The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far...

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat: Wacht am Rhein >> The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far...

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/15/2011 8:00:22 PM

huahuapro

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/25/2010
Status: offline

Not 100%, but most of the Panzers (I only play the German side. So not sure if US tanks got the same issue...) ONLY use their AP rounds - no matter soft targets or just suppressing fire on the open field, the tanks fire the HE round only when they are out of AP rounds...

Anyone help me? Thanks!

Post #: 1

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/16/2011 3:44:14 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

Tanks should have AP rounds loaded as default in anticipation of engagement with enemy tanks. If you instruct your tanks to fire at a soft target or unknown target, such as area fire, they should fire the already loaded AP round then reload an HE round as long as you didn't cancel the fire order you gave or the target moved our of LOS or be eliminated or they run out of HE ammunition. When you get down to one or two rounds you should see them go into ammo conservation mode and be receiving reports in the battle messages that they're running low on ammo. Provided they still have AP ammo left they're indicating they're running low HE ammo not ammo in general.

If you're seeing anything that contradicts this let us know which tank types you're seeing this on and the specific situation that lead up to them firing AP rounds only so we can replicate this on our end. Screenshots may be helpful.

Thanks!

(in reply to huahuapro)

Post #: 2

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/16/2011 6:12:56 PM

huahuapro

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/25/2010
Status: offline

Thanks for the answer.

So I made a test-run and have some screenshots here. Two vehicles are choosen: a Stug III and a Pz IV. First comes the Assult Gun. I ordered it to put some area fire on the building. As you can see in the first screenshot the Stug has its default AP round loaded:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 3

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/16/2011 6:14:54 PM

huahuapro

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/25/2010
Status: offline

First round fired. And second one is...AP round.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 4

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/16/2011 6:16:27 PM

huahuapro

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/25/2010
Status: offline

Go on...AP round again.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 5

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/16/2011 7:34:29 PM

huahuapro

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/25/2010
Status: offline

And now the Pz IV. Same as StugIII, its default AP round is loaded:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 6

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/16/2011 7:36:28 PM

huahuapro

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/25/2010
Status: offline

Same order,area fire on the building, and the next AP round is reloaded:

Attachment (1)

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 7

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/16/2011 7:37:38 PM

huahuapro

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/25/2010
Status: offline

Continue, and AP round goes on...

Attachment (1)

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 8

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/16/2011 7:43:23 PM

huahuapro

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/25/2010
Status: offline

That�s it. I�ve played all the "classical" CCs and also the COI, WAR, TLD and LSA but never see this before... Maybe something could be changed to keep our "precious" optimal?

(in reply to huahuapro)

Post #: 9

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/17/2011 12:24:11 AM

Tejszd

Posts: 3437
Joined: 11/17/2007
Status: offline

If you target infantry and or the ground the tanks switch to HE shells after firing the loaded AP shell.

I'll have to reinstall CC5 and or WAR to see what these older versions of the game do when targeting a building. Also, should test the Allied side to see if it is working the same as the Axis side....

Edit:
- tested WAR as the Allies and when targeting a building the loaded AP shell is fired and then an AP shell is loaded.
- tested CC5 and when targeting a building the loaded AP shell is fired and then an HE shell is loaded.
- tested TLD and when targeting a building the loaded AP shell is fired and then an HE shell is loaded.
- tested LSA and when targeting a building the loaded AP shell is fired and then an HE shell is loaded.

The problem seems to be specific to WAR regardless of the side played.

< Message edited by Tejszd -- 5/17/2011 4:48:32 AM >

(in reply to huahuapro)

Post #: 10

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/17/2011 5:15:46 AM

Andrew Williams

Posts: 6116
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline

Just checked .07 version of WaR as this is the first time I can remember this being reported

2nd shot changed to HE

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Tejszd)

Post #: 11

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/17/2011 5:16:29 AM

Andrew Williams

Posts: 6116
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline

and the Hetzer

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(in reply to Andrew Williams)

Post #: 12

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/17/2011 5:19:18 AM

Andrew Williams

Posts: 6116
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline

hmmm...

StugIII and PzIV from Pz Lehr stay with AP though... maybe a supply shortage?

_____________________________

(in reply to Andrew Williams)

Post #: 13

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/17/2011 5:32:31 AM

Andrew Williams

Posts: 6116
Joined: 1/8/2001
From: Australia
Status: offline

more hmmm... .07

Stugs seem to switch to HE fine when targeting men or ground.

But use AP when targeting buildings

< Message edited by Andrew Williams -- 5/17/2011 11:24:05 AM >

_____________________________

(in reply to Andrew Williams)

Post #: 14

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/17/2011 8:52:06 AM

huahuapro

Posts: 18
Joined: 1/25/2010
Status: offline

Thank you guys for the answers!

Hmmm....played again and confirmed. They use only AP when firing at the buildings...

(in reply to Andrew Williams)

Post #: 15

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/17/2011 4:17:34 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

Thanks all for confirming. It's been reported and will be looked into. Thanks for bringing it to our attention.

(in reply to huahuapro)

Post #: 16

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/26/2011 5:18:58 PM

Platoon_Michael

Posts: 1119
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline

I'm not sure when this started but I'm pretty sure it's been there since WAR came out.
When you look at the amount of Images that can be used for icons the amount that can be used is inconsistent.

When you look at the ScrnGadg.gdg the total amount of Images that can be used for BGUnits is set at 255.
The GSUnits within the ScrnGadg.gdg is set at 195.

When you look at the GameGadg.gdg the amount of GSUnits is set at 255.

Can you please fix the amount of GSUnits in the ScrnGadg.gdg to be at 255?

And while I don't currently understand the whole Soldier Rank Insignia I can't help but to wonder why the numerical #'s for them are different between the ScrnGadg.gdg and the GameGadg.gdg as well?

Thank-You

< Message edited by Platoon_Michael -- 5/26/2011 5:26:58 PM >

(in reply to huahuapro)

Post #: 17

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/28/2011 6:36:20 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

Hey Platoon_Michael. I'd be glad to help you out with understanding this. Thanks for asking.

As you do, or should, already know by looking at the scrngadg or gamegadg file entries, each gadg entry can have (if the EXE is set up to allow it) more than one gadg per entry. As evidenced by the _000, _001, _002 serials in the name of some of the gadg image entries. The EXE is set-up to acknowledge and utilize a prescribed number of gadgs for a given entry. So there is a ceiling set for each gadg entry based on the number of images for each gadg needed. If that ceiling for any one gadg is exceeded the game will crash on loading because the image offsets are different than what the EXE expects to see. Steve indicates you can have up to 65536 images for any one gadget entry and the total size of a *.gdg file can not exceed 4GB provided the EXE is set-up to recognize all the images for a given entry, as mentioned above.

When I asked how many of those images the EXE will recognize for the GSUNIT entry his response was

quote:

The UI will support 32767 images. This is tied to the team icon field in the teams data files.

So if you add a gadg to the Scrngadg file named GSUNIT_196.tga (that image being of a bit depth and pixel size to match the others) that you can reference that gadg in the team icon field and it will show up in the game. And you should be able to continue doing this up to 32767 images or 4GB whichever comes first. Each gadg image entry is going to have a different ceiling based on what the game requires.

If you have troubles with this working as I'm describing let us know. Also if you want to know how to mod the scrngadg file there are plenty of online sources to reference but it sounds like, if you're poking around in the scrngadg and gamegadg files, you should already know this or possess the knowledge to do it without help.

I know for a fact that we only needed 195 icons which is why there were not more in the scrngadg to begin with.

RE: rank insignia - The difference in numbers between the scrngadg and gamegadg is a requirement based on how the code in the EXE works.

< Message edited by RD_Oddball -- 5/28/2011 6:52:55 PM >

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)

Post #: 18

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/29/2011 3:48:44 AM

Platoon_Michael

Posts: 1119
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline

wow,
I'm impressed.
Your answer was more than I expected and the results were better than I thought.
I'm currently at 184 Images for the BG_Unit Icons and was thinking I may have to trim back on a few Ideas.

Sounds like there is no need for that.

Maybe later I can hit you up on some Sound help when I get to it.

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 19

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/30/2011 12:36:53 PM

Platoon_Michael

Posts: 1119
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline

quote:

And you should be able to continue doing this up to 32767 images or 4GB whichever comes first.

Now I assume the 4GB/32,767 you mention is the TOTAL size of ALL the Images within the ScrnGadg.gdg?
And not just the total amount of one's BG_Unit Icons and their GS_Unit Icons.
As it stands now an unedited ScrnGadg.gdg has 3302 files when extracted.
And does GadgetMunger or the RTBTool compress this file when rebuilding one's edited files?
Is that 4GB before or after rebuilding one's edited file?

And is the ceiling 4GB also for the GameGadg.gdg as well or will the GameGadg.gdg actually be less due to the fact that there are not as many images in that file?
If it's less what would the ceiling be for the GameGadg.gdg

Just trying to be sure I understand this properly.
Thanks

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 20

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 5/31/2011 10:52:00 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Platoon_Michael

quote:

And you should be able to continue doing this up to 32767 images or 4GB whichever comes first.

Now I assume the 4GB/32,767 you mention is the TOTAL size of ALL the Images within the ScrnGadg.gdg?
And not just the total amount of one's BG_Unit Icons and their GS_Unit Icons.
As it stands now an unedited ScrnGadg.gdg has 3302 files when extracted.

Correct.

quote:

And does GadgetMunger or the RTBTool compress this file when rebuilding one's edited files?
Is that 4GB before or after rebuilding one's edited file?

I don't know about the compression and If it does I'd assume the total size after since we're talking about what the EXE is expecting.

quote:

And is the ceiling 4GB also for the GameGadg.gdg as well or will the GameGadg.gdg actually be less due to the fact that there are not as many images in that file?
If it's less what would the ceiling be for the GameGadg.gdg

Just trying to be sure I understand this properly.
Thanks

I don't know this either but I'd assume he'd set both things to accept the same size file. Likely it's some sort of standard setting that would apply to all graphics files. Just guessing though.

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)

Post #: 21

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 6/1/2011 12:09:03 PM

Platoon_Michael

Posts: 1119
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline

kinda got me wondering here;
Is there any chance of manipulating the CCImages.pix file?

I had always thought it would be very nice to have screen files with a theme dependent upon what side the player choose.
I'm probably hoping for too much here but what the heck.
The info you've already provided was much more than I expected.

< Message edited by Platoon_Michael -- 6/1/2011 12:17:04 PM >

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 22

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 6/1/2011 3:49:53 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

Great suggestion for a possible future enhancement Michael.

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)

Post #: 23

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 6/8/2011 12:28:13 PM

Platoon_Michael

Posts: 1119
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline

Choose Allies for an Op. or GC.
Play one Battle.
Then exit.
Choose that same Op. or GC. from the save tab and you will see the the Sherman Tank has German half track wheels at the bottom of the Tank.

Attachment (1)

(in reply to huahuapro)

Post #: 24

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 6/12/2011 11:59:45 AM

Platoon_Michael

Posts: 1119
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline

I would really like to see you guys fix the deployment/control of a map when one BG leaves a map and another enters from the opposite side.

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)

Post #: 25

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 6/13/2011 7:36:28 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

I believe it was Michael. I'm not certain if we're talking about the same deployment issue or not. You'll have to clarify for me. I know several deployment issues were addressed and some deployment issues were addressed between the public beta releases and the official update that will be coming out soon. Let me know specifically what the issue is that you're talking about and I'll see if it was entered into the bug tracking system or if it's been addressed.

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)

Post #: 26

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 6/14/2011 12:16:43 PM

Platoon_Michael

Posts: 1119
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline

Have a look here.
Scroll down to where I say "Cant get that enemy BG off your map?"
I have 2 screen shots showing what I'm trying to say.
I posted others here at Matrix before,just can't seem to find them. :(

http://www.closecombatseries.net/CCS/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&p=44054#44054

< Message edited by Platoon_Michael -- 6/14/2011 12:19:47 PM >

(in reply to RD Oddball)

Post #: 27

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 6/14/2011 2:19:04 PM

RD Oddball

Posts: 4836
Joined: 2/10/2007
Status: offline

Sorry can't view the page. Can you repost it here or find your original posts here? That way it's more likely to get seen. Thanks.

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)

Post #: 28

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 6/14/2011 10:45:59 PM

Platoon_Michael

Posts: 1119
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline

Are we not a member of CCS anymore?

When you come up against an enemy BG that you just know theres no way your going to win,play one maybe 2 battles depending on your teams strength and then on the next strategic moves move that BG off and replace it with another one.

If your new BG enters from the same VL position that the enemy BG entered from it can have some pretty devistating effects on the deployment for that enemy BG.

Example:
No way was I going to defeat CCB/7 AD with the German BG that "was" on the map (295/18th VG)
So I moved Peiper into Beho from the North,first picture is how the map was held by the
295/18 VG

Attachment (1)

(in reply to huahuapro)

Post #: 29

RE: The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far... - 6/14/2011 10:46:43 PM

Platoon_Michael

Posts: 1119
Joined: 3/9/2003
Status: offline

And now the deployment the Allies end up with "after" Peiper was moved into Beho.
The AI kept all of it's forces to the right of the map wich made it even that much easier to take.

Note:
You will not see your new deployment untill you start the Battle.The game always displays the previous holding of both Teams for the map

Attachment (1)

< Message edited by Platoon_Michael -- 6/14/2011 10:47:44 PM >

(in reply to Platoon_Michael)

Post #: 30

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Close Combat Series >> Close Combat: Wacht am Rhein >> The first problem with v4.50.14b patch so far...

Page: [1] 2 3 next > >>