Grey_Fox
-
Posts
472 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by Grey_Fox
-
-
So those are the lowest-level air defense assets available. If those are engaging enemy aircraft, something has gone wrong in the several layers of the air defense network above them, which is not depicted in CM.
One of the more unrealistic things about quick battles in CM is that every tank you pick is available on the field in good working order, and none of the aircraft you buy are shot down or forced to abort by opposing aircraft or theatre, division, or regimental air defense assets.
-
@CanuckGamer a lot of your problem is that most of your tanks and troops are green, while the US are mainly veterans. You need to be careful and be lucky.
IMO it's not a good scenario for PBEM.
-
1 hour ago, MeatEtr said:
But I, like many others, got over this like a dozen years ago.
I don't think we should be settling for something that's let's face it is less than mediocre. At least if it were mediocre they would be providing a message or something.
-
@BFCElvis you guys went and implemented a synchronous service to upload the save file to the Slitherine servers that locks up CM for several minutes, and during which service call any user interaction causes a fatal error in the application?
I mean jeepers at least give players something that tells them that they need to wait or a progress bar or something that tells us to sit and wait and not do anything, and maybe disable user interactable functionality during the service call.
-
What overpowered armour stats?
-
2 hours ago, Jaime said:
For the non-chess players out there, to help understand the concept of tempo in chess. How it pertains to Soviet Cold War doctrine ask Domfluff I suppose..
?????????????????
This is exactly what soviet doctrine is all about - using templated battle plans to enable soviet commanders to get and stay inside of opponents' OODA loops.
This is an example of John Curry using it in professional wargaming settings:
It absolutely can be replicated in CM, as Free Whiskey's video shows, and as shown in the CMCW campaigns and scenarios.
If you want to read about Soviet doctrine, take a look at FM 100-2-1. If you can find the 1990 edition, that's better.
-
38 minutes ago, jackal263 said:
Hoping that my (gfs26) opponent (@Idontknowhowtodo) in the tournament read this :
"Hi !
I recently lost my primary pc... unfortunately it is not the power supply, so it will take some time to get it again.
I have a second pc, and it should be better (intel i9), but it has an ATI Radeon graphic card that doesn't run properly all the CM series...i tried to run our games, but there are a lot of graphic issues (in particular explosions) that make the game no more attractive.. I will try to restore the previous pc (but i doubt i will get it before mid of next week) and so will put our game in pause.
Sorry for the problem !By the way, great battle so far... a very bloody battle. "
Is there any suggestion in the forum for user having ATI Radeon graphic card ?
The game is really unplayable (i run it under Windows 10, on a high spec pc, maybe except for the graphic card Radeon RX 550)
You have to roll back to a previous driver. I believe 22.1.2 is the last version that works with CM.
-
10 hours ago, MikeyD said:
About those 'absurdly small' game maps. Average LOS in Germany is said to be about 1.3km, less so in the forested Fulda region. Even in flat industrial farm Ukraine the Ukrainians say average Javelin engagement range has only been about 900m. Soviet doctrine in the Cold War timeframe considered 2km to be the width of a battalion's zone of attack. Try to go wider and you'd be intruding into adjacent units' path of advancement.
And yet many of the QB maps are significantly smaller than that, with only a few allowing that 2km frontage.
-
49 minutes ago, Spriksprak said:
I've been a long time player of CM but was surprised that they've broken with their long established practice of publishing a demo with their new Cold War game. I remember them saying long ago it was how they promoted their games given the small size of the developer and the niche nature of the product. So couple of questions to anyone kind enough to clarify: do you know why they broke with tradition for releasing a demo (i.e. is the game particularly different from other CM entries?) and in your opinion is it worth a buy/a good entry for someone whose played since the original Shock Force?
Thanks for any input
I think it's worth the purchase.
If you want a sort-of demo, steam offers a full refund if you play for less than 2 hours and you have owned the game for less than 2 weeks.
The campaigns are uniformly excellent.
The standalone scenarios range from excellent to very mediocre.
The quick battle maps are quite poor, just the same ones you have in Black Sea and I think Red Thunder, which are usually absurdly small for modern-ish weapons systems (and worse for Black Sea). You'd be well-advised to import some master maps if you are into PBEMs.
-
3 hours ago, Artkin said:
Yeah but the thread is about why there are 310 kia and 9 wia for the entire battle. No survivors from apfsds or whatever was being shot?
I mean it's possible if they were all mounted and the vehicle cooked off on impact. TOW missiles do bad things to BMPs and BTRs.
-
The player will often be significantly more willing to get their troops killed than their real life counterparts at every level of the chain of command.
-
Wouldn't this be copyright theft?
-
9 hours ago, LukeFF said:
Quite the cheap shot from someone who's never been part of the beta testing process.
People are judged by their failures more often than by their successes. End users don't care about the bugs that were found and fixed prior to release, they only care about what they see in front of them.
Is any AAR process done to review bugs uncovered by end users in an attempt to identify why they passed through earlier testing rounds?
-
I'll be starting part 3 of this mission in a few minutes:
-
going to be starting my livestream in a few minutes, continuation of the first mission of the Five Days campaign in the new battle pack:
-
3 hours ago, Sunbather said:
Wow, the English in this thread has gone to ****. Reading this page alone made my head hurt.
Can you guys at least read your posts one more time before you click on "submit"? It would go a long way to raise the IQ back up again and prevent us all from further headaches.
What and who exactly are you referring to?
-
1 hour ago, Alchenar said:
I'm not remotely qualified, but my intuition is that the real problem is that the game engine is doing something really inefficient every time the camera moves. It's that, rather than anything in the simulation that causes issues.
Oh yeah, it smacks of a really silly calculation being done (or series of calculations) when a movement order is selected and the camera moved. And it doesn't help that the entire application seems to be running on a single thread.
-
16 hours ago, MikeyD said:
If you're getting low framerates when nobody else is complaining about it maybe the problem isn't the game.
CM's performance is rather lacking, particularly on larger maps with large numbers of units, and especially in the setup phase if the deployment zone is large and you have a unit selected with a movement order.
-
Splash screen seems to always be black and white. Others I have talked to report the same.
Graphics card: Nvidia Geforce 1080Ti
Driver: 526.98
-
discussion livestream starting in a few minutes:
-
On 11/19/2022 at 10:40 PM, Grey_Fox said:
I will be hosting a discussion with @George MC and @domfluff on my youtube channel about the battle pack, as well as campaign and scenario design in general, on Thursday 24th November at 20:00 GMT if anyone is interested:
Less than 24 hours to go on this event!
-
46 minutes ago, Artkin said:
Artkin #10
Unnecessary spotting icons plague the map all over the place. They prevent easily plotting moves from height since the partial contact icons act like real units. There are WAY too many of these. It's a plague.
Iron difficulty
Those are last-known positions for contacts which individual units have spotted. The reason you have so many is that some of the troops haven't recognised that there are multiple different last known contacts for the same units.
An example, unit A spots a tank and loses contact with it. A tentative spot is created. Later, unit B spots a tank, and reports the contact. This is the same tank, but neither A nor B know that, and this is what the player sees.
This is part of the deep fog of war that is core to CM gameplay. It's not a bug just because you don't like it.
-
I will be hosting a discussion with @George MC and @domfluff on my youtube channel about the battle pack, as well as campaign and scenario design in general, on Thursday 24th November at 20:00 GMT if anyone is interested:
-
Playing the new battle pack:
Kriegsburg 1979 Video AAR
in Combat Mission Cold War
Posted · Edited by Grey_Fox
Fully agree with Domfluff, currently it takes I would estimate 1-2 hours of effort per minute of footage if one were to do an AAR style video, not counting having to spend 1-2 minutes loading every save for each turn in a battalion size fight.