Jump to content

Any real differences between CMAK and CMBB 1.03


Recommended Posts

I guess one could list two major new features:

</font>

  • dust kicked up by moving vehicles, muzzle blast and shell impacts</font>
  • multi-gun tanks</font>

Besides those, there are hundreds of tweaks and refinements to the code, some small, some not so small.
</font>
  • Most vehicles have somewhat increased poly counts for example (even though we still use way fewer than, ahem, competitors smile.gif ).</font>
  • At the same time map sizes have increased to 20 square kilometers for battles and 32 square kilometers for operations for example.</font>
  • The AI has been tweaked to handle open desert maps realistically, and to cope with a "dusty" environment. It still cannot replace a human opponent however, but it remains adaptable and not scripted.</font>
  • Besides various ground conditions, we have three distinctive ground (soil) types now - dirt (gras), arid rocks and sand (snow is a ground condition, not a type).</font>
  • We have new terrain types like vineyards or sandbag positions, and likewise new buildings (mosque for example) for the various theaters.</font>
  • Ballistics and armor penetration calculations were further refined based on newest research and data.</font>
  • Desert haze has been implemented (affects spotting distances on mid-day desert maps).</font>
  • OOPS, FORGOT THIS ONE: Tons of new sound effects for weapons, vehicles, ambient sounds and voices (even distinguished between british and US etc.). Matt did an awesome job!</font>

And so on and so forth.

The list of changes isn't as long as it was for CMBB coming from CMBO, but we still did do our homework smile.gif

Martin

[ October 13, 2003, 06:03 PM: Message edited by: Moon ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the info Moon. And how about turn length, bogged chance? I must say that the change to get a vehicle out of a bogged situation seems to be improved since 1.03.

And I will only say this once... This kind of spontaneous response from you and your team mates is why I wake up with this forum and program and go to bed with it smile.gif

Grammar edits (sorry I'm Dutch ;) )

[ October 13, 2003, 04:08 PM: Message edited by: Jaws ]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oops, I've edited my original post to add the new sound effects.

Jaws, I am not sure what you refer to, the chance for bogging? It depends a lot on the actual type of vehicle, ground type and condition, so it's not one variable that can be tweaked. There is a bunch of new ground types in CMAK which has an impact on bogging.

Scheer, sorry, no mousewheel support. Stuff like this might sound trival but it actually involves a lot of recoding of the engine, and - with such a complex program as CM is - even more time to test if all works properly. You wouldn't believe what sometimes breaks in the code when you change some other, at first apparently totally unrelated part of it!

We've made the decision to base CMAK on the CMBB engine and restrict major recoding to include only what is absolutely necessary, and instead invest the freed time into making a completely new engine from scratch.

Martin

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All sounds pretty exciting but how about adding a little refinement to Hq units ability to spot. As it is the Hq unit can only call in fire support limited to a range of 400 or 500 meters. Plus the fact that when he calls in fire support he's actually firing his personal small arms at the enemy he's spotted which gives him away within a turn or 2. Can't the Hq unit call in fire support frm on board mortars without shooting?

All best

Patrick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by lucero1148:

All sounds pretty exciting but how about adding a little refinement to Hq units ability to spot. As it is the Hq unit can only call in fire support limited to a range of 400 or 500 meters. Plus the fact that when he calls in fire support he's actually firing his personal small arms at the enemy he's spotted which gives him away within a turn or 2. Can't the Hq unit call in fire support frm on board mortars without shooting?

All best

Patrick

Ummm....I think CMBB's Cover Arc command achieves this already. smile.gif
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Sivodsi:

What what what? The HQ fires his own pistol when spotting for an on-board mortar?

Surely this is not the case. As long as the HQ has the target in LOS you can target the onboard mortar without touching the HQ unit. I have never seen the hq fire in this situation.

I'm not sure what he's actually saying either :confused: My HQ units can call on mortar fire support just fine without firing their own weapons. As long as the HQ has LOS to the taget of course, and as long as the mortar is in command range.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Ant:

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Sivodsi:

What what what? The HQ fires his own pistol when spotting for an on-board mortar?

Surely this is not the case. As long as the HQ has the target in LOS you can target the onboard mortar without touching the HQ unit. I have never seen the hq fire in this situation.

I'm not sure what he's actually saying either :confused: My HQ units can call on mortar fire support just fine without firing their own weapons. As long as the HQ has LOS to the taget of course, and as long as the mortar is in command range. </font>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Moon:

Jaws, I am not sure what you refer to, the chance for bogging? It depends a lot on the actual type of vehicle, ground type and condition, so it's not one variable that can be tweaked. There is a bunch of new ground types in CMAK which has an impact on bogging.

Ok that's clear.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the overall bogging chance is fine, but could somebody look into the turn rates?

And some particular bogging chances and mobility seems to be severly off, e.g. that the StuG IV is so much worse than the StuG III (I have never seen historical mention of this) and that an 8-wheel AC is much better than the average fully tracked vehicle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...