Search found 30 matches

At Closecombat.org there is a post by Ernie_M:

"...
Slow down New computers

Postby Ernie_M » Thu Feb 22, 2007 9:43 pm
Lately I've be reading were people are having scrolling
problems while playing the Close Combat series games on
newer computers.

For years, I ran CC2, 4 and 5 on a standard 233mhz Pentium
with 48 mb of ram using a 16mb Voodoo Banshee video card.
All the versions worked fine in every way with this machine.

As everyone is aware, these games were developed in the
97-2000 time frame, taking into account the hardware of
the times. So this old Pentium was perfect for Close Combat.

I recently acquired a new 3.1mhz Pentium 4 and was at first
happy with the fast loading of CC4. My happiness faded when
in starting the game, the scrolling was so fast, the game
was virtually unplayable. Fortunetly, I had this program
called TurboDown. It works WITHIN Windows and as the name
implies, has the ability to slow down a fast machines and
stop the "Wild" scrolling WITHOUT affecting game play.

Problem solved and no need to mess around in the machine
BIOS to slow down the computer!

D#c%

The program was developed in 97' and works with 95, 98se,
NT and Me. Not sure about Xp or Vista.

Description:
Freeware

Turbo Down is a software "Turbo Switch".
You may set the effective CPU speed anywhere from 1 to 100%
of full speed. All programs will execute at the reduced CPU
speed set by Turbo. It is useful for programs that to be
slowed down to run on a faster CPU than originally intended.

Notes:

- Requires Intel CPU (Sorry, AMD Guys).

- One minor issue, the program does increase CPU temp.
about 10 degrees F. This shouldn't be a concern with a good
box and proper cooling...Try it, it may work for you.

Ernie_M
Unteroffizier
Unteroffizier

Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 12:47 am
Like / Share CSO - Post

Top

sod98

Hey! (Thanks for the appreciative post) Lemme say this about that: After about a year of playing about 3 games a week, so that's 150 hours, I started to get a bit of a grip on Panthers in the Fog. Can't say as I have observed my bazooka teams doing the same thing as 57mm At guns regarding the most opportune time to take a green reticule shot, at least not yet since I seldom use them, but when you are faced with enemy tanks attacking from a limited area (darkened-out area pre-game) through a village or city,( keep a tank in reserve to deal with LRRP infantry teams), use bazooka teams to salvage what you can, enemy tanks can't operate in restricted quarters without screening infantry. So, use your bazooka teams, screened behind your own infantry teams, to take them out. His infantry can't take every single building, so you have a better chance, (57mm don't have enough mobility compared to rocket teams) and even in forest, a bazooka team can get within 40 meters to blast a tank because of a tank's blindness, especially if you can get some team to fire at it and force it to button up. Also, a command team at close quarters can immobilize a tank fairly easily, here you will notice that a HQ team has a green reticule when the HQ team is in a building and the tank is flanked. Once the tank is immobile, although still a threat, it can be dealt with later at your leisure.

Another thing I noticed, If you have tank-against-tank dogfight, and let's say his tank misses, while he reloads, take a shot then click on "sneak" and back up, straight back, assuming you have snuck into range by only a couple of pixels.Then once he fires and misses again, sneak back into range and shoot while he reloads, repeat the sneak command to back out of range. If you have two tanks, you can play this game with one of your other tanks from a flanking position. Eventually he loses track of the most serious threat. Also:
I heard that an enemy tank in an anti-infantry role will be firing high explosive and when you confront the tank with one of your tanks, he has HE up the spout so the first shot he takes is not armour-piercing.
Better than chess eh? For some real good validation of this game you should read USA marines' Major McBreen's PDF on how he uses CloseCombat games to train his non-coms.
The link to his white paper is in one of my other postings, and as I often have preached, the Major's paper elevated the CC series way beyond a mere game.

HI Dima (This post is for you )

I have read what I said in a few sources. If you could share your written sources to the contrary, or your Russian school experience, I would appreciate the contrary view, so far I have heard only one side. (He who hears one side hears half a story).

Audi Alteram Partem

Anyhow: \"National Post" 7/31/14 : "...In 1920 Lenin invaded the newly-indpendent Poland. Russia again in 1939, January 1945. In between the depredations on the Vistula, Stalin launched a terror famine in Poland's neighbour, Ukraine, killing MILLIONS (caps mine) in one of the great atrocities of all history, the Holodomor... the ideological and nationalist ambitions that drove Russian tyranny beyond its borders in the Soviet period have never been confronted and renounced...described (as) this "Russian sickness." A systemic misrepresentation of the past and thence to a falsification of the present."

The Montreal Gazette ran a similar article.

So you will probably agree that we need a balanced discussion in everything.

(and no, I do not share my herb, unless you are female of course)

Which CC series do you favor?

Cheers!

In Panthers in the Fog, you see the target reticule change color as the tank shifts around; but nevertheless, in that game the Allies' salvation is the 57mm AT gun (and in actual combat by 1944 it was outfitted with tungsten carbide shot that could penetrate most frontal armour. )

So even if you get a black reticule, resist clicking the fire command, and consequently the anti-tank team is left to its own resources, so the AI kicks in and your effectiveness goes
'way up.

For example, I would say that the AI takes a shot when you have the tightest (not obvious to us humans) firing envelope, as when the tank is driving along a road lined with trees, target, no target, target, etc., the AT will take a snap shot quite efficiently. This is not the case 100% of the time, however.

Looking forward to anyone else having observed this.

When Russia collectivized the Ukraine before WW2, hundreds of thousands starved to death. Since they were formerly part of the Austrian-Hungarian empire (Germany) there was little sympathy out of Moscow. During the War, many Ukrainians supported the Germans, and after it ended, former premier of the USSR Nikita Khrushchev was called the "butcher of the Ukraine" for allowing another 3 million to die of starvation. That we have many Ukrainians Russian-speaking may have been due to a migration dictated by Moscow to attempt a colonization of the area.

(I doubt whether we will ever have a USSR with the same territory as it did when it won the second world war.)

Check out my post at Closecombatfanatics.com and link to the lecture by the retired historian and USA colonel about the Ost front; if you want to get a better historical perspective.

Celebrities (and no doubt we have wondered why so many celebrities are caught shoplifting) it is because they have a publicity agent looking for opportunity. It's a case of bad publicity is better than no publicity.

No multi-story buildings in TBF means that spotting, anti-tank (bazookas, 57mm) will be at a disadvantage. That was the Allies' salvation in PitF if you survived long enough to figure that out.
Technically speaking the armor was thinner on top and infantry hard to spot in multi-story buildings.

Photos??? Where can I get some? (Aww, come on guys/girls, just trying to lighten the mood.)

"Return to the core" I tend to agree, reminds me of the marine who was dismissed 'cuz he was rotten to the corps. Heheh.

So, sticking to my theme here:

Mooxe, you play any Gateway head-to-head? I tried the first map, then I tried it as the Germans, (single battle) to my surprise the Germans initially are dug-in AND there are some wonderfully camouflaged bunkers they can lurk in. (Spoiler alert).

A few years ago there was a group working on a Korean war mod and discussing it here at this web site.

And I have subsequently been reading a few books on the Korean war, excuse me, "police action"

And what do we have? The makings of a fairly good war game, we have tanks (actually all through the war)....T-34/85's in the beginning; later we see the Chinese enter with human wave tactics and a gradual dawning of understanding, by the allies (USA) forces, on how to defeat them:

(sorry, saving that for the game engine.)

Ok, Ok, since you insist: Troops must Hold in Place when surrounded and then use off-map artillery and air for support. (The Chinese used the inverted "V" attack formation which doomed units who would cut and run.)

Climb the hills and clear out the forces surrounding you instead of using road march formation to retreat down a valley. Aggressive patrolling by combined arms instead of fixed positions like WW1.

Anyhow, a properly tuned game engine would allot more force ratio points (increase in firepower) to the player who happens on these tactics. Just like the way an AT gun scores by using a flank shot.

We have different seasons, different terrain (city, villages, hills, valleys), amphibious landings, different nationalities: Marines, ROK's Canadians, Turks, French.

Au revoir

Evening Mooxe

Really keen to see you play the PitF maps and vid them over to TIK's Closecombatfanatics site.

(I've been PitF Allies inasmuch as I find the Huns to have just TOO much advantage, and that won't do if I am going to learn anything.)

Playing LSA against Steiner taught me a lot, but he's busy with the Gateway to Caen to do much mentoring.

Cheerio!

There used to be a small program called "CPU kill" that would let you play older CC games with reasonable mouse speeds.

Surely someone else has cured this problem in a better way by now?

If you want a tough fight head over to the PitF (Slitherine Lobby). You'll see MIKEBRUNO on at about 7PM Eastern Standard (New York) time. Post a chat message to him or leave your email addy in the lobby message screen. He's looking for someone to fight during the day time.
There are a few other strong regulars on at that time, and random times.
Surprisingly there is a player in China who does real well. Better than me.

I wouldn't play the suicidal AI unless you just want to get familiar with the maps. The AI just doesn't have the reflexes or intelligent reactions a human has. (With the exception of line-of-sight, it does that with a grim efficiency only a machine can, it will take a shot that we would never see in the tiny window that a target presents when on the move. A target can be visiblle for a half-second and we would never know it.

Now if they ported a chess engine to Close Combat, I would be really worried. Anyhow, by keeping the AI mediocre, they sell twice as many games and you wouldnt have these forums (slight sarcasm there).
Cheerio
williamfelixbradley(atsign)gmail.com
aka
Hetser

Hey all ! (I mean "achtung") been playing Panthers in the Fog, geez, hate that title, but the graphics are great, maps huge, Mk V's almost unbeatable.

Keep in touch?

Regarding "port scanning" ( vulnerability ), could he not run his connection to a router? Then, being behind a router the intrusion attempt would find nothing.

Or: Has anyone tried running "smoothwall" on an old computer and using that as a firewall?

Just curious.

Hetser

Oh yes, indeed, and furthermore, regarding game realism:
I read that the 88's, so long as they were intact, a position was never lost. The Germans had a lot of them when they gave up anti-aircraft defence of Berlin, and vets tell me that they used them like rifles.
The parts were nickel-plated and supposedly disassembly could be done by hand.

Maps are plenty large, hard to defend against a human who uses terrain for cover, which the AI does not. That is to say you can lose if the live opponent "flows" around you, cutting you off from supply. (Talking operations here.)

The AI seems to be a bit more aggressive, but still needs work. For e.g. the armor gets in too close to potential choke/ambush points. Not like a human's tactics in a similar attack.

Not a lot of opponents, those that are posting at the Slitherine web site are a continent away and therefore available at the wrong time.

I bought it using MasterCard at the Matrix game site,

Let me know if you get it, we could try a battle on for size.

This is what Gparted uses and he is in Wisconsin:
http://www.7l.com/business-hosting-solutions/Toronto-Colocation-Hosting-Provider.html

His software looks good too, if you worry about your hardrive, check it out. but I would navigate directly to his website fro more info. I don't like one of his Cd/DVD-burning programs listed. Some report malware content.

If anybody wants to meet me at GameRanger, PM-me; I have LSA and would like to try it out against a live opponent, or maybe PITF at the Slitherine site, can try the older CC2,3,4,5 but this Win7 box is a bit hard to patch.

Here is the URL to the Marine Gazette and the influence CC1,2,3,4,5 have had on training tactics.

http://www.2ndbn5thmar.com/dm/CCMWorkbookMcBreen2002.pdf

At one point the German armor was issued as many as a dozen shades of green to mimic the different seasonal changes of foliage. Yellow was mostly destined for Africa. But some vehicles painted in basic sand-yellow ended up in Russia. I heard that "pink" worked well in desert scenarios. (could be a contemporary bit of trivia)

“Close Combat” and Learning Infantry Tactics

I have learned more about small-unit infantry tactics from the “Close Combat” simulation than I
have from fourteen years of Marine Corps infantry experience.

“Close Combat” is a computer combat simulation published by Atomic Games. The focus of the
simulation is on infantry combat at the small-unit level. The series currently consists of five versions:
Close Combat I: Omaha Beach, II: A Bridge Too Far , III: The Russian Front, IV: Battle of the Bulge, and
V: Invasion Normandy.

I am an infantry major with fourteen years commissioned service, seven years with 5th Marines, three
years in schools, and three years as an infantry training officer with the Marine Corps Warfighting Lab. I
have deployed overseas with 2nd Battalion, 5th Marines four times. I have commanded two infantry
platoons and one rifle company. I have served as a battalion operations officer and regimental operations
officer. I am a student of tactics. I have taught NCOs and officers infantry tactics. I have participated and
led tactical decision training.

None of these activities or learning experiences can match the effective and focused tactical learning that
I have experienced through repetitive fighting of the small unit scenarios in “Close Combat.”

“Close Combat” permits a player to fight hundreds of scenarios, make thousands of tactical decisions,
experiment with different tactics, and learn from his mistakes. I would be a far more qualified platoon
commander now than I was twelve years ago. Through fighting the “Close Combat” simulation, I have
internalized significant platoon-level tactical lessons:

• Long unsupported assaults are deadly . Assault for short distances, against a lightly armed or
well-suppressed position. A single enemy soldier can destroy a squad across 100 meters of open
ground.

• A long covered approach is always better than a short open route. Be careful of covered
approaches that cannot be covered by an overwatching unit.

• Every unit needs obscuration. Smoke save lives. Every assault and every withdrawal should use
smoke.

• Fire and maneuver is the key tactic. Use the majority of your force to overwhelmingly suppress
the enemy, and a small assault unit to rapidly close on the objective.

(If you want more, and there are plenty of examples of basic tactics for the hard corps, let me know and I will try to post a link or the whole essay, space permitting. I would say that this throws a whole new validation- illumination on Close Combat.)


	Login or Register	Home · Downloads · Forums · Combat Camera · Help