CMHQ Feedback

[John Kettler]

First of all, I'd like to say that having looked at all the new POTDs and the Gallery, I am in awe of the progress that has been made in game textures and graphics--especially the new Panther!

Second, in looking at the various Panzer commanders and crewmen in the POTDs, I couldn't help noticing that headsets were conspicuously absent. I don't know whether throat mikes would even show, though. Somehow, I doubt it. I think it would be relatively simple to add headsets, but I'm no graphic artist. If it were doable, I bet it would look great.

Third, the artillery firing procedure article was most interesting. I believe the author would find it worthwhile to locate and read Ian Hogg's long out of print BARRAGE, which was part of the Ballantine's Illustrated History of World War II. My copy has somehow vanished, but from what I remember of it, Ian Hogg went into considerable detail on how the various major powers actually organized, coordinated and conducted massed artillery fires. As a former Master Gunner in the Royal Artillery, Mr. Hogg is intimately familiar with his subject and has written dozens of books on technical military topics. On a related note, it's apparent that confusion still reigns when it comes to proper ordnance nomenclature. I say again. It's "fuze" not "fuse." While I'm at it, I also saw "site" where the needed word was "sight." I think it's in a figure caption. What can I say? I used to work as a proofreader.

Fourth, if the towed antitank gun was a PAK 40, then a tweak needs to be made, since the real gun shield consisted of two layers separated by spacers. This was designed specifically to defeat antitank rifle projectiles by breaking them up. Maybe you could put in a black line to suggest a shadow between the armor layers?

Unless you're simulating a field scrape, the antitank gun emplacement and the foxholes are much too shallow. The gun barrel should be almost at ground level, with a fairly substantial pit directly behind it which would expose no more of the crew than from the chest up.

While we're on antitank guns, what are the chances of toning down the alarmingly bright paint on the uncamouflaged 88 so that it no longer is instantly visible from the other end of the board? Better yet, what about appropriate camouflage paint and foliage bits on all antitank guns? Has any thought been given to providing camouflage nets for dug-in guns, CPs, etc.?

Fifth, I wish I were playtesting. I know there's considerable work involved, but you guys are SO LUCKY!!!

In closing, let me thank you and all the mod developers out there for your immense contributions to this ever more incredible wargame.

Sincerely,

John Kettler

[Moon]

Hello John.

Just a few quick comments:

- rumor has it that the uniforms for tank crews are being redone

- the shallow foxholes and dug-in positions are visual only, the game engine does recognize the improved cover gained by such positions. The reason to do this, I believe, was to not get into trouble with units lying prone in a foxhole: you wouldn't be able to see them. But who knows, maybe it'll be tweaked, too?

- The color of the individual guns and vehicles plays no role with regard to spotting. You can change the textures yourself as you like. The current colors were chosen to not make it too hard for the player to spot his units on the map. The game engine does assume correct camo for spotting purposes.

Martin

[Guest KwazyDog]

Hiya John,

Just a couple of thoughts

'Fourth, if the towed antitank gun was a PAK 40, then a tweak needs to be made, since the real gun shield consisted of two layers separated by spacers.'

That would be great, but the problem is that this would doube the amount of faces needed for the gun shield. Detail such as this really isnt possible whilst keeping the frame rate up on larger battles, but it is certainally something that would be nice in the future

'Unless you're simulating a field scrape, the antitank gun emplacement and the foxholes are much too shallow. '

This is another instance where frame rate has been taken into consoderation. If this were done, each foxhole would need to be modeled in 3D, requiring at my guess maybe 20 odd faces or polygons each. Have a company dug in and that adds up to a lot of extra faces, probably even over the number in a CM vehicle

One thing to keep in mind is like Martin said, spotting isnt dependant on camo displayed in the game directly, so it dosnt chance the game results. Hopefully in the future processing power will allow for more in game detail