petestorm Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 I'm sure it's come up before, but is there any way to make a patch so the distances shown are in yards (for forces using standard measurements?) I'm sure the developers have better things to do, but I'm used to shooting pre-1960s U.S. arms and everything is done in yards. Would be a touch of realism for U.S. forces and possibly English and Aussie. phs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitzkrieg Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 Actually, a yard and a meter are pretty damn close in length (meter is around 3 inches longer IIRC). So even if the game doesn't use yards for distance, you can guesstimate the distance using the above guide. Hope this helps. Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petestorm Posted June 12, 2002 Author Share Posted June 12, 2002 Yeah, been doing that, but still.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sitzkrieg Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 Yeah, it's not real accurate when you're used to thinking in yards. Would be nice to have a "yards" option but I'm guessing it was easier to use meters since it is base 10 (easier to program). Keith Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 This ain't possible, because the entire game and all its distances are ahrd-coded in metric. The "terrain resolution" is in metric, and can't be changed with the flick of a switch. If you did have some patch that gave weapon ranges or LOS in SAE, you'd then have to always be converting SAE to metric or vice versa. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cameroon Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 Originally posted by Doug Beman: This ain't possible, because the entire game and all its distances are ahrd-coded in metric. The "terrain resolution" is in metric, and can't be changed with the flick of a switch. If you did have some patch that gave weapon ranges or LOS in SAE, you'd then have to always be converting SAE to metric or vice versa. DjB"Ain't possible" simplely ain't true A yards toggle would do NOTHING but perform a conversion before sending the text or number (however they are doing it) to be rendered. That is neither hard nor time consuming from a developers standpoint (unless the internals of the engine are have been horribly turned into sphaghetti) or a "cpu cycles consumption standpoint". I am a programmer, I do know what I'm talking about That said, I doubt you'll see such a feature simply because I'm sure they're running around doing other things. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WWB Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 Not to mention the fact that 1 yard and 1 meter are not too far apart. In fact, for scenario design purposes, I just convert them at 1:1. For example, a treeline 500 yards from a town becomes a treeline 500m from the town. WWB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 A rough but easy conversion is just to add 10% to get from meters to yards. 200 meters gives about 220 yards and so on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fairbairn-Sykes Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 Hey petestorm, Did you study at the University of Chicago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMsoldier Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 How many meters is each "square" in CM? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doug Beman Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 Each terrain tile is 20 meters on a side. I've made several scenarios by using a copier to enlarge/reduce the original paper map until its metric scale of 1:100meters exactly matches 5 tile squares in the editor. Then I copy the map to thinner paper, stick it to my monitor, and use that as a template for terrain contours, salient features, etc. DjB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 Range estimates in yards to meters would be unnecessary, but a really neat piece of chrome - but then you have all the data tables in metres only. I guess on the Russian Front it won't be necessary anyway, but to answer petestorm's question - yes, Canada, the UK, Australia and NZ were not metric in WW II. Canada used miles, pounds etc. until the 1970s; I remember having to learn both systems in elementary school. Appararently Starfleet Command continued to use the Imperial system well into the 2200s, if the original Star Trek is to be any judge.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonS Posted June 12, 2002 Share Posted June 12, 2002 Originally posted by Michael Dorosh: ... Canada, the UK, Australia and NZ were not metric in WW II...Mike, while true for civilians, I'm not sure that it's true fro the military. For example, currently the US Army uses metres while the rest of their country struggles along with that aborted imperial system. I'm reasonably sure that in the CW the military adopted metric before the civilians did, though I can't find anything to verify that. Evans talks about the introduction of mils in the 1950's, and in "1965 the Australia, UK, Canada, US (ABCA) common artillery procedures and terminology came into effect for calls for fire between observers and CPs, and subsequently became NATO procedures", which may have seen the introduction of metres at that time. Bah - you're most likely right; in WWII they used yards. Still, from my POV I'm happy that BFC used metres as that's what I'm most comfortable with Regards JonS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Dorosh Posted June 13, 2002 Share Posted June 13, 2002 You suck Jon! Actually you have a good point re: the military going metric. I wonder when Canada did, actually - I have no clue, but suspect it was in the time frame you suggest, ie the 1960s when the Americans and everyone else did. NATO standardization? I think that was the reason we adopted the 7.62 mm FN rifle, while the Americans adopted the 7.62 M14, etc. Good call. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tar Posted June 13, 2002 Share Posted June 13, 2002 I would think that programmatically the easiest thing to do for the "yards" would be to substitute the text without even bothering to do the conversions. Since it is just as a chrome item anyway, it wouldn't really matter. Of course, the penetration screen in millimeters would be problematic... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Louie the Toad Posted June 13, 2002 Share Posted June 13, 2002 Why should it matter, yards or meters? The distance from one object to another is still the same regardless of the name of the unit of measure. Trying to convert from one unit to the other is what causes confusion. If we called a certain distance a Zrk it would only take practice and a fair eye to know that the distance between two objects was so many Zrks. Half a Zrk long ...... Toad Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASL Veteran Posted June 13, 2002 Share Posted June 13, 2002 When I saw the title of this thread, I thought the request was for the houses in CMBB to have yards!! Front yards and back yards, complete with little fences and lawn gnomes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted June 13, 2002 Share Posted June 13, 2002 Originally posted by ASL Veteran: When I saw the title of this thread, I thought the request was for the houses in CMBB to have yards!! Front yards and back yards, complete with little fences and lawn gnomes. Pink flamingos and inflatable wading pools. Jeez, our middle class American values are coming through. Michael Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pud Posted June 13, 2002 Share Posted June 13, 2002 Originally posted by Doug Beman: This ain't possible, Thank goodness!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olle Petersson Posted June 13, 2002 Share Posted June 13, 2002 Originally posted by Louie the Toad: Trying to convert from one unit to the other is what causes confusion.... with one exception; temperature It's really imperative to convert between Centigrade and Farenheit to get the one you're used to. Temperatures given in the other unit are incomprehensible. Cheers Olle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMplayer Posted June 13, 2002 Share Posted June 13, 2002 Originally posted by Olle Petersson: It's really imperative to convert between Centigrade and Farenheit to get the one you're used to. Temperatures given in the other unit are incomprehensible. Farenheit is easy if you think like this. 100 is the hottest day of the summer (in a normal country, not Sweden), 0 is the coldest day of winter, and 50 is not warm, but not cold either: sweater weather. It's not such a bad system for air temperature really, since it gives such a nice wide spread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
petestorm Posted June 13, 2002 Author Share Posted June 13, 2002 Hey petestorm, Did you study at the University of Chicago? Nope, University of Illinois at Champaign-Urbana. U of C would have required too much studying, too much money, and an application essay phs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tar Posted June 13, 2002 Share Posted June 13, 2002 > Farenheit is easy if you think like this. 100 is the hottest day of the summer (in a normal country, not Sweden), 0 is the coldest day of winter, and 50 is not warm, but not cold either: sweater weather. Granted that temperature is one of the measurements that takes the most getting used to. Of course Celsius isn't that hard either: -20 - stay inside -10 - wear gloves 0 - wear a coat 10 - wear a sweater 20 - normal clothes 30 - shorts 40 - bathing suit [ June 13, 2002, 03:28 PM: Message edited by: tar ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuka Posted June 14, 2002 Share Posted June 14, 2002 You people need lives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panzer Leader Posted June 14, 2002 Share Posted June 14, 2002 Originally posted by tar: > Of course Celsius isn't that hard either: -20 - stay inside -10 - wear gloves 0 - wear a coat 10 - wear a sweater 20 - normal clothes 30 - shorts 40 - bathing suitAt which temperature centigrade to I wear a pair of galoshes, a bikini, and one of those big Russian hats? [ June 13, 2002, 11:30 PM: Message edited by: Panzer Leader ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts