of all WW2 CM games. Because inevitably we found things along the way that required fixes which apply to CMBN/CMRT/CMFB. We'll be putting out patches for the other games to bring them up to the same standards, but maybe we should let CMFI customers have some bragging rights for wee bit of time
Steve
Starting to sound like the Italian Campaign itself, tough old gut...
-
37 minutes ago, ASL Veteran said:
I haven't tested triggers with reinforcements so it's possible that triggers will override the 'normal' behavior of not moving until the entire group is on map. I've personally tried having a single AI group split into an on map group and a reinforcement group so I know that, at least used to be, the expected behavior. It has been a while since I've done anything like that though since - well once I see something doesn't work then I don't typically keep trying to do it.
Sure, but this is all more trial and error than getting anything from the manual and I just noted that behaviour looking at this other scenario.
-
On 3/20/2017 at 5:55 AM, Sgt.Squarehead said:
You think 16 AI groups is too few.....Hahahahahahahahahahahaha!
I'd kill for 16.
ASL Veteran is correct.
Nothing wrong with asking. The more complex the AI the more complex and realistic the scenarios and gameplay can be.
It would also be nice if the tac AI could break off the execution of an order in progress when it contacts enemy units. ATM it rarely fully engages those enemy units instead simply plowing on like they don't exist. -
On 3/19/2017 at 11:01 PM, ASL Veteran said:
An AI group will not move unless all members of that group are on map. So if AI group 1 has some troops begin on map and others entering as reinforcements, then no members of AI group 1 will move until all the members of AI group 1 have entered the map as reinforcements. Once all members of group 1 have arrived then the group will begin to carry out the group orders that you have assigned. So essentially it is currently impossible to have AI movement orders with groups that are split between on map elements and reinforcements, unless your movement plan is set to begin after all the members of that AI group have arrived on map.
As I was saying to Combatintman that's strangely not the behaviour I see in another scenario. The units not only don't wait for the reinforcements in their AI group but move as soon as they spawn. Then when the second part of the group arrives they also move (more strangely they don't follow the preset order plan directly but simply go to where the first group already is on the map). I'm not sure then what the variable is and why in some scenarios AI grouped units move and in others they don't.
-
On 3/19/2017 at 10:20 PM, Combatintman said:
AFAIK this shouldn't be a problem. The non-movement issue may be linked to the timing of orders you have set for AI Group 13. If group R2 arrives at 15 minutes and group R3 arrives at 30 minutes but the first order you have for AI Group 13 is timed at 5 minutes then it is unlikely that the later arriving elements (eg R2 and R3) will move.
While I agree that it would be nice to have more than 16 AI Groups, it is generally possible to craft a workable AI plan with those 16 AI Groups - remember the AI just needs to present a challenge to the player and appear credible. Try doing it in CMSF which only has 8 available groups
.
I've set the departure for 00.00 on both clocks so would expect they would leave immediately with no waiting for timed execution. Interesting that in another scenario the units do move even though they spawned about 20 minutes apart. the only difference I can see is the latter situation involves a trigger on map.
It is possible to craft a workable AI plan but more AI slots gives you more flexibility and more randomness in the scenario. I'm glad to see the AI orders have been boosted from 16 to 32. -
Frustrating situation so I'll ask the experts. Can you assign the same AI group to different reinforcement groups? At the moment what is happening is I'm trying to assign R2 and R3 to AI group 13 but when I do so those units won't move once they spawn. The reason for this is the lack of AI groups - we definitely need more than 16. Any help/advice appreciated. I hope I posted this in the right place.
-
On 3/14/2017 at 11:50 AM, Heinrich505 said:
Nightops,
Well, I managed to eek out a German Army Tactical Victory at Elite. The battle was very challenging and it made me work, very hard, for my end result.
I won't give away any spoilers. There is a fair bit of frustration with the battle, and there were several times when I was about to give up, and then on came some more reinforcements, which gave me new life for my attempts to move forward. I had to change plans several times, reacting to the enemy reinforcements.
I did like the diverse equipment that was provided during the battle. It is fun to use certain pieces of equipment that you don't normally see in the usual battles. Having said that, it is not fun seeing these items blown up before you ever get a chance to use them!
Quite frankly, I thought I had lost the battle or at the best, gained a draw. But, I was surprised to see I had actually scored well. My troops were not very happy with me though, as many of them were slaughtered.
One thing that was simulated well was the carnage and high casualties that are normally associated with Eastern Front battles.
This battle is not for the faint-hearted. Thank heaven for the Panthers!
Heinrich505
Nice work getting that outcome on Elite. I always end up playing scenarios but then think what if this or that equipment were added and I always like that element of surprise.
PS Panthers are my favourite, they can really change the way things are going in any battle. -
I just want an Afrika Korps TOW release sooner rather than later. Apart from that an expansion of the Black Sea TOW, which I have found to be extremely immersive and well done despite a preference for WW2. CMBS makes you appreciate how much technology and warfare have changed over a relatively short period of time.
-
7 minutes ago, IanL said:
Against the AI you can offer a cease fire at any time and the game will end. No need to press the BRB over and over sixty times. Vs a human opponent - you need to find a different opponent if they will not accept a cease fire when nothing is going on.
Still have a lot to learn about the game I see. I always thought initiating a cease fire would affect the win/lose outcome algorithm so never went there.
-
On 2/27/2017 at 10:05 AM, Warts 'n' all said:
Personally I couldn't give a monkey's t*** how many sales CK2 or anything other game has sold. Since when has popularity equaled quality? Mein Kampf sold shedloads, it was still garbage.
It's a nice bedtime read...
-
On 3/12/2017 at 7:58 AM, Frederico said:
Intense might be an understatement. The action did not not stop from the the first shot til the bloody end!
Did you win though?
I prefer more action and more armor in my games, the occasional scenario where you have longer out breaks for movement/strategy/scouting between fighting/action is good for a change though. Smaller maps are generally going to be more all out battles. What I can't stand is scenarios where you have to click the start button turn after turn after turn just to get through tediously long drawn out periods of absolutely nothing happening. That, or getting through/winning a battle and having 20-30 minutes of the same repeated clicking of the start button with nothing to do at all but wait for the finale. -
On 3/4/2017 at 2:56 AM, AstroCat said:
Hire some more help, freelance contract or staff, invest...straight up. Do the P&L and figure it out.
I think Astrocat is right on a number of things especially on continuing to build community and awareness of the product. The way I found Battlefront was on piratebay over 10 years ago when I happened to spot a game called Combat Mission Afrika Korps. I had no idea what it was but the title sounded interesting. I've been a fan of the games ever since - but most will agree that's not exactly the way you want people finding or being introduced to your product. Definitely a stronger social media presence wouldn't hurt. I also get some of the worst looking "strategy" games being advertised on my facebook feed, games that don't hold a candle to Combat Mission in terms of depth and quality. It also doesn't help that since Star Wars Battlefront the official Battlefront page is now relegated to page 2 or three on Google.
One major quibble though, $20 bucks for a vehicle pack for a game (CMBN) you've already bought along with two expansion packs for is a bit too steep. -
On 12/15/2016 at 3:22 AM, Raptorx7 said:
Ever considered that not everyone has flickering shadows and swirling pyschedelic patterns showing up in there game?
I mean I'm not going to say CM has great graphics and honestly Steve probably wouldn't either, but they do the job just fine in my opinion especially with mods. It looks like you should log a ticket about those graphical problems.
I wouldn't say the graphics are great but they're not bad, but then I'm using a 2Gb NVidia on a 40" screen. If people want dazzling graphics they should go play World of Tanks. Sometimes the shadows and rendering can be a bit off but again what the game is and does outweighs those minor issues.
-
RDM – Angriff
This original scenario has been randomized and expanded so that no two games will play alike, and so you and the AI opponent have more forces at your disposal making for a more intense experience. There are 5 different AI plans and all reinforcements have been set for random deployment times.
As this is an alteration of an existing scenario you can expect to play the same objectives and general flow of the battle but with more opposition and some surprises. The reinforcements have been designed to keep you on your toes and to counter those of your AI opponent. However don’t get complacent or throw away your forces – you will need them.
Feedback welcome and appreciated. you can email me at xxnightopsxx@gmail.com
Thanks to the scenario author for the original scenario and Battlefront for one of the best and most unique war game simulations around. Keep up the good work.
Download from here:
http://www.thefewgoodmen.com/tsd3/cm-red-thunder/cm-red-thunder-add-ons-scenarios/rdm-angriff/
Best Computer for CM?
in Combat Mission Black Sea
Posted · Edited by nightops